Defense Committee approves 10,000 personnel for Strade Sicure

In recent months, the national security architecture appears to have taken a direction that warrants careful consideration. After the initial guidance set out by Defense Minister Guido Crosetto – which seemed to point to the need for greater rationalization of the military instrument and a concentration of resources on functions directly related to Defense – the picture appears to have gradually changed.

Requirements linked to domestic security have in fact brought the possibility of a broader deployment of the Armed Forces on national territory back to the forefront. This is an understandable choice from both a political perspective and in terms of public perceptions of security, but it raises questions about its long-term sustainability and the proper division of responsibilities between Defense and police forces.

From words to action: the proposal for 10,000 troops

The issue took on a concrete dimension when the resolution providing for the permanent deployment of 10,000 troops on national territory passed through the Defense Committee, pending the subsequent parliamentary process.

This is a significant decision, as it could have a structural impact on the employment of the military instrument. The issue is not to question the contribution the Army can make to national security, already demonstrated on numerous occasions, but rather to understand whether permanent employment in predominantly territorial duties is compatible with the Armed Forces’ primary mission.

The risk of overlap with law enforcement agencies

An increasing use of troops in cities also risks creating a gradual overlap between the Army’s functions and those properly belonging to police forces.

The problem becomes even more evident when troops are assigned territorial control duties without an operational, legal, and material framework fully consistent with such responsibilities. The possibility of equipping them, for example, with plastic restraints for the temporary restraint of detained persons highlights the need to clarify equipment, procedures, and safeguards.

A servicemember is not a public safety officer and should not gradually be turned into one without an overarching assessment of the operational and legal consequences. The risk is that soldiers will be assigned increasing responsibilities without being provided with adequate equipment, training, and safeguards.

The training issue

There is also a strictly military aspect that should not be overlooked: combat readiness requires continuous training.

Units intended to operate in high-intensity scenarios must maintain high standards through exercises, live-fire training, unit activities, and the integration of personnel and equipment. Prolonged employment in territorial duties inevitably takes time away from these activities.

The recent incident involving four Bersaglieri of the 11° Reggimento, who were injured in Latvia during a live-fire exercise after being hit by a burst fired from another Dardo armored vehicle, is a reminder of how complex, sensitive, and inherently risky military training can be.

The fact that a burst from a 7.62 mm machine gun caused injuries without even more serious consequences can, under the circumstances, be considered particularly fortunate. However, incidents of this kind should reinforce the need to ensure that units have sufficient time, resources, and continuity in training.

The strategic issue: homeland security and international commitments

The possible permanent deployment of 10,000 service members across the country ultimately raises a strategic question.

The Defense establishment’s human and material resources are not unlimited. A unit continuously assigned to territorial security inevitably has less time to train, prepare for operational deployment, or take part in international commitments.

It is therefore necessary to consider whether a significant expansion of domestic duties is compatible with the commitments Italy maintains abroad, from the NATO Eastern Flank to missions in the Mediterranean and the Middle East, including Lebanon.

The issue should not be framed as an absolute choice between the security of cities and international security. Rather, the challenge is to identify a sustainable balance.

Because if the Army is called upon ever more frequently to compensate for structural shortcomings in territorial control, sooner or later it will be necessary to determine which military activities to reduce, which units to deploy, and which strategic priorities to preserve.

And this is probably the central point of the debate: deciding whether the Armed Forces should be used primarily to supplement domestic security or whether they should focus their personnel, equipment, and training on their core mission, namely preparing for the defense of the country and for the military commitments undertaken by Italy with its allies.