Italy could classify $13.5 billion bridge as NATO spending – Poltico

Italian authorities are looking to classify a long-term project to construct a bridge connecting the mainland to the island of Sicily as a NATO expenditure amid their struggle to meet the bloc’s spending goals, according to Politico.

The idea of creating an overpass to the largest island in the Mediterranean had been discussed in Italy for many decades, but its realization has been hampered by high costs, the difficulty of operating in a seismic zone and other issues. If built by the current government of Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, the 3.6-km-long suspension bridge across the Strait of Messina will become the longest in the world.

In its article on Monday, Politico described Italy as “one of NATO’s lowest military spenders,” with Rome investing only 1.49% of its GDP in defense last year, a far cry from the 5% goal approved at the bloc’s summit in The Hague in June.

Marking the $13.5 billion bridge as a NATO spending could help Meloni meet the bloc’s 5% target and, at the same time, “convince a war-wary public of the need for major defense outlays at a time when Italy is already inching toward austerity,” the article read.

An unnamed Italian government official told the outlet that no formal decision has yet been made by Rome on classifying the bridge as a security project, but further talks would likely be held soon to “see how feasible this feels.”

According to another official from the Italian Treasury, who also talked to Politico, the new designation of the project would make raising money for it easier and would also “override bureaucratic obstacles, litigation with local authorities that could challenge the government in court claiming that the bridge will disproportionately damage their land.”

The problem for Rome is that the Strait of Messina lies outside of Italy’s only designated NATO military mobility corridor, the article pointed out.

However, the Italian case is backed by the fact that only 3.5% from the NATO spending target must be allocated for core military needs, while the remaining 1.5% could be steered toward broader strategic resilience projects, including infrastructure.

“Whether NATO — and more importantly, US President Donald Trump, who loves a big building project — will buy into that logic is another matter,” Politico noted.