National Identity and Historical Controversy: The Legacy of the Foibe Killings in Contemporary Italy
In the annals of Italian collective memory, few episodes are as contentious and laden with ideological import as the Foibe massacres and the Exodus. These events not only scar the history of WWII but have also become focal points in the complex process of constructing national identity in contemporary Italy. This guest contribution by historian @Marco Bernardi delves into how the narratives surrounding these historical episodes have been harnessed, shaped, and sometimes manipulated, revealing the potent interplay between history and political narration.
The interplay between history and politics raises critical questions: How do we choose to remember, and what does this say about our societal values and aspirations? As we examine the process of identity construction through the lens of the Foibe and Exodus, we invite readers to consider the profound impact of historical narratives in shaping our understanding of the present and future. [ML]

One of the pivotal issues in Italy’s collective memory of WWII concerns the mass killings known as the Foibe, perpetrated by Yugoslav partisans along the Eastern border regions of what is now Slovenia and Croatia. These incidents involved the execution and disposal of thousands of individuals, including Italian fascists, anti-communists, and civilians, into natural sinkholes called “Foibe”. Often related to it but yet not directly connected is the other very important issue of the mass exodus of Italians from Dalmatia after 1947. This was a large-scale relocation of ethnic Italians to Italy, triggered by Yugoslavia’s annexation of the region and subsequent political and ethnic pressures.
Since the 1950s, the issue of the Foibe has been a contentious topic, primarily championed by far-right, chauvinistic, and neofascist factions within Italian politics. By the early 2000s, groups such as the MSI-AN successfully brought the topic to the forefront of political discourse, focusing on Italy’s identity rooted in historical narratives. They employed self-victimizing and ultra-nationalistic rhetoric that gained significant traction and support across the political spectrum. As a result, what were once fringe, radical viewpoints became part of the mainstream political narrative, marking a significant shift in the identity of the Italian Republic. This Republic, borne out of the anti-fascist Resistance and enshrined in a Constitution that repudiates war and imperialism (Art. 11, Italian Constitution), finds itself increasingly defined by chauvinistic principles that diverge from its foundational values.
This transformation underscores a broader ideological struggle within Italy, as the nation grapples with its historical legacies. The increasing embrace of narratives that simplify and nationalize complex episodes from Italy’s past not only reflects a move towards a more chauvinistic national identity but also signals a worrying trend of historical revisionism that challenges the principles upon which the modern Italian state was founded.
Although evidence suggests these killings were primarily politically motivated and have been the subject of historical inquiry since at least the 1960s, two dominant narratives have emerged in Italy, particularly since the early 2000s: a) the Foibe were an attempt at ethnic cleansing; b) a conspiracy of silence surrounded these events. TheseThose narratives gained traction among the associations of the in exile living giulian and dalmatian and the far-right political parties, eventually achieving widespread media attention and social acceptance from the 1980s.
In 2004, the Italian Parliament instituted the National Memorial Day of the Exodus and Foibe, thereby institutionalizing these narratives with bipartisan support.
This Memorial Day emerged from a protracted process that began in 1996 with an initial far-right, nostalgic proposition by the neofascist party Alleanza Nazionale, countered by a proposal from the left-wing Partito Democratico. Although the latter proposal was not adopted, the stage was set for subsequent successful attempts in the following legislative period. Merging these two initial drafts incorporated long-standing narratives and introduced an alternative interpretation of the historical events. The merged draft controversially asserted that the exodus of Italians from the region was a direct result of the Foibe, portraying them as an ethnic cleansing campaign along Italy’s North-Eastern border, despite the temporal and logical separation of the two events (with Foibe occurring in late 1943 and spring of 1945, and the mass exodus starting post-1947 for political and national reasons).
From a fringe subject to mainstream narrative, the contentious Foibe debates have reshaped the debate on Italy’s national identity.
II
This narrative, which occasionally drew unjust comparisons to the Holocaust, became part of the Italian Republic’s official discourse on March 30, 2004, with the enactment of the “Giorno del ricordo”-law “in memoria delle vittime delle Foibe, dell’esodo giuliano-dalmata, delle vicende del confine orientale e concessione di un riconoscimento ai congiunti degli infoibati (No. 92)”. Since then, concerted efforts at all institutional levels level to galvanise Italian people with the idea of being part of the innocent victims. Politicians often supported narratives portraying Italians primarily as victims, thereby fostering a sort of official identity that resonated broadly. This identitythough it was supposed to be part of the founding features of the Republic, most of the rhetoric sourced from neo-fascist, ultra-nationalistic circles, with right-wing parties using it to construct a national narrative. An illustrative example of this is the controversy over the wording on the commemorative plaque dedicated to the offspring of Foibe victims in 2004, with Roberto Menia, the first law’s draft promoter, lamenting the replacement of his proposed inscription “For Italy” with “The Italian Republic remembers”. Despite its contentious origins, the nationalistic rhetoric gained increasing acceptance.
In fact, there are many examples of cross-party efforts to build up self-acquitting, self-pitying, and chauvinistic narrations on this issue.
Even before the final approval of the law, several municipalities, led by right-wing parties, named streets after the “martyrs” of the Foibe. This practice was soon imitated by all parties; thus, during the 2010s, streets and squares dedicated to this theme sprouted up in almost all Italian cities and towns. The word “martyr,” rather than more neutral terms such as “victim” or “fallen,” was largely selected due to the Christian influence in the culture. In Italian society, the term “martyr” carries significant weight for at least two reasons. Etymologically, it means “testifier,” denoting someone who bears witness to a belief or event. Additionally, it evokes a sense of innocence, implying a clear dichotomy between the victim (the right side) and the perpetrator (the wrong side). For instance, among the 746 cities with more than 15,000 inhabitants (almost 10% of Italian towns, covering 60% of the population), there are at least 337 dedications to the Foibe and/or the Exodus, with 238 of them — approximately 70% — including the word “martyr.” For comparison, the same sample reveals 450 dedications to events and individuals connected to the anti-fascist Resistance, with 311 — about 69% — employing the term “martyr.” Consequently, in less than a decade, streets honoring the Foibe and Exodus became as prevalent as those dedicated to the Resistance and anti-Fascism, the foundational events and ideals of the Italian Republic since 1945.
The association of the term “martyrs” with the victims of the Foibe represents the culmination of a political project; it highlights the success of a specific political message aimed at endorsing a self-pitying and chauvinistic interpretation of the past, as well as a particular perspective on the fascist dictatorship and its place within Italian history. These narratives align with attempts to re-evaluate Fascism and its figures. This confluence of ideas is evident at the highest levels of official discourse, as in some speeches of the former President of the Republic, Giorgio Napolitano. Despite his communist background, President Napolitano emerged as a steadfast advocate for incorporating this new element into the “national identity” of Italians. His political history, coupled with the very fact that he spoke as the President, underscores the effectiveness of ultra-chauvinistic messages in becoming central to the collective memory. Such memory identity employs undeniable arguments—that being on the side of the nation is inherently good; thus, to refuse or even question this narrative could be perceived as tantamount to treason, an intolerable affront to the community’s existence.
Indeed, when Napolitano recognized that Italians had committed war crimes against the population of the former Yugoslavia, he nevertheless framed this acknowledgment within a broader assertion of Italian victimhood. On July 14, 2011, he juxtaposed World War II, extermination camps, the Foibe, and the Exodus, blurring the lines between victims and perpetrators and insinuating that Italians belonged exclusively to the former group. In his view, the Foibe victims were indeed “martyrs” who died for Italy, a sentiment he expressed in a speech on February 10, 2011, urging remembrance for “all innocents who died or were killed in the stone quarries of Carso, the trenches in 1915-18 or the Foibe in 1945.” Not surprisingly, he even used the term “ethnic cleansing” on February 10, 2007, describing a movement of hatred, violence, and territorial ambition reminiscent of such atrocities.
This institutional effort quickly permeated mass culture, supported by numerous educational initiatives, local commemorations, and pop cultural productions, with significant backing from institutions. Notable examples include Simone Cristicchi’s theater play “Magazzino 18” (broadcast by the public television RAI on February 10, 2014) and the TV movie “Il cuore nel pozzo.” The blatant self-pitying and chauvinistic messages in these works are unmistakable, and at times, even crude. “Magazzino 18” combines sentimental songs and clichés about Italian innocence and victimhood, notably omitting any references to Fascism or Italian war crimes. The play almost verbatim reflects Menia’s proposal, depicting a region “emptied of its essence.”
“Il cuore nel pozzo”, a TV film by Alberto Negrin, produced by RAI and aired on the first National Memorial Day of the Exodus and Foibe in 2005, aimed to “break the silence” on historical crimes, attracting an extraordinary viewership of more than 16 million people. The film portrays Istria as starkly divided between the malevolent, atheistic Slavs and the virtuous, Catholic Italians. With the arrival of Tito’s forces in post-German retreat Istria, led by Novak, a Slav commander intent on seizing Italian lands, the narrative through the eyes of Francesco, an 8-year-old boy, seems designed to liken him to the Italian Anne Frank, implying the Foibe as Italy’s Holocaust.
Indeed, there are unabashed attempts to draw parallels of equivalence. For example, the portrayal of persecutions and mass killings in the Foibe is notably derived from iconic representations of Nazi operations in classical cinema, down to the attire and heavy boots worn by the Slav partisans, which unmistakably replicate those of German soldiers. This portrayal casts Slav actions as akin to a methodical ethnic cleansing, mirroring the atrocities of Nazi campaigns. In tandem with portraying Italians primarily as victims, “Il cuore nel pozzo” articulates a stark, and at times crude, anti-Slav sentiment. The narrative turns the war of extermination by the Slavs into a personal vendetta for Novak, the Slav partisan leader, who embarks on a search for Carlo, his son conceived through the violation of Giulia, a young woman he had assaulted. The symbolism is profound: Giulia’s violation is allegorically depicted as the violation of Italian territories, leading to “the mutilation of Eastern Italy and the significant loss of territories in Venezia Giulia and Dalmatia.” This reference draws directly from one of the proposals that laid the groundwork for the National Memorial Day of the Exodus and Foibe Law, amplifying the narrative of Italian victimhood while casting the Slav partisans in a malicious light.
III
The discourse surrounding the Foibe massacres and the Exodus in Italy exemplifies a wider contemporary trend towards increasingly aggressive forms of nationalism. This trend utilizes historical phenomena to craft identities within a political sphere that postures as being beyond ideological divides. Particularly, far-right factions, notably the Lega Nord and Fratelli d’Italia (successors to Alleanza Nazionale and, before, of MSI), have adopted a rhetoric that ostensibly transcends traditional political alignments. However, their discourse frequently aligns with chauvinistic and, at times, xenophobic sentiments. The debates around Italy’s historical narrative, especially regarding its fascist past from the 1990s to the early 2010s, have set the stage for the prominence of the Foibe and Exodus narratives. These narratives have increasingly occupied the center stage in the official commemorations of Italy’s recent history, signaling a significant shift in the nation’s collective memory. This focus on the Foibe and Exodus effectively leverages a form of nationalism that challenges the political assumption of what being Italian “should” entail. It frames the victims of these tragedies not as casualties of their beliefs but as individuals who suffered solely due to their national identity — as Italians. This approach fosters a narrative of “innocence” against “criminal” ideologies, allowing for a broad, uncritical commemoration and empathy for the supposed purity of the victims. Such a narrative promotes a “weak memory,” enabling a universal sense of patriotism and pity to overshadow complex historical debates and considerations.
The present paper was written as an implementation and with the support of the ERC Prject F-WORD, GA 101042882
OpenEdition schlägt Ihnen vor, diesen Beitrag wie folgt zu zitieren:
marcobernardi (5. April 2024). National Identity and Historical Controversy: The Legacy of the Foibe Killings in Contemporary Italy. TrIBES. Abgerufen am 9. Februar 2025 von https://doi.org/10.58079/w692