With the aim of filling the huge gap in its military spending, Italy is trying to integrate the controversial Messina bridge into NATO’s defense plan, presenting it as a strategic infrastructure.

In particular, as Politico reports, as the Italian government is called upon to respond to NATO’s new defense expenditure, Italian politicians propose to integrate the bridge to Sicily, costing € 13.5 billion in military spending.

According to the same report, Rome is one of NATO countries with the lowest defense spending with only 1.49% of GDP in 2023, making its new target 5% by 2035 almost impossible.

The government of Georgia Melloni wants to move on with the pharaoh plan to construct a bridge that joins the Strait of Messina, an infrastructure that, if implemented, will be the largest hanging bridge in the world. It is a work that has previously been a vision of the Romans, dictator Benito Mussolini, and former Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi.

Both Foreign Minister Antonio Tayyani and Infrastructure Minister Matteo Salvini, who are both vice -presidents of the Melonian government, argue that the bridge has a strategic value for NATO and not just a financial role, a position highlighted in a government report in April.

A government official stressed that no official decision has been made on classification of the bridge as a security project, but said that further discussions would probably follow soon to “estimate how realistic this possibility would look like”. The idea could prove politically useful to Meloni, as it struggles to persuade public opinion, which is cautious about the war on the need for high defensive spending, while Italy is back towards austerity.

There are some reasonable causes on which Italy could support its bridge arguments. From the 5% GDP target set by NATO, only 3.5% should relate to basic military costs, while the remaining 1.5% can be directed to broader strategic spending, such as infrastructure.

An Italian Treasury official also noted that the bridge as a military project could help the government overcome some financial and technical obstacles that had previously preventing its construction.

For decades, efforts to build the bridge, with an estimated central opening of 3.3 kilometers, repeatedly stumble upon costs, in the difficulties of operating as it is in an seismic zone and the necessary movement of residents.

Once the bridge joins defensive plans, it will “bypass bureaucratic obstacles and lawsuits with local authorities that could appeal against the government, arguing that the bridge would cause disproportionate damage to their land,” the official said. It will also “facilitate the pumping of funding, especially within the next year, for the work of the bridge”.

“The bridge will be used to transport NATO forces to the Mediterranean”

In April, the Italian government adopted a letter stating that the construction of the bridge is considered “imperative for reasons of a superior public interest”.

In addition to its use by citizens, “the Messina Strait Bridge is also of strategic importance for national and international security, to the extent that it will play a decisive role in defense and security, facilitating the movement of Italian Armed Forces and NATO allies.”

Italy also called for the project to join the EU’s funding plan for military, equipment and media mobility, as “it fits perfectly with this strategy, providing a basic infrastructure for the transfer of NATO forces from Northern Europe to the Mediterranean”, as stated in the government.

The bridge “is an advantage for military mobility, allowing quick transportation of heavy vehicles, troops and resources both by road and rail,” the government added.

Whether NATO, and especially US President Donald Trump, who has a particular weakness in major construction projects, will accept this logic is another issue, Politico notes.

Officially, the Strait of Messina is outside the only designated NATO military mobility corridor in Italy, which starts from the ports of Apulia (in the “heel” of Italian boot), crosses the Adriatic to Albania and continues to Northern Macedonia. It also remains unclear whether the strait is included in the EU military mobility network, whose corridors, according to people who know the discussions, are expected to be aligned with NATO routes.

The Americans, for the time being, keep their papers closed. When asked about the bridge at the NATO meeting in The Hague in late June, US advisers smiled, but did not give any immediate response.

The “Berlusconi Bridge”

Foreign Minister Antonio Tayyani is a staunch supporter of the bridge. “We will make the Italians understand that security is a broader concept than tanks,” he said in an interview with the financial newspaper Milano Finanza.

“To do this, we will focus on infrastructure that has political use, such as the Messina Strait Bridge, which falls under defense, as Sicily is a NATO platform,” he added.

Infrastructure Minister Matteo Salvini, the other vice -president of the Melonian government, sees the bridge as a venture that could boost the far -right Lega, which began as a secessionist power of the north, in a successful national party that is now investing in the south.

“Of course,” he recently responded to a journalist’s question about whether the bridge could help Italy achieve NATO’s new goal. “Infrastructure is of strategic importance for security in many ways, so if we invest more in security, some strategic infrastructure will also be included in the security plan.”

Salvini is pushing for the process to speed up, according to a finance ministry official and a member of the internal government processes.

“Matteo is pushing hard to secure some form of” approval “of the project at a technical and political level, to show public opinion that something is moving,” the Treasury official said.

The opposition speaks for ‘mockery’

Opposition parties disagree with both the need for the construction of the bridge and its classification as military expenditure.

“This is a mockery against the citizens and commitments that Italy has made under NATO. I doubt that this government bluff will be accepted, “said Giuseppe Antochi, MEP of the 5-star left-wing movement.

“The government would have to stop and not be ridiculed internationally, ashamed of Italy,” he added.

Another argument against the project is that it will unite two of Italy’s poorest regions, none of which has an efficient transport system. Many believe that investment in local roads and railways are much more urgent.

“The population of Sicily and Calabria is suffering from inadequate water supply network, transportation, streets full of puddles and third -world level hospitals. The bridge in the strait, therefore, cannot be a priority, “Antochi said.

However, the government alliance is determined to proceed. On Tuesday, Salvini said the final approval of the project was expected in July.

In a rather ominous sign, Tayyani suggested that the name of Silvio Berlusconi, a prime minister who became known for the Bunga Bunga parties and endless judicial adventures, ends at the bridge.