It would be necessary to establish a central body (an Agency or directly the ministry) that oversees maritime policies in the international sphere, follows negotiations on the future WTO, implements the Montego Bay Convention and negotiates alliances with trade flows while taking national interest into account.
1. The crisis of the international community and its effect on European states
The risk for every society, even more so if it is a “late-stage empire,” is to remain anchored to the existing state of affairs: to practices, procedures, and organizational structures, which may be steeped in tradition, but which are too difficult to change (moreover, in Italy and Europe, the appetite for reforms has been exhausted for at least twenty years while the appetite for… bonuses and subsidies prevails!). So it happens that, with the waning of WTO rules (which safeguard economic freedoms) and UNCLOS (which safeguard freedom of navigation), and having moved beyond the “social market economy” model of the 1950s, the opulent European societies are unable to change and remove privileges and rents.
The international community, now increasingly less based on neoliberal setups and if anything influenced by imperialist assumptions, is unable to be accepted by the old European countries, now marginal at the negotiating tables. Fortunately, the few large European multinationals assert their autonomy.
2. The evolution of the international order in the trade sector
The same consideration also holds true if one considers our country’s maritime policy, perhaps the most typical and logical: and therefore the role of the Mediterranean which should unify the policies of many European and non-European countries. Everything, in short, seems to lead to an evolved (political in the high sense) reflection (which evidently will not happen). On one hand, the “difficult” role of the Red Sea is taking shape, not only due to the risk stemming from conflicts in the area, which highlight the growth of terrorist-type movements, but also due to the strategic designs of the United States, China, and Russia – incompatible with the freedom of the seas, especially in territorial waters – which concern the support of Africa from the east (Red Sea) as from the west (from the Atlantic).
On the other hand, the international table that will try to rebuild some minimum rules in international trade (governed by the United States, Russia, and China, with India, Turkey, and Arab countries), also concerns the influence of major powers on world areas. This table, focusing on the Far East (Taiwan Area, China in particular), Africa, and Europe (de facto “colonies”), also confirms the growth of an Arctic corridor which would allow reducing the transit time by a full 18 days between China and Europe. A corridor that, evidently, will be heavily influenced by Russia and China, who have been preparing for some time, and where the United States is trying to gain a foothold through Greenland. The service started a few days ago seems to be based in Rotterdam: but it is evident that in the future, traffic to Europe will take place through some Russian ports that have been developing since the early 2000s (for example, Arkhangelsk in the White Sea, Kaliningrad, Ust-Luga, Saint Petersburg in the Baltic Sea, etc.).
Obviously, for the Russian ports of Northern Europe to be truly efficient, they will, however, have to guarantee intermodal and logistical networks and services on efficient infrastructures.
In this sense, perhaps, the ports bordering the European networks, namely those of the Baltic, are more competitive as they can route their traffic through the Scandinavian Mediterranean Corridor; but it is also true that they are direct competitors of Hamburg and Rotterdam, which are already well served by the Rhine-Alpine Corridor (Karlsruhe – /Rotterdam sector).
The issue of the Mediterranean, which needs to be completely rethought, remains. As for the areas, if we look at the container traffic figures, there is still a space for the ports of the northern Adriatic, where however Luka Koper has grown significantly thanks to Slovenia’s maritime policies, establishing itself as the port for the Semmering and the soon-to-open Coralm. While Trieste favors a public policy based on Intermodality, which is a flagship and would deserve to be replicated. The Genoa – Gioia Tauro system, in the Tyrrhenian Sea, thanks to the role of the Po Valley, remains central: but perhaps, in perspective, it weakens in the context of the Rhine-Alpine Corridor when looking at traffic to/from abroad. While it is logical to think of a development of short sea shipping and perhaps of general cargo traffic, in addition obviously to cruises and especially to recreational boating which is growing.
3. What measures and reforms in light of the international situation
First of all, a reform of Italian ports would do well to go beyond the principles of tradition and therefore consider organizational models less expressive of the neoliberal principles that are currently in crisis. What is the point of structuring “authorities” for small ports directed from the center (a contradiction in terms, an authority that is not independent) especially in a national system characterized by State aid, rules, exclusive rights, services of general economic interest and alliances with companies, in evident conflict with European rules?
Perhaps it makes sense to establish three or four ports entrusted to as many public companies that answer to the strategic choices of the shareholder government, entrusting actual public service obligations to the terminal operators. A reform, however, should go beyond ports and concern international maritime policies: by building, for example, a central body (rather than a company, an Agency or directly the ministry) that oversees maritime policies in the international arena, that follows negotiations on the future WTO, that implements the Montego Bay Convention, that negotiates international alliances with traffic flows taking into account the national interest, that establishes the necessary infrastructure within the context of these same alliances.
These are some general themes, which stem from the crisis of international economic law and consequently of the European legal order (whose foundations are failing), which Italy, if possible in agreement with other coastal states, must address.
