SECESSIONISM
IN ITALY
A comparative case study on regional nationalist
movements seeking independence in Veneto and Sardegna
Margherita Cantele
Anja Van Heelsum
Mike Medeiros
June 2018
Political Sciences: International Relations
Table of Contents
ABSTRACT ... 3
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ... 4
CHAPTER 2: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ... 8
2.1NATIONALISM ... 8
2.2PERIPHERAL OR REGIONAL NATIONALISM... 10
CHAPTER 3: METHODS ... 16
3.1DESIGN ... 16
3.2OPERATIONALISATION AND QUESTIONS ... 19
3.3RESPONDENTS ... 20
3.4ETHICS ... 21
CHAPTER 4: VENETO ... 23
4.1CULTURE VS ECONOMICS ... 23
4.2ETHNIC VS CIVIC NATIONALISM ... 26
4.3AUTONOMY VS INDEPENDENCE ... 27
4.4INFLUENCE OF EUROPE ... 28
CHAPTER 5: SARDEGNA ... 31
5.1:CULTURE VS ECONOMICS ... 31
5.2:ETHNIC VS CIVIC NATIONALISM ... 36
5.3:AUTONOMY VS INDEPENDENCE... 37
5.4:INFLUENCE OF EUROPE ... 38
CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSIONS ... 40
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ... 45
Abstract
Regional nationalist movements seeking independence from the central state are a fairly new phenomenon in Europe and have been rapidly increasing over the last decades. In particular, in Italy as many as 7 regions are currently advancing independence claims. With this in mind, the relevance of learning more about these movements in Europe and understanding how they work in modern age is ever clearer. This research aims to explore the dynamics behind the process of regional nationalist movements developing independent tendencies. The focus of this thesis is on the movements of two Italian regions: the independence movement of Veneto, a rich region of the North, and the independence movement of Sardegna, a poorer region of the South. A comparative case study was carried out, using semi-structured interviews to collect data. It appears that a combination of cultural elements and economic interests operate as the driving force of these movements. This driving force, which was present to different degrees in both movements, is worsened by the centralist character of the Italian state together with its bad administration. Additionally, both movements revealed a regional identity formation far from Ethnic Nationalism and closer to Civic Nationalism; leading to believe that the ladder is more likely to result in a peaceful quest for independence. Moreover, both elements expressed a strong preference towards independence rather than autonomy, which is considered insufficient as the state would still have a say in important matters. Finally, a shared element between the movements was the desire to be part of the European Union, seen as an over-state entity and making belonging to the Italian state unnecessary.
Chapter 1: Introduction
Over the last decades, a number of regional movements seeking independence have sprouted in different European states and have been increasing in dimension and gaining more traction. Some examples are Catalonia and Basque Country in Spain, Northern Ireland and Scotland in the United Kingdom, and Flanders and Wallonia in Belgium (The Guardian 2017). Although there is an agreement among scholars on the fact that some features are shared among these movements, each movement manifests some peculiar characteristics. It is, therefore, ever more important to study in detail these movements and understand their dynamics in order to grasp how they work and how to deal with them. This research will focus on regional nationalism and independentism in Italy.
Unified Italy has a recent history, only coming together as the country it is today after the First World War. In fact, in 1815, after the Restoration of the Congress of Vienna, Italy was still divided in seven main reigns. The Kingdom of Sardegna included modern day Piemonte, Liguria, Valle D’Aosta, Sardegna, and was under the house of Savoia, an Italian dynasty (Meriggi 2011). The Kingdom of Lombardo-Veneto included modern day Lombardia and Veneto, and was under Austrian domination (Meriggi 2011). The smaller Ducats of Modena and Parma, together with the Gran Ducat of Toscana occupied the central area (Meriggi 2011). The Papal States included part of Lazio, namely Rome, Umbria and Emilia Romagna, and were under the Pope’s ruling (Meriggi 2011). Finally, The Kingdom of Due Sicilie, the largest one, included Abruzzo, Molise, Puglia, Basilicata, Campania, part of Lazio and was under the house of Borboni, a Spanish dynasty (Meriggi 2011).
Revolutionary waves aiming to unify the peninsula took place in 1820-21 in Napoli, Sicilia and Sardegna, and 1830-31 in Modena, Parma and the Papal States, but were unsuccessful (Meriggi 2011). The First Independence War occurred from 1848 to 1849 and saw the Kingdom of Lombardo-Veneto losing to the Austrian Empire (Meriggi 2011). The Second Independence war, in 1959, saw the opposite outcome, with the Austrians defeated by the Kingdom of Sardegna, thanks to the help of France (Meriggi 2011). With this war, modern day Lombardia, Emilia-Romagna and Toscana were freed of foreign domination and annexed to the Kingdom of Sardegna (Meriggi 2011). The Expedition of the Thousand in Sicilia, led by Garibaldi on behalf of the Kingdom of Sardegna in the summer of 1860, freed the South from foreign domination and annexed the Kingdom of Sicilia to the enlarged Kingdom of Sardegna, which then changed its name in Kingdom of Italy (Meriggi 2011). In 1866, with the Third Independence war, Lombardo-Veneto freed itself from foreign domination and
became part of the Kingdom of Italy (Meriggi 2011). In 1870, what was left of the Papal States was also conquered and annexed to the Kingdom of Italy and Rome became the capital (Treccani). This is why 1871 is officially known as the year of the unification of Italy. However, Trentino Alto Adige was still missing and was only acquired after World War One (Meriggi 2011).
It appears clear how Italian history influences its current situation, with seven out of twenty regions showing regionalist tendencies and bringing forward claims of independence from the central government, namely Sud Tirol, Lombardia, Veneto, Valle D’Aosta and Friuli in the North, and Sicilia and Sardegna in the South. For this research, I will focus on two independence movements, one of a region in the North, the independence movement of Veneto, and one of a region in the South, the independence movement of Sardegna. In both regions, there are two different trends, one demanding more autonomy from the central government, even if Sardegna already has a certain degree of autonomy, and one seeking to be completely independent from Italy and create a new state. For the scope of this paper I will focus only on the pro-independence trends. This is a map of Italy, to give the idea of where the two regions are located and their respective dimensions:
Figure one: Map of Italy (Source: Regionimist)
In Veneto, the champion of autonomy is the political party Liga Veneta and the champion of independence is the movement Independenza Veneta, seeking to create the Republica Veneta. However, there are many other movements, big and small, that claim independence. Last year, on the 22nd of October, 57.2% of Venetians voted in a referendum for more autonomy of Veneto and 98.1% of them voted "yes", leading President of Veneto Luca Zaia to start negotiations with the central government, which are still ongoing, about the terms of a possible autonomy for the region (Regione Veneto 2017). Previously, Plebiscite.eu, a partisan organization, organized a non-official online referendum to vote on the actual independence of Veneto from Italy in March 2014 and 2.36 million Venetians participated, roughly half of the population eligible to vote, and 89.1% of them voted yes (Romano 2014). This highlights the presence of a desire not only for autonomy, but also for independence. In the mainstream media, this request for independence of the Venetians is often connected with the significantly wealthier status of the region. The independentist claims were first brought forward in the 70s by the political party Lega. Over the last decades, since Lega has shifted more to a moderate position and now solely supports autonomy, this resulted in an increase in the number of independentist parties and in the radicalization of their position.
In Sardegna, the main political party historically promoting independence from Italy are the Partidu D’Azione Sardu, created already in 1921. In fact, independence tendencies in Sardegna started after WWI, and throughout the years have experienced ups and downs in strength and popularity. Over the years, one problem with the movements for independence was fragmentation, lack of unity and a central authority to guide them, resulting in some violent episodes in the past carried out by extreme separatists. This reflects on the success of the movement. An example of this is the failure by one vote to pass an independence referendum bill in the Sardinian Assembly in 2014. However, in 2012 the Universtiy of Cagliari, the capital of Sardegna, organized a survey on the identity of the respondents 28% identified as Sardinian, 22% with the identity of their town or village. Only 18% as Italian and 17% as European (Università di Cagliari 2012). This shows a strong regionalist sentiment and the potential of the region towards independence. Today, there is a new cohesive organization of the movements, with 7 different movements coming together in Progetto Autodeterminatzione, which aims to unify and strengthen the independentist position in the region. Currently, Sardinia enjoys a condition of “Statuto Speciale”, meaning it has a certain level of autonomy on some regional matters.
We have already witnessed in Catalonia how, once obtained the autonomy of the region, the population moved towards claims of independence. Eventually, the Catalonian unilaterally
declared independence, clashing with the central Spanish government. The escalation of the movement in the region and the consequent violent tensions with the state highlight the possible negative consequents of this kind of movements. It is therefore important to explore the dynamics and ideologies behind the independence movements in Italy, an already economically and politically unstable country, as proved by the recent elections in March 2018 and the following struggles to create a unified government.
The aim of this paper is to investigate the motives, the ideologies and the aspirations of the movement aiming at Venetian and Sardinian Independence. The goal is to answer the following central question: “Why do regional nationalist movements in Italy seek independence?”. In particular, I am interested in why such claims and tendencies towards independence are present particularly in Veneto, in the North of Italy, and in Sardegna, in the South of Italy; how do the supporters of Independence in the two regions conceive their regional identity, and how is this distinct from the one of Italians; how do they legitimize the tendency toward independence in particular, comparing with other solutions to gain more responsibilities on the administration of the region and freedom from the central state, such as autonomy, which is present in Sardegna and being negotiated in Veneto; and to what extent do they take into consideration the geopolitical scenario in which they operate.
The structure of this thesis will be as follow: in chapter 2 I will first try to provide the definition of the key concept to understand this phenomenon, such as nation, nationality and nationalism and I will provide an overview on the most important literature on the topic of regionalism, independentism and secession; consequentially in chapter 3 I will present the research methods, in chapters 4 and 5 I will analyse the data I collected for each region and in chapter 5 I will also layout the conclusions that I extrapolated from my results.
Chapter 2: Nationalism and sub-nationalism
2.1 Nationalism
In this chapter I will create a comprehensive theoretical background to better understand the regional nationalist movements seeking independence in Veneto and Sardegna. Independentist and secessionist movements are often identified as a phenomenon of sub-nationalism. A nationalistic sentiment is, thus, a big component of the narrative of regionalist movements with aspirations for separation from the central government. It is important to start with an attempt to define what nationalism is. Nationalism is a sentiment linked to the idea of nation and nationality. According to Benedict Anderson, one of the most respected scholars in the field and author of Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, a nation is: “it is an imagined political community - and imagined as both inherently limited and sovereign” (Anderson 1983: 6). Anderson explains that the idea of nation exists first in the idea of the communion of each citizen with the other citizens inhabiting it, and this idea of nation is characterized by borders and by the fact that no other nation can have authority on it (Anderson 1983). Today, the most common term adopted in relation to this entity in the field of international relations is the one of “nation-state”, a territory where a distinct group lives under a recognized government, both at national and international level (Montevideo 1993).
One of the first definitions of nationalism is given by John Stuart Mill: “A portion of mankind may be said to constitute a Nationality if they are united among themselves by common sympathies which do not exist between them and any others – which make them co-operate with each other more willingly than with other people, desire to be under the same government, and desire it should be government by themselves or a portion of themselves exclusively” (Mill 1861:181). As Mill highlights, this feeling of sympathy exists only among a certain group, differentiating them from other groups; this can lead to the development of nationalistic tendencies among that group and an urge to separate from the rest. However, among scholars in the field there appears to be a lack of consensus on a single definition of nationalism, mainly because nationalism is considered a “doctrine of self-determination” and there are numerous ongoing debates about self-determination, more specifically on who has right to it and when (Keiting 1996).
With this in mind, I believe analysing the idea of self-determination and its criteria under international law will help to create a better understanding of what nationalism is. The right to self-determination was first born as a remedial right, in relation to colonization, after the First
World War (Klabbers 2013). This principle entails that “identifiable groups have a right to determine for themselves how they wish to be politically organized” through “independent statehood, association or integration” (Klabbers 2013 p. 129). Even if the international community has opposed the use of this right for any other means rather than colonisations, minorities all over the world have started using it to achieve independence from the central government and secede. International law is not clear on the criteria for secession, but it is possible to extrapolate some by looking at some recent secession cases where it has been granted. Secession has been granted in cases where it was “last resort”, so only applicable when all other options have failed, and when large-scale human rights violations were committed and the government was the perpetuator or unable to protect its people (de Villiers 2012). In order for secession to be granted, international support and approval is fundamental, as it can push the government to recognize the minority’s right to it and agreement to it (de Villiers 2012). And finally, secession is granted only when the internal right to self-determination, so “people's pursuit of its political, economic, social and cultural development within the framework of an existing state”, is not respected; only then minorities have so far recognised the right to external right to self-determination and, thus, claims for secession are legitimized (de Villiers 2012).
In order to create an even more comprehensive idea of nationalism, I will present the three major approaches to nationalistic studies as summarized by Umut Özkirimli (2000). The three approaches are primodialism, modernism and ethno-symbolism. Primordialism is the earliest approach and considers the nation a “primordial” category, as nations are natural, ancient and a fixed phenomenon (Özkirimli 2000). While the view of nation is shared among primordialists, there are different views on the role “sociobiological, cultural or psychological factors” play in the creation of national identity, however, they agree that it is part of human nature (Özkirimli 2000). The primordialist approach is opposed by the modernists, the second approach presented. For modernists, nations and nationalism are a new and modern phenomenon only, developed together with the international system they exist in (Özkirimli 2000). This is because they are created by conditions such as “capitalism, bureaucracy, industrialism, urbanization and secularism” that are typical of modern times (Özkirimli 2000). The third approach, ethno-symbolism, critiques the approach of modernists because they “underestimate the significance of local cultures and social context” (Özkirimli 2000). Ethno-symbolists consider “pre-existing ethnic ties” among people to play a key role in the creation of identity. Özkirimli says ethno-symbolism can be considered an attempt to create a middle ground between primordialism and modernism (Özkirimli 2000). This approach is the most diffused in current times.
Micheal Keiting (1996) says that there are two types of nationalism that have been observed so far: ethnic nationalism and civic nationalism. In ethnic nationalism, the membership to a nation is considered “ascriptive” and it is based on ethnicity (Keiting 1996). On the other hand, in civic nationalism the membership is considered voluntary and it is based on “common values and institutions, and patterns of social interaction”; ethnicity is thus irrelevant (Keiting 1996). Keiting specifies how these two categories are, however, just ideal types and even if these categories appear normative, contrary to what most believe this doesn’t mean one, namely civic nationalism, is “good” and one, namely ethnic nationalism, is “bad” (Keiting 1996).
It is now important to identify the different typologies of nationalism. Michael Hetcher (2000) highlights how academics have observed important differences between nationalist movements over the years and he attempts to present the different typologies encountered up to that point: state-building nationalism, peripheral nationalism, irredentist nationalism and unification nationalism (Hetcher 2000). State-building nationalism is the process of assimilation of territories with different cultures in another state under a central government and tends to be culturally inclusive to achieve a culturally homogeneous population (Hetcher 2000). Peripheral nationalism is the process through which the members of a particular territory resist the incorporation into another state or attempt to secede from the state they are already part of (Hetcher 2000). Irredentist nationalism is the process of including territories of a bordering state in which the population is part of nationality of the state they are trying to incorporate into (Hetcher 2000). Unification nationalism is the process of merging a territory that is divided on the political level but has the same culture in a unified state and tends to be culturally exclusive towards other territories with different culture (Hetcher 2000). He, finally remarks that these typologies are not exhaustive, for example, they don’t include nationalist movements resulted from migration of religious groups to a specific area of religious significance already inhabited by another population, such as Zionism (Hetcher 2000). The typology of nationalism that applies to this research is the one of peripheral nationalism, as the Independence movements in Italy focus on the secession of the specific region from Italy.
2.2 Peripheral or Regional Nationalism
This part of the theory chapter focuses only on peripheral nationalism as it is the most relevant for this research. While investigating peripheral or “regional” nationalism, one interesting question is “how are regions and regional identities formed?” According to Paasi (1986), a region is “a process which, once established, is continually reproduced and gradually
transformed in individual and institutional practices” (p. 110). The process of “institutionalisation” of regions is when, over time and space, a territorial unit becomes an entity formed by social action and consciousness and reproduced in individual and institutional practices (Paasi,1986). This process has four interacting stages: territorial shape, conceptual shape, institutional shape and established role (Paasi 1986). The first stage is the “assumption of territorial awareness and shape”, in which a territory assumes a defined shape in the mind of the people that inhabit it through economic, political and cultural practices. The second stage is the “development of the conceptual (symbolic) shape”, in which the concepts and practices of the specific territorial unit are used to establish group solidarity (Paasi 1986). The third stage is the “development of the sphere of institutions”, in which formal institutions such as “education, law and the media, alongside local or regional politics, economics, administration and culture” are created in the territorial unit thanks to the group solidarity (Paasi 1986). The final stage is “the region as an established part of a regional system and regional consciousness”, in which the institutionalized territorial unit becomes a region in the social consciousness of people belonging to it (Paasi 1986).
Once a regional identity is formed in the mind of the people, this can lead to the birth of regionalist tendencies. The three main components of regionalism according to Stein Rokkan and Derek Urwin (1982) are: the view of the central state, the identification with a territory and the development of group identity. The first component is the perception of the central state as unfit to fulfil the needs of a group of people living in a specific territory in the eyes of the members of this group and the consequent reaction to this perception, expressed in the creation of regionalist movements (Rokkan & Urwin 1982). The second component is the realization of the crucial role of the territory for these movements (Rokkan & Urwin 1982). The third component is the creation of a “group identity” linked to the territory and the mobilisation of support for the movements linked to this new group identity (Rokkan & Urwin 1982).
In regard to the origins of regional or “minority” nationalism, Michael Keiting explains that one of the problems with nationalism is exactly that groups within the nation are also able to develop a national identity different from the national identity of the rest of the population of the state and start advancing national claims in favour of that identity (Keiting 1996). This process involves the rejection of the nationalism of the whole state and the development of self-determination claims of groups within the state (Keiting 1996). Due to the absence of largely agreed upon criteria to evaluate these claims, the conflict between the group and the central state cannot be resolved peacefully (Keiting 1996). Keiting differentiates between two types of nationalistic claims: one type of claims is the substitution of one exclusive collective national
identity by another also exclusive minority identity; another type of claims simply rejects all together the idea of an exclusive nationality in favour of an inclusive nationality (Keiting 1996). The former is likely to lead to a separatist position (Keiting 1996).
As previously mentioned, in regional nationalist movements there are two trends, one aiming to more autonomy from the central government and one seeking independence from Italy and the formation of a new state. These two trends can be explained by Pereira et al (2018), who consider regionalism “one process with two varieties”: autonomism and secessionism. According to the researches, autonomism and secessionism are interrelated and many crucial aspects of these varieties are shared. One important common aspect is the rejection of the “status quo and the attempt to find an alternative with higher level of self-government and lower level of dependency from the central government” (Pereira 2018:200). What differentiates the two varieties of regionalism is the variable that determines support, which for autonomism is mainly cultural variables and for secessionism is economic variables (Pereira 2018).
Benito Giordano (2000) highlights that there has been an increase in the number of parties in European regions striving for autonomy in recent decades. He contrasts this fact with the claims popular in the 50s and 60s that the process of industrialisation and urbanisation of post-war economic growth would eventually eradicate regionalist tendencies (Giordano 2000). He then attempts to explain why these movements are not only still present in Europe but even increasing. He believes that the institutionalism relates to the processes of “regionalisation” carried out in European states in the last years, with regions gaining gradually more importance and leverage, and is more related to economic factors (Giordano 2000). Instead, autonomism is a form of “minority, separatist and ethnic regionalisms” that has been gaining traction in the recent years and it is more related to ethnicity and identity (Giordano 2000).
To elaborate more on the increasing of regionalist movements seeking independence, we need to investigate the incentives for adopting such a position. Alberto Alesina and Enrico Spolaore further elaborate upon their iconic article On the Size and Number of Nations, published in 1997, in which they stated that democratization leads to secessionism (Alesina & Spolaore 1997). They bring forward a reflection on the tendency to have smaller and more numerous nations in current times and they summarize the two main incentivizing elements that motivate groups to seek secession. The first element generates from the evolution of political regimes in modern times (Alesina & Spolaore 2015). As the two authors explain, the regimes that were more popular in the past, such as monarchies and dictatorships, had the capability to disregard the preferences of their people, even using force to maintain their power and the centrality of their states (Alesina & Spolaore 2015). But since democracies took over,
it became almost impossible to ignore and suppress these preferences. In particular, ethnic, linguistic and religious minorities gained more of a say in how they desired to be governed with governments obliged to fulfil these desires (Alesina & Spolaore 2015). Secondly, they identify how the political and economic situation has improved in recent years, even if not in all parts of the globe. This is due to the increase in “free trade, and international agreements and institutions that fostered peace and economic integration” (Alesina & Spolaore 2015 p.3). With these conditions, small countries can trade freely with the rest of the world. Because of this, they argue entities such as the EU increase the attractiveness of regional secessions and diminish their costs and losses (Alesina & Spolaore 2015). They conclude, however, stressing how the choice regarding borders falls always under the preferences of citizens, which are not always based on an economic cost-benefit analysis (Alesina & Spolaore 2015). These preferences are often influenced by other non-material factors such as culture and identity (Alesina & Spolaore 2015).
Let’s then focus on how support for such movements can be explained. For both varieties mentioned above, Pereira et al (2017) present two potential causal factors: culture and economy. Cultural elements such as “historical, traditional, linguistic and ethnic factors” have been often linked with the creation of minority identity features (Pereira et al 2017). Yet, the researches recognise that cultural factors cannot be the only valid explanation for support for all regionalist movements. Economic elements such as “income, wealth and relative economic well-being” can also play a role in influencing support for secessionism and autonomism (Pereira et al 2017). Empirical evidence shows how socio-economic issues affect voting to a much larger extent than what appeals to history and traditions (Pereira et al 2017).
Finally, to fully grasp how these movements work and what to expect from them, it is necessary to investigate their strategies. Ryan Griffiths (2016) says that secessionist movements have shown the use of two general strategies, with one often completing the other: one is to target the national government and demand more rights and autonomy from it, usually this strategy entails a referendum; and the other one is to address the international community so that this can push the government to fulfil the requests of the movement (Griffiths 2016).
According to Griffiths (2016), in both strategies we can see elements of coercion and normative appeal combined.He stresses how “local technological, institutional, and historical factors” can condition the choice of one strategy over the other (Griffiths 2016). He concludes presenting two paths to pursue secession, namely a “high road” and a “low road” (Griffiths 2016). The main factor that differentiates the two paths is the use of violence, the “low road” is based on violence while the “high road” takes advantage of tools such as networking and lobbying; the
latter is typical of mature democracies (Griffiths, 2016). Interestingly enough, he highlights how the “high road” has the lowest success rate in obtaining secession and questions whether violence is necessary to achieve the goals of secessionist movements (Griffiths, 2016).
Overseeing the literature, I conclude that the following aspects are particularly relevant to answer my central question and for the two regions that I want to study. The first aspect comes from Pereira et al (2017), from whom I took the concepts of Economically-driven Independentism and Culturally-driven Independentism. These concepts are relevant in answering my research question because it lies at its very core as these are identified as the two possible catalysts for independence movements. However, thinking about these specific regions, it seems that some issues were not mentioned in the literature, namely geography and shared history. I believe that geographical elements, such as mountains, deserts and seas, can play a role in the creation of a national identity, as well as its evolution. It wouldn’t surprise me if an island, such as Sardegna, would develop a different national feeling than the one of the mainland. And finally, as mentioned already in the introduction of this paper, Italy’s past cannot be forgotten when analysing its present, as recent history might have a big influence on the current regionalism present in the region. Due to the characteristics of the regions, I expect the independence tendencies in Veneto to be economically-driven and in Sardegna to be culturally driven. The second aspect comes from Micheal Keiting (1996), from whom took the concepts of Ethnic and Civic Nationalism. This is relevant in answering my central question because the formation of a national, or in this case sub-national identity, is the origin of independence claims. The third aspect come from Pereira et al (2017), from whom I took the concepts of independentism and autonomism. This set of concepts are relevant in answering my central research question because they help understand why they seek independence in particular and not another solution, such as autonomy. The fourth aspect comes from Alesina and Spolare (2015), from whom I took the concept of the influence of Europe. This concept is relevant in answering my central research question because the presence of this institution might create an opportunity for regional nationalist movements to seek support outside of the state, increasing the chances of them pursuing independence.
In relation to these four aspects, I developed the sub-questions of my central research question. In relation to the aspect of the role played by cultural and economic factors, the sub-question is “Why such claims and tendencies towards independence are present in particular in Veneto, in the North of Italy, and Sardegna, in the South of Italy?” In relation to the aspect of national identity formation with ethnic and civic nationalism, the sub-question is “How do the supporters of Independence in the two regions conceive their regional identity, and how is this
distinct from the one of Italians?” In relation to the aspect of regionalism possibly resulting in autonomism and independentism, the sub-question is “How do they legitimize the tendency toward independence in particular, comparing with other solutions to gain more responsibilities on the administration of the region and freedom from the central state, such as autonomy, which is present in Sardegna and being discussed in Veneto?”. Finally, in relation to the aspect of the influence of Europe, the sub-question is “To what extent do they take into consideration the geopolitical scenario in which they operate?”
Chapter 3: Methods
3.1 Design
The main focus of this research is to explore the ways in which independence movements in Europe, and specifically in Italy, function, are motivated and legitimise their claims. In order to achieve this I conducted a qualitative research. The research design is a comparative case study, namely the cases of Veneto and Sardegna. I used interviews to gather information on the driving forces and nature of the movements and I analysed the data I collected through the interviews to achieve a well-rounded knowledge of the movements and their characteristics. Once my data was collected I organized it, identified the main themes and, accordingly, created a coding system to make sense of it. Coding is “the process of organizing data by bracketing chunks and writing a word representing a category in margins” (Creswell 2014:247).
A qualitative research is preferable when the topic is relatively new and there is a lack of research on it, as it is the case with the topic of this thesis (Creswell 2014). Additionally, since I wanted to explore the catalysts of the movements and the attitudes of their members, arguably abstract factors, a qualitative research was more suitable than a quantitative one (Creswell 2014). Since a comparative case study design is exploratory, it allows the researcher to gain knowledge of a specific case, which is the goal of this research; this is why I chose a comparative case study design (Creswell 2014). Additionally, a comparative case study appeared to be a good fit for this research because, normally, case studies are used when the research aims to answer the questions “how” and “why”, as this research does, and when it is not possible to manipulate the contemporary phenomenon one aims to study; it is, indeed, impossible for me to manipulate the behaviours of the members of independence movements (Yin 2003).
Interviews can be structured or structured (Creswell 2014). I conducted semi-structured interviews because it allowed me to cover with certainty some specific topics that I already identified as relevant for my research, while keeping the possibility open for new topics to come up that I didn’t consider but which are also relevant (Creswell 2014). Once the collection of data through interviews was completed, I started analysing them. I organized the material retrieved and read it all together in order to get a general sense of it. I then coded the material on Veneto and on Sardegna separately, identifying the major recurrent themes in order to attribute meaning to the data.
I choose Veneto and Sardegna because they present rather different characterises. Veneto is considered richer than Sardegna and it is more densely populated. Additionally, they are situated in two different areas of Italy, Veneto is in the North and Sardegna in the South. Since North and South are often portrayed with opposing peculiarities having one region per area might help achieving diversity. It is important to provide some information on the two regions, to get a better idea of the context. The first graph represents the election result of March 2018 in the whole of Italy, including Veneto and Sardegna, as I believe elections results and political orientation are an important factor to keep in mind while analysing regional independentist movements. The second and third graphs represent the census of the population in Veneto and Sardegna. Finally, the fourth graph represents the Human Development Index in Italy, to show the difference in wealth between Veneto and Sardegna. In looking at this, it is important to keep in mind that in Sardegna there is a high level of tourism, which creates wealth but it is not at all equally distributed among the whole population.
Figure two: Italian Election Results 2018 (Source: Italy’s Ministry of Interior)
Figure three: Census Veneto (Source: Istat.it)
Figure four: Census Sardegna (Source: Istat.it)
Figure five: Human Development Index (Source: Mapscroll)
3.3 Operationalisation and Questions
Based on the four categories mentioned in Chapter 2, I prepared some questions that I believe helped me touch upon these specific aspects. There is at least one question per aspect, as well as other answers that might produce relevant findings. However, while conducting the interview, I kept a window of possibility open for new factors to be explored in case something came up during the interviews, therefore the structure of the interview was not fixed or always the same. The interview questions are:
1. What is your position on the independence of Sardegna/Veneto? If favourable, why? 2. Are you involved with a movement/political party that seeks independence of a region
from Italy? If yes, which movement/political party are you part of?
3. What would be the benefits of obtaining independence that you see for this region? Can you think of any negative consequence of independence? If yes, which?
4. Some people say economic interests of the region are the driving force in independence movements, what would you comment on this? Others think culture is the most relevant factor, what would you comment on this?
5. How would you describe the Venetian People/the Sardinian People? How do they differentiate from Italians?
6. Why do you think independence is the best option compared to autonomy? 7. What do you imagine independent Veneto/Sardegna to be like in the future?
The first 2 questions are introductory questions, to warm up to and to get to know better the respondents and their backgrounds. The 3rd and 4th questions can be referred to the influence of cultural elements and economic interests; the first aspect. The 5th question is related to the formation of regional nationalism and identity through civic nationalism or ethnic nationalism; the second aspect. The 6th question explores the dichotomy of independence and autonomy; the third aspect. Finally, the 7th question looks into the aspirations of the independentists for the two regions in the international arena, especially related to the European Union; the fourth aspect.
Culture vs Economics • Cultural Elements o History o Language o Work ethics • Economic Factors o “Residuo fiscale” o 70% Fiscal Pressure o Potential
• Reasons Related to Italian Political Situation • Self-determination
Ethnic vs Civic Nationalism • Ethnic Nationalism • Civic Nationalism Independence vs Autonomy • Pros Autonomy • Cons Autonomy • Pros Independence • Cons Independence? Europe Influence • Europe • Italy 3.4 Respondents
I conducted 14 interviews, 7 with Venetian independentists and 7 with Sardinian independentists. In the case of Veneto, I started by contacting some of the different independence movements in the region through their websites. Three people came back to me: Alessandra Zanella from Indipendenza Veneta, Gianluca Busato from Plebiscito.eu and Antonio Guadagigni from Veneto Stato. Consequentially, I used their help to find new relevant interviewees, using a snowballing technique. The other interviewees are Ettore Beggiato, ex
member and leader of various independentist parties and author of the book Nazione Veneta, Lorenzo Fogliata, lawyer and expert of Venetian legislation, Andrea Favaro, lawyer, Luciano Sandonà, member of the political party Lega and part of the Venetian Regional Council. All the interviewees are highly educated and belong to upper-middle class. Moreover, they presented a tendency to the right-wing political position. One interviewee was a woman, the rest were men.
In the case of Sardegna, I first contacted the organization Progetto Autoderminazione, a project that brings together different independence movements in the region under the common goal of achieving independence for Sardegna. Their PR forwarded my messages to the representatives of the various movements and three got back to me, Bustianu Compostu of Sardegna Natzione, Brigida Carta and Gianfranco Sollai who both militated in the past in independentist movements, such as Sardinia Natzione and Partitu Sardu Dazione, and now work in Progetto Autodertminazione. Additionally, Ettore Beggiato who has close ties with other independentist movements in Italy, including the Sardinian one, put me in contact with some other relevant supporters of the Sardinian Independence, namely Edordo Figus, who is member of the independentist organization for young people Scida!, Paola Bonesu, a political consultant, and Andrea, a professor. Finally, Paola Bonesu put me in contact with Mario Carboni, historic member of the Partito Sardu Dazione. All the interviews are highly educated and belong to upper-middle class. Moreover, they presented a tendency to the left-wing political position. Finally, two interviewees were women, the rest were men.
3.5 Ethics
In order to respect the rights and the desire of the interviewees, I decided to grant them the possibility of giving informed consent through full disclosure. When I contacted them, I included a brief but complete description of my research and its objectives and offered a summary of the questions, when requested. Additionally, I made clear I could maintain their anonymity if they desired, however the interviewees expressed a preference in having their name mentioned in my paper, except the Sardinian professor Andrea who requested for only his first name to be disclosed. I am not concerned with the fact that making public their names and the information they shared with me would put them in danger. This is because since 2006 talking about Independence is legal and overall accepted in Italy, even if not everyone shares this view no harm can come to the interviewees from this. Moreover, I sent them a copy of the transcript in order for them to approve it. In presenting my findings, some information resulted not to be relevant for my research, so I left this out. However, I didn’t purposely ignore any
information just because it didn’t meet my expectations or to manipulate the meaning of what any interviewee said. Finally, before the interview started I asked the permission to record it. For this I received a positive response, expect from Zanella, who asked me not to be registered and I complied.
Chapter 4: Veneto
In this first results chapter, the answers to sub-research questions stated in the previous chapter are presented and each relative aspect was investigated for the case of the independentist movements of Veneto.
4.1 Culture vs Economics
With interview questions 3 and 4, I attempted to answer the sub-research question 1: “Why such claims and tendencies towards independence are present in particular in Veneto, in the North of Italy, and Sardegna, in the South of Italy?” From the interviews, both economic and cultural factors surfaced as important in driving independence movements, but other factors were also brought to my attention. All interviewees recognized the presence of strong economic interests connected with independence, they were reluctant, however, in identifying them as the catalyst of independence movements. The majority also mentioned cultural elements and many recognized them as the focal point of Venetian independentism, with only one interviewee not believing that culture played a role at all. On top of these two factors, another argument in favour of independence that was brought up by many interviewees is related to their discontent with the Italian government and administration. Finally, the theme of freedom and right to self-determination was recurrent.
There are two trends of opinion in relation to the role cultural factors have in generating independentist claims. Some of the interviewees believe culture to be the critical catalyst as well as the element at the basis of this quest for independence, on which then other aspects, such as the economic aspect, can be built on. They alluded to the fact that without cultural elements the rest wouldn’t hold. One of these is Luciano Sandonà, member of the Regional Council of Veneto, who to support this claim gave the example of Lombardia, a neighbouring and rich region, which on the economic level would have benefits even bigger than Veneto coming from independence. However, as it lacks the strong cultural feeling that characterizes Veneto, the independence movements in the region are much weaker. This was clear in the referendum on autonomy that took place last October, where Veneto had a much higher response rate and more positive votes in general than Lombardia. Another argument in favour of the centrality of culture was presented by Andrea Favaro, a Venetian lawyer who now is resident in Sofia. He explained how in Veneto there are 7 provinces, some are very rich, such as Padova and Vicenza, and some are quite poor, such as Rovigo and Belluno. If it was a matter of merely economic interests we would be hearing about independence of Padova and Vicenza
alone, as they wouldn’t want to be disadvantaged by the other poorer provinces. Instead the independence claims envision Veneto as a whole, including richer and poorer areas.
Others recognised the presence of cultural factors but stated that without the economic pressure, culture alone would fail to create strong independence movements. One of these is Gianluca Busato, cofounder of the partisan movement Plebiscito.eu. and author of Una x per il Veneto, who said that the cultural aspect has been undoubtedly present over the two centuries since the end of the Venetian Republic. But he believes that at this moment in time the aspect that is favouring most the increase and spread of independence claims is the economic one, linked to new developments that allow small but progressive states, like independent Veneto would be, to rise within a geopolitical organism such as Europe.
The most popular belief, however, resulted to be the former, namely viewing cultural aspects as pivotal in stimulating independentist ideas. Nevertheless, it appears to be the combination of the two that in some way ensures the development and empowerment of these ideas. Alessandra Zanella, member of one of the biggest movements in the region Indipendenza Veneta, explains how there is an ongoing deep crisis in Italy, and in Veneto, not only from an economic point of view, as many can witness, but also from a cultural point of view, “the state simply doesn’t work on both dimensions” she said. Ettore Beggiato, who in the past has been part and leader of different independentist parties and is the author of La Questione Veneta, reveals how for him the cultural aspect is the prevailing one, but he recognises the importance of economic factors, as he knows that more often than not big masses are moved by their own economic interests the most. He also clearly dissociates the movements from its portrayal in the mainstream media, as it is often depicted with an egoistic connotation, and he explains that the aim is not the one of gaining privileges and richness but to have the opportunity to freely continue being Venetians on every level. A similar opinion is expressed by the expert of Venetian Law and history Lorenzo Fogliata, who believes that the prevailing of one aspect on the other is simply a personal choice, says for him it is without a doubt more important the cultural aspect because of his pride in belonging to what used to be a glorious civilization and its rage with the Italian government for keeping its history from being celebrated, “[…] The knowledge of your past is one of the most important element of a human being.” (interview 9, expert) He does recognise, however, that the economic stimuli are numerous and even more powerful than those of any other European country seeking independence, such as Catalonia and Scotland. He thinks that this choice depends on what you hold closer to your heart: if it is your past and history then it is the cultural element, if it your present and, as he jokily says,
“your wallet,” then it is inevitably the economic element. He does specify, however, that they are in no way competitive but rather he identifies them as synergetic.
The main concern in terms of economic interests is the so called “residuo fiscale”, meaning per-capita fiscal balance calculated as the difference between final revenue and expenditure, is on average in deficit in the case of Veneto. This leads many Venetians to complain about the amount of taxes they have to pay to the central state. Zanella explains how this is argued to be around 17 billion euros for Veneto. Another economy- related argument is the great potential of Veneto as a world player, thanks to its wide export system, the efficiency and quality of its products that is appreciated in foreign countries, and the entrepreneurship oriented attitude of its people. Busato says that the central government has been showing a negative attitude towards the potentiality of Veneto and, therefore, sees Italy as an obstacle to the region in reaching its full potential. Finally, as Fogliata highlights, Veneto would be able to develop even more once freed of the fiscal pressure of Italy, which is as high as 70%.
A strong cultural element mentioned by many interviewees is the past history of Veneto, the long-lasting civilization of the “Repubblica della Serenissima”, a great maritime power that ruled the Mediterranean from 751 to 1797 A.D and had as its core territory the current region of Veneto. Furthermore, Beggiato argues that the historic and cultural aspect can be linked to the environmental aspect, because the region’s territory has been periodically experiencing devastation and cementation over the last years and, as he says, “[…] I dream of a Veneto free to choose its identity and the territory, that we have occupied for thousands of years, is part of our identity and we need to safeguard it.” (interview 2, independentist) Language is also an important cultural element, as many interviewees brought it up and specified that it is not a “dialect”, as in Fogliata’s words many try to make us believe, but a real language that is spoken all across the region. Busato adds that there is definitely a language that, even if with some local variations, is spoken by 70% of the population within families.
One interviewee, Antonio Guadagnini, the secretary of Veneto Stato and a member of the Regional Council of Veneto, believes that the main reason to seek independence is neither cultural nor economic, even if he at least recognises the presence of the latter while instead completely rejecting the former. He is strongly convinced that independence would free Veneto from the antiquate structure that is the Italian central state and that smaller more horizontal forms of government can at best represent citizens and their interests. He adds culture is not a sufficient reason to seek independence and gives the example of Sudtirol, another Italian region, where cultural identity is completely protected within the system of the state. Similar arguments are carried out by other interviewees, such as Zanella, who also critiques the central state calling
it a “pachyderm” that is heavy and slow and holds back the natural development of people that inhabit it; and Busato, who believes that in the contemporary globalized world it doesn’t make sense to be stuck in a “giant and rigid bureaucratic apparatus” but it is easier, in order to live the challenges of modernity, to operate with “small and agile institutions flexible enough” to deal with these challenges.
Throughout the different interviews, there is the recurrence of the theme of pursuing the right to freedom and self-determination as a legitimating factor for the Venetian people seeking independence. Busato argues that for him the most important aspects are “[…] All principles of freedom, not as a goal but as a way of living, and self-determination is strictly connected to that.” (interview 8, independentist) He says that the right to independence is ensured by the principle of self-determination, which is ratified by Italy in law 886 and in the statute of the region Veneto in article 2 since 1971, in which the Venetian people are given the right to govern themselves according to their traditions, history and culture. Zanella as well makes a point on the rightfulness of pursuing independence for any person that desires to do so in the light of the international norms and the right to self-determination. Favaro says very bluntly “[…] I never understood why I have the freedom to choose which dentist should take care of my teeth and which architect should project my house but I can choose the ordainment under which I should live.” (interview10, lawyer)
4.2 Ethnic vs Civic Nationalism
With interview question 5, I attempted to answer the sub-research question 2: “How do the supporters of Independence in the two regions conceive their regional identity, and how is this distinct from the one of Italians?” From talking to the Venetian independentists, it appears clear that they believe in the existence of a Venetian People and have a very clear idea of how this population is characterised; only one interviewee expressed his reservation on this. Venetian people as intended by the interviews are the inhabitants of the Veneto region and descendants of the civilization of the “Repubblica della Serenissima”. They recognise some distinct characteristics of these people, such as the work ethics and the value of family and speaking the same language as well as following the same laws. But at the same time, they highlight the openness of this civilization, explaining how people from all over the world became part of it over the centuries. Beggiato makes a paragon with a forest, where “[…] Many trees are born and die within, but some trees’ seeds are also carried by the wind and if the forest is healthy that the new trees will be accepted and the forest will thrive by living in harmony” (interview 2, independentist). Fogliata further elaborates on this dynamic characteristic of the
Venetian people and explains how the glue between the newcomers and the old inhabitants was always the laws and how they were enforced for all the same. The statements of the interviewees excluded any racial and ethnic connotation.
Instead, it appears clear how much emphasis is given to the institutions of the civilization, especially to the rule of law and law enforcement, as Fogliata explained. Many interviews also expressed a feeling of belonging to shared norms and values. Busato, Zanella, Beggiato and Sandonà all highlight how much the pride of belonging to Veneto is felt by the people, especially in recent years thanks to a rediscovery of its past. This is exemplified by the presence of many symbols linked to the “Repubblics della Serenissima”, such as the Lion of San Marco, both in public places like bridges and roundabouts and by private properties. Beggiato explicates how the independence movement of Veneto has no racist characterization: while since its appearance in the 80s it was accused of being anti-south, their fight was really only against the Italian state and the central government. Their aim to “[…] Destroy centralism with its parasite-like, cliental-based approach and asphyxiating bureaucracy, which in the reality of facts can prevent for all people from thriving, not only Venetians” (interview 2, independentist).
4.3 Autonomy vs Independence
With interview question 6, I attempt to answer the sub-research question 3: “How do they legitimize the tendency toward independence in particular, comparing with other solutions to gain more responsibilities on the administration of the region and freedom from the central state, such as autonomy, which is present in Sardegna and is being discussed in Veneto?” When asked about the ongoing negotiation for the autonomy in certain matters of Veneto from Italy, started after the overwhelming victory of “yes” at the referendum held in October 2017, interviews’ preference tent drastically still towards the support of independence, with many arguing the impossibility of actually achieving autonomy. It is important to notice that the majority of the independentists aspire at separatism, with only a few contemplating federalism. Busato said that in order to achieve autonomy, a very strong political consensus is necessary, meaning 2/3 of the chambers should be in favor or 50% of the chambers should be confirmed by a referendum with the majority of Italians voting yes. Instead, the process to achieve independence is different, as it is only necessary that the majority of Venetian people vote in favor. Fogliata explained that such a political consensus is hard to imagine, especially in regard to taxes, as the Italian government benefits greatly from the taxes Veneto pays, this is why he continues to support independence.
Additionally, many interviewees pointed out the shortcomings of autonomy, highlighting how even if autonomy was achieved it would be unfulfilling: Since it is a matter of delegation not freedom, as Busato put it “[…] The Italian government would simply concede you a longer leash” (interview 8, independentist), it still won’t grant Veneto the freedom it needs to flourish. Especially it wouldn’t have a say on the most pressing situations, such as the fiscal one, as control over these matters are often not allowed with autonomy. Zanella also critiqued autonomy, saying that a real change is not possible in that way, and that independence is necessary to have a total “rip” from the current order of things, only this would lead to effective empowerment.
However, the opinions on autonomy are not all negative as there is a sentiment of hope for the future connected to it. Beggiato thinks that independence cannot be brought to fruition by a movement of “everything, now”. This would not be realistic, but it is a gradual change and it would be already a victory to obtain more delegations from the central state. Therefore, he does not see any contradiction of terms, rather one path to independence with some intermediate steps, one of them possibly being autonomy. On a similar line of reasoning lies Sandonà’s idea, who said that he supported, and still does, the process of autonomy, as a passage towards a future of freedom and a fundamental step to make Venetians take conscience of their possibilities. When people voted for autonomy and the possibility to administrate some of their resources, he said, they also unconsciously voted for more freedom from the state. He prises it as the first official result in the direction of independence.
Furthermore, it is shared among the interviews the idea that having the people of Veneto thinking about autonomy from the central government is a positive phenomenon. Busato brought up the fact that until 2006 talking about independence was illegal, now nobody is “scandalized” by it anymore. Fogliata, even if he believes that autonomy and independence are two completely different things “or better antithetic”, supported it not because he believes in autonomy, but because he believes in everything that helps the people to start thinking autonomously, autonomy is “a habit to freedom.” Zanella, who also doubts the possibilities of positive developments coming from autonomy, nevertheless stated that talking about autonomy and having in the media everyday helps involve people and inform them at the same time.
4.4 Influence of Europe
With interview question 7, I attempted to answer the sub-research question 4: “To what extent do they take into consideration the geopolitical scenario in which they operate?” The interviewees recognised the importance of international relations in the process of adjusting to
the new condition if or when independence is achieved. In particular, they expressed a feeling of encouragement connected with institutions such as the European Union. Busato and Zanella both said that in modern times many important developments that have been achieved, for example the European Union and the United Nations, and some big challenges of the past century, such as trade and security, find support to a level superior to the one of the nation state. They concluded that a state like Italy doesn’t make sense anymore, it even becomes a limitation. Beggiato declared himself to be a deep supporter of the European Union and specified that this position doesn’t clash with his independentist stance, even if some think so, as he believes that the real obstacles to achieve a true cohesion of people are indeed the nation-states. The accomplishment of this reality will be achieved by the weakening of the supremacy of nation-states and the straightening of the autonomies of people, such as the Venetian, the Catalonian, the Flemish, the Bavarian. Sandonà elaborated on the inevitability of this process, which in his opinion will be slow and gradual but certain. He thinks this push for independence is similar to other ones found in Eastern Europe in the past that already resulted in the creation of new independence states, and he noticed that at this day there are many other similar pushes all over Western Europe, such as the one in Scotland and Catalonia. He is convinced, “The Europe of today looks nothing like the one of 40 years ago and you can be sure nothing like the one of 40 years from now.”
While talking about the process of achieving independence related to the question about the European Union, many interviewees reiterated the fact that this process needs to be peaceful and democratic. One of these is Beggiato: he highlighted how in order to achieve the approval of Europe it is necessary to avoid violent behaviours and conflict. These, he said, would not be beneficial to the cause, but actually work against it by crediting those that condemn independence and try to portrait independentist movements as dangerous. Some interviewees also expressed their expectations for future relationships with Italy to be as peaceful as ever. As Fogliata said, the only negative consequences of independence would manifest if Italy retaliated. He hopes in a “friendly divorce” with a membership in the EU, to open borders with Italy and the continuation of importing venetian products in the peninsula and the rest of the continent.
If we look at the information on Veneto as a whole, the most important aspect results to be the economic one, as it is mentioned by all the interviewees and it has heavy consequences. The “residuo fiscale” and fiscal pressure are a big problem for the independentist, and together with the poor administration of the central government they are an explosive combination. However, many interviewees made a point about culture being another relevant aspect. The
glorious Venetian history and institutions and the common spoken language ties the Venetians together and contributed to develop a regional identity that separates them from the rest of the Italian population. The idea of achieving autonomy is doubted by many, and even if it was achieved it is portrayed as insufficient. There is a common desire to see independent Veneto approved by Europe and by part of the Union.
Chapter 5: Sardegna
In this second result chapter, I will focus on Sardegna. I will use the same order as the chapter on Veneto and present the answers to sub-research questions stated in the previous chapter as well as investigate each relative aspect.
5.1: Culture vs Economics
With interview questions 3 and 4, I attempted to answer the sub-research question 1: “Why such claims and tendencies towards independence are present in particular in Veneto, in the North of Italy, and Sardegna, in the South of Italy?” When asked about the motivations behind the quest for independence the interviewees confirmed the presence of cultural and economic factors, as well as highlighting some other factors. In relation to the role of cultural and economic elements as driving forces of these movements, independentists gave two main trends of answers: some interviewees stated that culture is the central element, while some stated that culture and economic interests taken together originate independence tendencies. Some interviews brought up pressing economy-related issues that have a big impact on independence claims and their popularity with the general population of Sardegna. In addition to these elements, some recurrent themes were history, the principle of self-determination and problems related to Italian policies. These seams to also have an incentivizing value in the pursuit of independence.
The majority of the interviewees stressed the importance of cultural elements in driving the independentist waves that have been present in the region since after the First World War. In this regard, Bustianu Compostu, coordinator of the movement Sardegna Natzione, talked about a cultural awakening following the WWI, characterised by the Sardinian people taking conscience of their specific history and traditions and distancing themselves from the Italians. He expressed his discontent with the process of unification of Italy, as he does not think it was right to consider Sardinians and Italians as one people by de fault. By unifying them under one state, a process of homologation started, he stated “[…] We were under similar situation under the Spanish, only difference is that they never tried to make us Spanish. The damage Italy has done, to the Sardinian society, the environment and the health of the people, it’s bigger than the one of all the previous dominators put together.” (interview 1, independentist) Moreover, Paola Bonesu, political consultant, said “[…] I think the real question comes down to: does Sardegna have the right to decide for itself?” (interview 3, consultant), her answer is yes. She further elaborated on this saying that this right belongs to many realities, but in particular to Sardegna because of historic and cultural elements that distinguish it from the central state more than
other regions. Finally, she specifies that with culture she means “everything that forms a person, not only history and language but also the way they relate to the territory, Sardegna is territorially very different from the rest of Italy.” Mario Carboni, member of the historic party Paritu Sardu DAzione, said that those who state that economic elements are more important than cultural ones in driving independence movements, are simply part of a group of researches that focus on economics and try to explain every phenomenon through economic lenses. This approach prevents them from fully understating complex phenomena as independence movements. He identified the main reason for Sardinia to seek independence with the fact that people happen to take conscience of their nationality and start claiming their right to be represented by a state. He explains how a population wants self-government not only for its economy, but mostly on cultural matters. He made a point giving the example of the Catalans, where they have many economic problems but the main motivation is the language; this purely cultural factor has the most weight. Gianfranco Sollai, member of Progetto Autodeterminazione and lawyer, recognises that other small states in Europe (there are 5 that are even smaller than Sardegna) are all in better conditions because they can use their resources and organise them. He thinks Italian policies addressing Sardegna do not belong with the region particularity. This might actually be a strategy of the central government, he goes as far as saying that Sardegna is not developing because the Italians don’t want Sardegna to develop and to rise their head asking independence with more vigour. He said “[…] We have to be honest, we are colonized.” (interview 5, independentist) But even if he believes that independence is a necessity for Sardegna at this point, because continuing on this path will inevitably lead the land and the people to destruction at the hand of the current dominator, he still insists that economic elements are not the core of the movement. In his words “[…] It is not something you can negotiate, the right to independence is an unalienable right. Even if they offered us better economic situation no Sardinian would give up independence, we can’t be bought.” (interview 5, independentist)
Some of the interviewees agreed that both elements are important. Brigida Carta, professor and member of Progetto Autodeterminazione, said, “[…] The two elements to me are on the same level and actually quite connected,” (interview 4, independentist) and she continued explaining how the adequate type of economy is dependent on culture and having a Sardinian culture and being sensible towards Sardinian identity elements would bring in place a sustainable and eco-friendly economy that safeguards peculiar historic aspects of their land. A “right” economy can be realized only if there is sensibility for these aspects. Until now the economic models imposed have clashed with the specificities of Sardegna. She gives the example of the industries and the military bases located on the region, which ruin the
