Telegrammi da Roma_9_10

Il Caso Calipari è stata una delle patate bollenti più scottanti che il governo Berlusconi ha dovuto affrontare in questi ultimi anni per ciò che concerne la politica estera.

Al di là delle apparenze i telegrammi dell'ambasciata usa confermano che la volontà del governo italiano sia stata quella di "superare" l'incidente e cercare il più in fretta possibile di dimenticare e ristabilire quanto prima gli ottimi rapporti esistenti tra i due paesi.

ID:	32245
Date:	2005-05-09 15:53:00
Origin:	05ROME1593
Source:	Embassy Rome
Classification:	SECRET
Dunno:	05ROME1506
Destination:	This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available. 091553Z May 05
S E C R E T ROME 001593 SIPDIS BAGHDAD PLEASE PASS TO BG VANGJEL; JUSTICE FOR ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, CRIMINAL DIVISION E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/08/2015 TAGS: PREL, MOPS, KJUS, IT, IZ, IRAQI FREEDOM SUBJECT: IRAQ/ITALY: BERLUSCONI IN PARLIAMENT ON CALIPARI- STRESSES GOOD RELATIONS AND COOPERATION WITH US, COMMITMENT TO IRAQ; ALSO MENTIONS WITHDRAWAL PLANS REF: ROME 1506 Classified By: DCM Emil Skodon, reasons 1.4 b and d. 1. (S) Summary and Recommendation: On May 5-6, PM Berlusconi spoke to both houses of Parliament about the joint investigation and separate reports of the March 4 shooting of Italian Intelligence officer Nicola Calipari by US forces near Baghdad. While Berlusconi defended the Italian report and took issue with some of the US report's findings (see synopsis of his remarks at para 3), he reaffirmed the points of most importance to us: the incident was unintentional; US-Italy relations and our alliance remain strong; and Italy remains committed to its involvement in Iraq. We continue to recommend letting the US report speak for us rather than prolonging public debate. While the issue appears to be losing steam here, we still must deal with the MLAT requests and the possibility of a continuing investigation by Italian prosecutors. End summary and recommendation 2. (U) On May 5, PM Berlusconi briefed the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate on the Italian and US reports that concluded the work of the joint investigation in to the March 4 shooting of Italian Intelligence officer Nicola Calipari by US forces near Baghdad. Berlusconi, in televised session, was flanked by FM Fini and other cabinet ministers. A debate followed. A synopsis of his remarks, as reported in the Chamber of Deputies transcript follows (his report to the Senate was nearly identical). 3. (U) Begin synopsis of transcript: The impossibility of reaching shared conclusions....certainly mean that the joint investigation...was not able to bring its task to full completion. Nonetheless, it is also true that the US decision to open a joint investigation with Italy is unprecedented and came in response to a request by the Italian government. Investigations were objectively conditioned by the lack of preservation of the scene of the incident. This notwithstanding, the work of the joint investigation team was carried out in a climate of strong mutual cooperation and the Italian members of the team had full access to -- and were enabled to acquire -- all the information available. Discrepancies between the Italian and American reports turned out to be irreducible and I will certainly not be the one to minimize the size of the disagreement. Discrepancies in the two texts touch on aspects that are far from being marginal. The US considered reliable testimony and data that do not coincide with what we collected and which we found were reliable. In particular, the declarations by the two Italian survivors are in contrast with those by the US military. Given that the impartiality and good faith of the US investigators cannot be under discussion, and I think we all agree on this, we cannot but respect their conclusions, noting that they do not coincide with ours. This is even the opinion of the Americans on our results and also, their report converges with ours on this -- it recognizes that not everything worked as it should have in preparing/locating and managing that blocking position. Both sides, however, recognize that the incident was unintentional and both sides recognize the need to take concrete operational measures to avoid similar occurrences in the future. Still, one thing is to conclude like the Americans did, because of disciplinary measures, and another is to underscore, as we did -- and I quote -- on the basis of acquired evidence that there was a lack of intention . The absence of criminal intent -- the intention -- does not rule out the guilt/responsibility that is ascribable to negligence, imprudence or even simply inexperience. And this, you will agree, is not a small difference. The Italian report concluded that the blocking positions was irregular. It was set up with no written or specific instructions and was located where it had little visibility and could not protect the security of the military manning it nor that of drivers of vehicles approaching it. Accusations and criticism of the Government for how it managed the Calipari case and for the conclusion of the joint investigation are paradoxical. If we believe one vision of the facts is credible rather than another, it evidently cannot be friendship to make one change one's mind. This is elementary and holds true for both the US and Italy. The friendship between Italy and the US is not under discussion. The alliance and the friendship with the United states have solid foundations, foundations that we are committed to consolidating every day against the threat of totalitarianism and terrorism. Our friendship has overcome even more difficult tests. To this day, Italy recognizes itself in the Le Monde headline after the 9/11 tragedy that read, "We are all Americans." Our commitment to do what is possible to ascertain the truth and possible responsibilities remains unchanged. It is a commitment we intend to honor, first and foremost for the respect we owe to the memory of Nicola Calipari. The Italian judiciary can count on the firm support of the Government. I want to free the ground from any misunderstanding: there is no connection between the investigation into the circumstances of the death of Calipari and the continuation of the Italian commitment toward reconstruction in Iraq...We do not intend to establish any kind of link between the assessment of the event in which our official lost his life and Italy's role in Iraq. Italy is in Iraq in compliance with a UN Security Council Resolution. End synopsis of transcript. 4. (U) In response to press questions after the debate, Berlusconi said: The Center-Left opposition's attitude was "responsible," because they did not place under discussion the alliance nor the friendship with the US. The opposition continues to ask for our withdrawal from Iraq, which is in the plans, in agreement with the Iraq government and the allies. In the past, we have made announcements to this effect and we hold to this prospect. There is no reason today to say, "everybody home." It would sound irresponsible and incomprehensible. On the progressive withdrawal of troops from Iraq we already announced our position some time ago. We already discussed it with our main allies. We will continue to talk with them. A progressive reduction of our presence will certainly occur. I had even given an indication of when. Everything will be in agreement with the Iraqi government and with our allies. I even spoke about it directly and personally with Bush and Blair. Therefore, we continue in this direction. An international conference on Iraq will soon take place. Italian efforts for the reconstruction of Iraq are not isolated and even NATO and the EU are now involved. 5. (S) COMMENT: Berlusconi's remarks, while reassuring on Iraq and on US-Italy relations, also reflect a position he and his government staked out on the Calipari case from the beginning: a commitment to fix responsibility. Although this commitment was not actually included in the joint investigation's terms of reference, Berlusconi evidently felt an obligation to adhere to it. We believe this was at the heart of US-Italian disagreements over the joint investigation conclusions and set the tone of both the Italian report and Berlusconi's remarks to Parliament. In particular, the determination to avoid any criticism of Calipari's own role led the Italian government and investigators to ignore a question that seemed obvious to the US investigation: out of the 30 cars that came to the blocking position, why was this the only car fired upon that night? As in Reftel, we continue to urge Washington to discourage USG spokespeople from point-by-point refutation of the Italian report or Berlusconi's remarks. As much as possible, we should allow our report to speak for itself on our view of the incident. This will hasten the fading of the case from the political radar screen. 6. (U) Baghdad minimize considered. SEMBLER NNNN 2005ROME01593 - Classification: SECRET

ID:	31909
Date:	2005-05-03 15:18:00
Origin:	05ROME1506
Source:	Embassy Rome
Classification:	SECRET
Dunno:
Destination:	This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available. 031518Z May 05
S E C R E T ROME 001506 SIPDIS BAGHDAD PLEASE PASS TO BG VANGJEL; JUSTICE FOR ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, CRIMINAL DIVISION E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/02/2015 TAGS: PREL, MOPS, KJUS, IT, IZ, IRAQI FREEDOM SUBJECT: IRAQ/ITALY: BERLUSCONI TRYING TO PUT CALIPARI INCIDENT BEHIND US - ITALIAN REPORT FINDS NO INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY Classified By: Ambassador Mel Sembler, reasons 1.4 b and d. 1. (S) Summary and Recommendation: Just prior to the May 2 release of the Italian report on the March 4 killing of intelligence officer Nicola Calipari at a U.S. checkpoint in Baghdad, Ambassador, DCM and PolMilCouns were called to PM Berlusconi's office to receive an advance copy of the report and to hear from senior GOI officials their view of the way forward. The Italians stressed that the GOI wanted to put the incident behind us, that it would not damage our strong friendship and alliance, and that it would not affect the Italian commitment in Iraq. The Italians said that while U.S. cooperation with Italy in the joint investigation had been total and thoroughly professional, Italy had to stand by the Italian reconstruction of the March 4 incident. The Italian report, they said, concluded that the shooting was not intentional and that no individual responsibility could be assigned for the shooting, thus making the magistrate's criminal investigation less likely to develop into a full criminal case. 2. (S) Recommendation (see also Para 9): While the Italian report quibbles with many findings and much of the methodology of the US AR 15-6 report on the incident, we will be best served by resisting the temptation to attack the Italian version point-by-point, and should instead continue to let our report speak for itself. While our instinct at Post is to defend the U.S. report and criticize the Italian one, we realize the consequences of doing so could be asymmetrical: while the criticism in the Italian report is unlikely to have serious negative consequences for the USG, if the GOI appears to be disloyal to its public servants - or to be rolling over to please the USG in this matter, the consequences for Berlusconi's government and Italy's commitment in Iraq could be severe. Therefore, we strongly recommend all USG spokespeople stand by the 15-6 report while refraining from detailed criticism of the Italian draft. End Summary and Recommendation. 3. (S) Ambassador, DCM and PolMilCouns were called to the PM's office late May 2 to receive an advance copy of the Italian report on the March 4 Calipari incident, based on the joint investigation carried out with the U.S., and to hear from senior GOI officials their views on the matter. Present on the Italian side were FM Fini, U/S Letta, PM Dip Advisor (NSA equivalent and Ambassador-designate to the US) Castellaneta, SISMI Chief Pollari, a few of their senior aides, and the two Italian investigators BG Campregher and MFA official Ragaglini. (Berlusconi himself was not at the meeting and, we believe, was out of Rome until the next morning.) 4. (S) The Italians made the following main points: -- The intent of Italian Government is that this incident should have no negative effect on our excellent bilateral relations. -- Specifically, there should be no effect on the Italian commitment in Iraq. -- The Italian government wants to put the incident behind us and hopes this report will contribute to that end (see below for explanation as to how it will serve that purpose). -- An unclassified version of report would be posted on a GOI web site May 2, with classified sections redacted. The full, classified report would be given only to PM Berlusconi, but the USG could have a copy on request after Berlusconi sees it. -- Berlusconi would discuss the report in Parliament on Thursday, May 5. -- It would be useful for President Bush to call Berlusconi Wednesday, so that he could say before Parliament the next day that he had spoken with the President about the matter. 5. (S) As to the report itself, the Italians generally described it as supporting the "tragic accident" thesis, and highlighted the following: -- The report says it is impossible to attribute individual responsibility for the killing. -- It also says Italian investigators found no evidence that killing was intentional. -- This last point was designed specifically to discourage further investigation by the prosecuting magistrates, since under Italian law they apparently can investigate cases of intentional homicide against Italian citizens outside of Italy, but not cases of unintentional homicide. (NOTE: Our contacts warn that Italian magistrates are infamous for bending such laws to suit their purposes, so it remains to be seen whether the GOI tactic will work in this regard.) Also, Castellaneta told us later that the GOI was hoping the prosecutors would find that, because the killing was unintentional, there would not be grounds for a case of "excessive legitimate defense." -- The Italian report was written with prosecuting magistrates in mind. The Italians stressed that USA 15-6 regulations permitted some things to be covered in the joint investigation but not others, while Italian magistrates had broader scope that had to be satisfied. -- The government will block attempts by parliamentary committees to open their own investigations (there are already several calls for this from the opposition), on the grounds that this report answers questions sufficiently. -- The report stands behind the accounts given by Sgrena, the driver, and SISMI's Baghdad Station Chief; i.e., the "Italian reconstruction" of the incident. 6. (S) The copy of 67-page Italian report that they handed to us was a draft that was still being proofread in another room (in fact, they said it was the only hard copy in existence, and they swapped out a couple pages during the meeting as typos were corrected). We have translated and e-mailed to State EUR/WE high points (see para 10) and faxed the complete text in Italian to State EUR/WE. Our quick scan indicates that there are several pages in which the Italian investigators take issue with specific facts and findings in the USA 15-6 report, generally on the grounds that the accounts of the Italian witnesses differed significantly from those of the American soldiers. There is also an extensive critique of the inadequacy of SOPs for Traffic control Points and Blocking Positions. It argues that more complete notification to US authorities would not have changed the outcome. In a subsequent meeting with the DCM, Castellaneta said the main difference in the reports was that the US report focused on communications while the Italian report focused on preparation of the soldiers and the stress under which they were operating. The final conclusions, though, are as stated by the Italians in our meeting: no individual responsibility, no deliberate intent. 7. (S) Ambassador Sembler told the Italians that the USG shared the Italian desire to put this incident behind us and not let it affect overall bilateral relations. In that regard, it was important for the Italian government not to point accusing fingers at the U.S. or complain about lack of cooperation, and we would endeavor to continue doing so ourselves . Fini said Italy could not complain about cooperation from U.S.; the Italian report clarified that the Italian investigators had full access and he would ask Berlusconi to stress that fact in parliament on May 5. Ragaglini and BG Campregher were effusive about the "total and complete" cooperation they received from the USA investigators, including access to all evidence. The one caveat was that for five days before they arrived in Baghdad BG Vangjel had been conducting interviews within the USA chain of command re communications and U.S. knowledge of the rescue operation. The Italians, however, were given copies of everything done prior to their arrival. 8. (S) The Italians were clearly not happy about the classified portions of the USA 15-6 posted on the web being "unredacted" so easily and asked the Ambassador for an explanation. They did not push the issue after he explained it was solely a technical mistake. The Italians said they had pulled from Baghdad the SISMI Station Chief whose name was revealed in the "unredacted" version of the 15-6; he will not go back. 9. (S) Embassy recommendations for immediate next steps: -- The NSC should try to schedule a POTUS-Berlusconi call on Wednesday. -- The USG public reaction for now should be limited to "We've just received Italian report and are studying it." (Italian press will be furiously nit-picking, and it will not serve a useful purpose for us to get into point-by-point refutation at this stage, although we might want to do backgrounders later in Baghdad, Washington, or Rome.) -- The Department should consider a SecState-Fini call in the next few days to confirm that we share Italy's desire to put incident behind us. 10. (U) Informal Embassy Translation of Italian Report's Conclusions: "The Italian representatives - based on the evidence they were able to obtain - did not find elements that would allege that the facts indicate deliberate murder. It is realistic that tension felt by the soldiers and some inexperience and stress may have made them react instinctively and with little control. The lack of formal references to clear rules that should have been observed makes it problematic to assign specific individual responsibilities. The facts asserted by Ms. Sgrena, the car's driver and the SISMI Chief of Station in Baghdad can be considered realistic. Based on the overall analysis, their reconstruction is coherent and plausible." End Informal Embassy Translation of Conclusions. 11. (U) Baghdad minimize considered. SEMBLER NNNN 2005ROME01506 - Classification: SECRET