Berlusconi not to run in 2013 election

The beleaguered Italian prime minister has said he will step down as leader.

In an interview published today in the Italian newspaper, La Reppublica, Silvio Berlusconi has announced that he will not be running in Italy's upcoming elections.

Asked if he would be putting himself forward as a candidate for election, he replied: "Absolutely not".

"I would like to leave now, really, but I won't," he said.

In his place, he named his justice minister and head of his People of Freedom (PdL) party, Angelino Alfano, as his potential successor.

"The candidate for premier on the centre right will be Alfano. If I could, I would give it up now... in any case I won't be the candidate for prime ministr in the next election... at 77 I can't still be the president of the council".

He offered his full support to Alfano, saying he was "the only [politician] who doesn't play games".

The 74-year old media-mogul and effective tyrant has suffered several political drawbacks in recent months, including an unprecedented defeat in regional elections on 31 May and in four referendum votes on 13 June. Abroad, his image has long been sullied by a long list of salacious allegations, and he is currently being investigated on corruption charges and for allegedly paying an under-age prostitute for sex.

"When will you stop attacking me?" He whined to the newspaper. "Try to be a little more balanced. If you can."

But news of his departure, however welcome, should be taken with a healthy degree of scepticism. After all, he is not a politician best known for his command of the truth.

Emanuelle Degli Esposti is the editor and founder of The Arab Review, an online journal covering arts and culture in the Arab world. She also works as a freelance journalist specialising in the politics of the Middle East.

Getty Images.
Show Hide image

The problems with ending encryption to fight terrorism

Forcing tech firms to create a "backdoor" to access messages would be a gift to cyber-hackers.

The UK has endured its worst terrorist atrocity since 7 July 2005 and the threat level has been raised to "critical" for the first time in a decade. Though election campaigning has been suspended, the debate over potential new powers has already begun.

Today's Sun reports that the Conservatives will seek to force technology companies to hand over encrypted messages to the police and security services. The new Technical Capability Notices were proposed by Amber Rudd following the Westminster terrorist attack and a month-long consultation closed last week. A Tory minister told the Sun: "We will do this as soon as we can after the election, as long as we get back in. The level of threat clearly proves there is no more time to waste now. The social media companies have been laughing in our faces for too long."

Put that way, the plan sounds reasonable (orders would be approved by the home secretary and a senior judge). But there are irrefutable problems. Encryption means tech firms such as WhatsApp and Apple can't simply "hand over" suspect messages - they can't access them at all. The technology is designed precisely so that conversations are genuinely private (unless a suspect's device is obtained or hacked into). Were companies to create an encryption "backdoor", as the government proposes, they would also create new opportunities for criminals and cyberhackers (as in the case of the recent NHS attack).

Ian Levy, the technical director of the National Cyber Security, told the New Statesman's Will Dunn earlier this year: "Nobody in this organisation or our parent organisation will ever ask for a 'back door' in a large-scale encryption system, because it's dumb."

But there is a more profound problem: once created, a technology cannot be uninvented. Should large tech firms end encryption, terrorists will merely turn to other, lesser-known platforms. The only means of barring UK citizens from using the service would be a Chinese-style "great firewall", cutting Britain off from the rest of the internet. In 2015, before entering the cabinet, Brexit Secretary David Davis warned of ending encryption: "Such a move would have had devastating consequences for all financial transactions and online commerce, not to mention the security of all personal data. Its consequences for the City do not bear thinking about."

Labour's manifesto pledged to "provide our security agencies with the resources and the powers they need to protect our country and keep us all safe." But added: "We will also ensure that such powers do not weaken our individual rights or civil liberties". The Liberal Democrats have vowed to "oppose Conservative attempts to undermine encryption."

But with a large Conservative majority inevitable, according to polls, ministers will be confident of winning parliamentary support for the plan. Only a rebellion led by Davis-esque liberals is likely to stop them.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

0800 7318496