For observers in the US, the Italian crisis could be perceived as a cautionary tale. It is a story of how democratically-elected politicians can jeopardize the future of their own country by focusing entirely on their own narrow self-interests. This very week, while Mario Monti − the man appointed to enact a series of painful reforms in Italy − tries to put together a new government in Rome, in Washington, the so-called super committee is frantically trying to forge a deal to address the fiscal problems of the US. Many observers have already labeled the committee’s work as a pantomime, focused more on the upcoming elections than on America’s debt. Others have pointed out that the US is, in some ways, in an enviable position: if it were to suddenly face a sovereign debt crisis, the Federal Reserve Bank (FED) would never allow the country to default and would act as a lender of last resort. But this confidence is misplaced and bears elements of hubris. While it is true that the institutional framework in the US allows for a much more streamlined decision process, when the institutional pipes are seriously clogged, they will face serious plumbing problems, regardless of how simply built they are.

It is true that managing seventeen members of the euro zone in a crisis of this magnitude is very complicated. It is also true, though, that the euro zone is not standing still. The crisis in Europe has already had the effect of removing some of those governments which were perceived as an impediment to finding solutions. Italy’s former Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi is the latest, and probably best, example. He, more than anybody else, had become part of the problem. He is now gone.

Looking for a New Leader
It is now up to former European Commissioner Mario Monti to form a government tasked with painful reforms. Speaking before reporters on Monday, Monti promised sacrifices for all, but he stopped short of promising “tears and blood.” Speaking in the German capital of Berlin last Wednesday, the widely respected Monti set the tone of what would come with his leadership. He made it clear that Italy needs more growth, “not through more borrowing, but through the removal of impediments to growth.” He went on to underline that “growth requires structural reforms in the form of taking away privileges and rents from practically every category in society.” While his words were well received by financial markets and European partners, Monti is well aware that to implement such reforms in Italy will be a tough task.

His government will need not only a group of capable experts, but also wide political support in parliament. For many politicians, the temptation − a trap so well described by the writer Giuseppe Tomasi de Lampedusa in “The Leopard” − will be to agree to change everything on the surface, only in order to make sure that nothing changes in reality.

Mired in byzantine power struggles, the Italian political class, on both sides of the isle, is under-equipped for today’s challenges. Expecting change from the very same politicians that think their main purpose is not to give, but to take from their citizens, requires a lot of optimism. Furthermore, the political atmosphere has been deeply divisive for decades, which makes it hard to find a middle ground with the ability to agree on a program of reforms.