Diplomatic tension between Rome and Moscow after the speech by the President of the Republic Sergio Mattarella at the University of Marseille, in which he compared Russia's action in Ukraine to the expansionist project of the Third Reich.
Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova called Mattarella's words "blasphemous inventions". The response from the Quirinale comes: the President is "absolutely serene" and refers to the full reading of the text pronounced in France. Meanwhile, Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni expresses full solidarity with Mattarella.
Moscow is not having it. The words spoken by the President of the Republic Sergio Mattarella during a lecture at the University of Marseille, in which he compared Russian aggression in Ukraine to the project of the Third Reich, have triggered a harsh reaction from Russian diplomacy. Maria Zakharova, spokeswoman for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Moscow, branded Mattarella's statements as "blasphemous inventions" and "outrageous and patently false historical parallels".
According to Zakharova, the Italian president asked to take into account the failure of the appeasement policy of the 30s to resolve the Ukrainian crisis, comparing Russia's actions in Ukraine to those of Nazi Germany in Europe. "It is strange to hear such blasphemous inventions from the president of Italy, a country that knows from direct experience what fascism is," the Russian spokeswoman said, stressing that Russia, unlike Italy, suffered the attack of Nazi Germany and managed to liberate Europe from Nazism and fascism.
Zakharova also criticized Mattarella for failing to remember Italy's role during World War II and its contribution to the conflict. "Didn't he know, doesn't he know his history well? I don't think so," the spokeswoman added, accusing Italy of supporting the "neo-Nazi terrorist regime in Kiev" by supplying lethal weapons.
The Quirinale's response and Meloni's solidarity
A measured but firm response came from the Quirinale. Sources close to President Mattarella said that the Head of State is "absolutely serene" and referred to the full reading of the text pronounced in Marseille for a correct understanding of his words. Meanwhile, Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni intervened in defense of Mattarella, expressing her full solidarity and that of the entire Government.
“The insults of the spokeswoman of the Russian Foreign Ministry, who called the words of the President of the Republic 'blasphemous inventions', offend the entire Italian nation, which the Head of State represents,” Meloni said. “I express my full solidarity, as well as that of the entire Government, to President Mattarella, who has always firmly supported the condemnation of the aggression perpetrated against Ukraine.”
Moscow's accusations and the call to history
Zakharova concluded her speech by saying that Mattarella's words insult not only the memory of the Italians who fought fascism during the Second World War, but also "all those who know history and do not accept these inadmissible and criminal analogies." According to the Russian spokeswoman, the parallel between Russia and the Third Reich is "unacceptable" and represents an offense to the historical memory of both countries.
The tension between Italy and Russia is part of an already complex international context, with the West lining up to support Ukraine and Moscow continuing to defend its actions as necessary to ensure national security. Mattarella's words, spoken in an academic context, have reignited the debate on the role of historical memory in international relations, but also on the responsibilities of global powers in maintaining peace and stability.
Meanwhile, the Quirinale remains calm, reiterating the correctness of the positions expressed by the President and the need for a careful and contextualized reading of his speech.
Here is the passage from Mattarella's speech criticized by Moscow
Here is part of the long speech dedicated to the new world balances by the President of the Republic, Sergio Mattarella, delivered at the University of Marseille last February 5. After an analysis dedicated to the situation that has arisen in Europe since the crisis of 1929, we arrive at the passage that has provoked, almost ten days later, the harsh criticism of Moscow conveyed by the spokeswoman of the Russian Foreign Ministry, Maria Zakharova.
Here is an excerpt from the speech of the head of state: "History, especially that of the twentieth century, has taught us that this order is a dynamic entity, subordinated to balances that, obviously, are not immune to being influenced by political tensions, economic changes. Often, the imbalances that emerge have remote roots: in the aftermath of past conflicts. Or they correspond to impulses, ambitions of actors who believe they can play a game in new and more favorable conditions, with the attenuation of the reservations represented by the possible reactions of the international community and the emergence of a growing disillusionment with the mechanisms of cooperation in crisis management. Those tools created to be able to deal with reckless pressures aimed at reopening situations already previously regulated on diplomatic ground.
Moreover, the generous efforts of the institutions that arose in the decades following the Second World War, marked by sudden stops and disappointments, unfortunately have not been able to demonstrate their full potential effectiveness. Crossed vetoes in the Security Council have repeatedly prevented the UN from deploying its peacekeeping action, and yet what it has managed to express has been a great success.
The Organization's detractors, however, forget, among other things, its crucial role in the decolonization process, or in the construction of a normative framework to stem military escalation and promote disarmament. A reflection on the future of the international order cannot ignore an analytical exercise that, looking at the geopolitical uncertainties that characterize our world today, recalls the succession of events, actions or inactions, that led to the tragedy of the Second World War.
History is not destined to repeat itself slavishly, but we never stop learning from the mistakes made by men in history. The world economic crisis of 1929 shook the foundations of the global economy and fueled a spiral of protectionism, unilateral measures, with the progressive erosion of alliances. Freedom of trade has always been an element of understanding and encounter.
Many states failed to grasp the need to address that crisis in a cohesive manner, instead settling into nineteenth-century visions, focusing on the domestic dimension, at most counting on the resources of enslaved peoples overseas. Authoritarian phenomena took over in some countries, attracted by the fable that despotic and illiberal regimes were more effective in protecting national interests.
The result was an increased climate of conflict – rather than cooperation – despite the awareness of having to address and resolve problems on a larger scale. But, rather than cooperation, the criterion of domination prevailed. And they were wars of conquest. This was the project of the Third Reich in Europe. Today's Russian aggression against Ukraine is of this nature.
Today we are also witnessing the return of protectionism. The President of the European Commission, in Davos, a few days ago, recalled that, in 2024 alone, global trade barriers have tripled in value. Economic crisis, protectionism, distrust among global players, forcing freely agreed rules, dealt a final blow to the League of Nations that arose after the First World War, already compromised by the failure of the United States to join, which, with President Wilson, had been among its inspirers. For the United States, it was a surrender to the temptation of isolationism.
But the work of the Society was not in vain if we think that we owe to it, for example, the Treaty against the Slave Trade and Slavery, and we are in 1926"
Article published on 14 February 2025 - 19:12
Video Chronicles
President Mattarella's words about Russia and the Third Reich were very strong, but perhaps they were unnecessary. History is complicated and one should always be careful what one says in delicate situations like this.