Crosetto: “Agreements on the use of U.S. bases have always remained the same.”

The statement by Defense Minister Guido Crosetto, reported by ANSA, brings back to the forefront a fundamental point that is often overlooked in public debate: the use of U.S. military bases in Italy is governed by clear and fully valid international treaties. These are neither arbitrary decisions nor opaque automatic mechanisms, but the implementation of agreements signed within the framework of the alliance between Italy and the United States of America.

In an international phase marked by growing instability, regional wars, and hybrid threats, recalling respect for treaties is not a bureaucratic formula. On the contrary, it is a statement of institutional seriousness and strategic coherence. Italy is a member of NATO and for decades has shared with Washington the burdens and responsibilities of collective security. U.S. bases on Italian territory are not an anomaly, but one of the pillars of this defensive architecture.

Supporting American military action when it falls within the framework of international agreements means defending a simple principle: alliances must be honored. In a world where authoritarian powers challenge the international order and the right of peoples to security, the unity of the Euro-Atlantic axis represents a factor of stability, not provocation.

Italy, also thanks to its geographic position in the Mediterranean, plays a strategic role. The infrastructure shared with the United States strengthens the capacity to respond to crises, acts as a deterrent against external threats, and ensures operational coordination that no European country could guarantee alone with the same effectiveness.

Naturally, political debate is legitimate. But it is essential that it be grounded in legal facts and strategic vision, not slogans. The treaties regulating the presence and use of American bases are the result of Italy’s sovereign choices, reaffirmed over time by governments of different political orientations. Questioning them without proposing credible alternatives risks weakening not Washington, but Rome.

Ultimately, the position expressed by Minister Crosetto is a call to responsibility: within the Western alliance system, there are no shortcuts or ambiguities. If one wishes to benefit from the protection and geopolitical weight guaranteed by the partnership with the United States, one must also assume the responsibilities that come with it. And it is precisely this coherence, now more than ever, that represents the true strength of the West.

Klevis Gjoka