Italy’s Demographic Decline: War Spending vs. Supporting Families & Future Generations

History repeatedly demonstrates, as seen in Athens and Rome, that the decline of a civilization stems primarily from internal factors: demographic crisis coupled with the lack of creative leadership in addressing challenges. Epidemics, wars, and invasions merely deliver the final blow to a society with an insufficient birth-to-death ratio for natural social equilibrium, led by a leadership lacking solutions or offering inadequate, even destructive, ones. Recent Istat data, presented during the widely criticized (or misrepresented) National Conference on Natality, suggests that Italy is also facing this decline.

Is this winter irreversible? It would be if the same data didn’t reveal a potential spring: 8 out of 10 Italians want children, but are unable to realize that desire. The desire to have children isn’t lacking, but the conditions are, particularly for women who lack freedom of choice. Save the Children’s 2024 report on maternity in Italy describes these women as “tightrope walkers,” struggling or unable to balance their aspirations with reality. Why are we among the lowest-ranked countries in the EU in responding to this emergency? And are we certain the problem solely concerns women? Data is needed, because raising a family requires accounting for realities.

For years, Italy has seen fewer than 400,000 births annually, reaching a record low in 2023 with 379,000 births, compared to 661,000 deaths. By 2050, there will be one young person for every three elderly individuals. Migration inflows do not compensate for the replacement rate needed to sustain the welfare system, leading to a decline in quality of life, evident in healthcare and education. To maintain social equilibrium, the fertility rate should be at least two children per woman; in Italy, it’s 1.2, with an average maternal age of 31.6 years – the highest in Europe, where the average is 29.7. France, with a better fertility rate of 1.8, has long offered tax breaks, nurseries, full-time schooling, and part-time options for both parents.

Germany (1.5 children per woman) provides financial support, paid parental leave, and guaranteed nurseries. Finland, at its lowest in 2019 (1.35 children per woman), reversed the trend with baby-sitter vouchers, tax breaks, longer and transferable parental leave. These countries have shifted their mindset, prioritizing childcare and ensuring equal opportunities for women and men. Spain, since 2021, offers 16 weeks of parental leave for each parent (with the first 6 weeks mandatory, the remaining optional, either full-time or part-time) with 100% of salary. Portugal offers 150 days of paid leave at 100% or 180 days at 80% of salary, with the possibility of an additional three months of part-time work for each parent. Norway provides 12 months of paid leave, divided or shared between parents. Sweden offers each parent 16 months of leave, with three months at 80% of salary. Germany has flexible parental leave: parents can work up to 32 hours per week for 24 months. Poland offers 36 weeks of leave, with 20 weeks paid.

And Italy? With the 2024 Budget Law, 5 months of maternity leave at 80% of salary and only 10 days at full salary for fathers are provided, along with the possibility, but only for employees, of an additional two months for parents, at 80% within the first 12 years of the child’s life. Yet, the second month of paid leave will only apply in 2024, reduced to 60% from 2025. There’s also the universal child allowance (based on income, from 50 to 200 euros per month per child), exemption from contributions for mothers with more than three children, and nursery bonuses. These are, however, non-systematic aids, characterized by restrictive criteria, excessive bureaucracy, and regulations that ignore the fact that a child is conceived and raised by two parents equally.

nurseries cover only 28% of children aged 0-3, it’s no surprise that women often have to leave work after childbirth. Our welfare system fails to meet the challenge and doesn’t account for equality: public spending on the family is 1.4% of GDP (1.9% EU average, 2.2% in France, 2.9% in Finland). Even as the effects of the regulations introduced in 2024 remain to be seen, a contradiction has persisted for years. The Constitution, Article 31, states: “The Republic supports the formation of the family and the fulfillment of its duties with economic measures and other benefits, with particular regard to large families. It protects motherhood, childhood and youth, promoting the necessary institutions for this purpose,” while Article 11 states: “Italy rejects war as an instrument of offense against the freedom of other peoples and as a means of resolving international disputes.” Yet, in recent years, military spending has increased systematically. Global military expenditure reached a record $2.443 trillion in 2023, up 16% in Europe – the highest level since the Cold War, with Western Europe accounting for $345 billion. In Italy, military spending is projected to reach 28 billion euros in 2024, an increase of 1.4 billion euros compared to the previous estimate, with approximately 10 billion allocated to new armaments.

These are said to be necessary for current war fronts and deterrence strategies, but, assuming that’s true, shouldn’t they go hand in hand with care? What great is an electrified fence to defend a crumbling house? As G.K. Chesterton wrote, referring to a London neighborhood: “If people loved Pimlico as mothers love their children, freely, in a year or two the neighborhood could become more beautiful than Florence. Some readers will say that this is pure fantasy. I reply that this is the true story of humanity. This is how cities have grown. The Romans did not love Rome for its greatness. Rome was great because the Romans loved it.”

Love for a place, a thing, a person is the source of its growth. A (pro-)creative energy that we won’t have until women are no longer forced to walk a tightrope, men are included in a shared responsibility for care, and our politicians become farsighted. I am concerned by this will to death that funds war more than life: it’s a defeat for our Constitution, which, unifying a country devastated by war, believed in dialogue to manage relations and the family to shape the future. For political classes focused on power rather than life, history should show that when a country increases spending on war and not on care (hospitals and schools), that country isn’t declining, but has chosen to decline. And decisions aren’t made by chance, they are taken.