• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Philippe Le Corre",
    "Carlotta Alfonsi"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie Europe"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "EP",
  "programs": [
    "Europe"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "East Asia",
    "China",
    "Western Europe",
    "Asia",
    "Europe",
    "Iran"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "EU",
    "Economy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media

Italy’s Risky China Gamble

For all the overtures to China that Rome is making, Italy has not yet settled on what kind of relationship it actually wants.

Link Copied
By Philippe Le Corre and Carlotta Alfonsi
Published on Mar 14, 2019
Program mobile hero image

Program

Europe

The Europe Program in Washington explores the political and security developments within Europe, transatlantic relations, and Europe’s global role. Working in coordination with Carnegie Europe in Brussels, the program brings together U.S. and European policymakers and experts on strategic issues facing Europe.

Learn More

Source: The Diplomat

Chinese President Xi Jinping’s upcoming visit to Rome on March 22 will be an important test of China’s diplomatic and economic clout. Claims that Italy has decided to sign an agreement for official participation in China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) led to a rebuke by the U.S. Trump administration, which in turn brought to surface divisions within Italy’s populist coalition government.

As the first G-7 country to sign a memorandum of understanding on the BRI, Italy’s participation would carry large symbolic weight for China. But this would hardly be enough to legitimize the BRI amid a global backlash against it and Beijing’s own struggles with piling debt and a slowing economy in the throes of a trade war with the United States. Instead, U.S. diplomats correctly warn that it would harm Italy’s own reputation.

The recent Italian pivot toward Beijing that underlies this decision is as fickle as the BRI itself. For all the overtures to China that the populist government in Rome is making, Italy has not yet settled on what relationship it actually wants with China.

Over the last decade Italy has received around $23 billion in investment from China, making it the third largest European recipient of Chinese FDI. ChemChina’s takeover of tiremaker Pirelli was the largest in the EU and overshadowed the build-up of stakes in energy companies ENI, ENEL, and CDP Reti, and in hallmarks of “made-in-Italy” like Fiat and Ferragamo.

While Beijing’s shopping spree for Italian firms raised some eyebrows with previous governments, the current one is eager to attract even more money. Italy hopes to offload ailing airline Alitalia and secure greenfield investments that grow the country’s economy and create local jobs. The economic rationale for China to indulge this remains unclear. Most of its European investments so far have been driven by the Made in China 2025 strategy, which aims to make Chinese firms competitive in high value-added industries.

For years Italy’s China policy has consisted of a growing volume of diplomatic visits and countless conferences, but little in the way of tangible outcomes. What is new about the current government’s trajectory, besides the decisive rhetoric, is a considerable downplay of the risks associated with closing ranks with China.

The change of course is largely the work of Michele Geraci, undersecretary of state in the Ministry of Economic Development. Geraci, who has himself spent a decade in China, has largely sidelined the Ministry of Foreign Affairs by establishing his own China Task Force and by taking four trips to China in the second half of 2018 alone, including with Economy Minister Giovanni Tria and Deputy Prime Minister Luigi Di Maio.

The proposition behind Italy’s new policy trajectory is that Chinese investment will help finance its ambitious fiscal reforms, such as the new basic income for the poor, and that cooperation with China in Africa will curb migration flows in the Mediterranean. These ideas have been met with contempt by Italian academics and demonstrate the unrealistic and misplaced goals of Italy’s China policy.

Indeed, Geraci’s enthusiasm for China is not shared across the board. Two-thirds of Italians view China unfavorably, the largest proportion in a European country. Even more doubt its human rights track record.

The debate over Huawei and 5G shows more cracks in Italy’s China policy. Geraci seems to see no national security risks, but members of the governing Northern League party don’t share his view. Some of them are pushing to exercise Italy’s domestic investment screening policy, dubbed “golden power,” to revoke the auctioned 5G spectrum. Last month the Ministry of Economic Development rushed to dismiss a leaked claim that Huawei might indeed be banned from 5G contracts. Notably, Italy was one of the original proponents of the EU investment screening directive before the populists’ recent back-and-forth on it.

Italy’s strategy is similarly divided when it comes to including its ports in the BRI. At one stage or another every major Italian port has competed for a share of the BRI pie. In February, not long after Geraci was in Trieste to nudge a decision to make it the main Italian node for the BRI, Venice signed a memorandum of understanding to partner with the Chinese-run port of Piraeus in Greece.

Lingering skepticism about Chinese objectives and the benefits to Italy of supporting its global advance suggest that this policy might not outlive the current government – all the more since it appears tied significantly to Geraci himself. Given this is the fifth Italian government since Xi Jinping’s ascent as China’s top leader in 2012, its pivot to Beijing should not be exaggerated in the grand scheme of things.

This is not to say that Italy should not pay greater attention to China, but rather that its priorities are misguided. Long term, Italy will be better served by aligning with the rest of Europe instead of splitting it further. The country’s short-term economic motives provide a valid rationale for seeking a beneficial partnership with Beijing, but unity in the bloc is the best way to deliver this. As the European Commission wrote in its newly-released “strategic Outlook on EU-China,” only a united Europe can balance China’s leverage and ensure that relations serve the interests of both sides.

Carlotta Alfonsi is a research assistant at the Harvard Kennedy School.

This article was originally published by The Diplomat.

About the Authors

Philippe Le Corre

Former Nonresident Senior Fellow, Europe Program

Philippe Le Corre was a nonresident senior fellow in the Europe Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

Carlotta Alfonsi

Authors

Philippe Le Corre
Former Nonresident Senior Fellow, Europe Program
Carlotta Alfonsi
EUEconomyEast AsiaChinaWestern EuropeAsiaEuropeIran

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    The EU Equivocating on Turkey Is Bad Geopolitics

    Following Ursula von der Leyen’s gaffe equating Turkey to Russia and China, relations with Ankara risk deteriorating even further. Without better, more consistent diplomatic messaging, how can the EU pretend to be a geopolitical power?

      Sinan Ülgen

  • Article
    India’s Press Note 3 Gamble: Opening the FDI Door to China

    On March 10, 2026, India’s Union Cabinet approved amendments to Press Note 3, a regulation that mandated government approval on all foreign direct investment (FDI) from countries sharing a land border with India. This amendment raises questions primarily about whether its stated benefits will materialize and if the risks have been adequately weighed. This piece will address the same.

      Konark Bhandari

  • Woman standing amid debris from buildings
    Commentary
    Emissary
    Trump’s National Security Decisionmaking Is Broken

    Here’s why—and what the next president needs to do to fix the process.

      Daniel C. Kurtzer, Aaron David Miller

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    What Does Nuclear Proliferation in East Asia Mean for Russia?

    Troubled by the growing salience of nuclear debates in East Asia, Moscow has responded in its usual way: with condemnation and threats. But by exacerbating insecurity, Russia is forcing South Korea and Japan to consider radical security options.

      James D.J. Brown

  • Vietnam's Top Leader To Lam meets with young representatives from China and Vietnam participating in the "Red Study Tours" at the Great Hall of the People on April 15, 2026 in Beijing, China. T
    Commentary
    Why Vietnam Is Swinging in China’s Direction

    Hanoi and Beijing have long treated each other as distant cousins rather than comrades in arms. That might be changing as both sides draw closer to hedge against uncertainty and America’s erratic behavior.

      • Nguyen-khac-giang

      Nguyễn Khắc Giang

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.