• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Federiga Bindi"
  ],
  "type": "commentary",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "EP",
  "programs": [
    "Europe"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "East Asia",
    "China",
    "Western Europe",
    "Iran"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Economy",
    "Trade",
    "Foreign Policy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

Commentary

Why Did Italy Embrace the Belt and Road Initiative?

Italy was the first big European economy to join China’s enormous infrastructure project, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Why did Rome sign up, and what are the risks?

Link Copied
By Federiga Bindi
Published on May 20, 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

Italy’s Long-Standing Friendship With China

In March 2019, Italy signed a memorandum of understanding with China on the BRI. This culminated a long-standing economic relationship spanning decades, that was punctuated by finance minister Giovanni Tria’s August 2018 visit to China. Although Tria may have quickened the process, Italy’s political class were already in agreement about the merits of deepening relations with Beijing.

Industrial relations between Italy and China date back to the mid-1980s. When Romano Prodi (who would later serve two stints as prime minister) was president of Italy’s Institute for Industrial Reconstruction, China asked him to build a factory in Tianjin. In return, his Chinese counterparts helped him build a factory in what was then the Soviet Union. Once he became prime minister in 1997, Prodi led a massive trade mission to China, bringing over 100 companies to promote joint ventures in engineering, pharmaceuticals, foodstuffs, textiles, fashion, and finance.

Most Italian prime ministers over the years have shared Prodi’s warmth toward China: including Massimo D’Alema, Matteo Renzi, and Paolo Gentiloni. The only major dissenting voice has been Silvio Berlusconi, who—after selling his beloved Milan soccer team to Chinese investors—presented his candidacy for the 2019 European Parliament elections as a counterweight to Chinese hegemony. He asserted that Italy should side with the United States in its antagonism toward China.

Competing for Lucrative Chinese Business in the Mediterranean

Italy has good reasons to nurture its friendship with China. Enrico Fardella and Giorgio Prodi of the University of Bologna have analyzed the BRI’s impact on Europe, particularly Italy. They point out that since a Chinese shipping company bought a controlling stake in the Greek port of Piraeus in 2016, the Mediterranean has become a more important trade hub for China.

Maritime transport is an important part of the BRI, because the vast majority of China-Europe trade travels on ships. According to Prodi and Fardella, in 2016, after China acquired the Port of Piraeus, 13 percent of Chinese trade passed through Greece, compared to just 2 percent seven years earlier.

Fardella and Prodi warn that, should Italy remain outside the BRI, it could miss trade opportunities. Specifically, Italian ports on the Adriatic Sea could lose business, should the Port of Piraeus become linked to Central Europe via rail – because this would mean that trade bypassed Italy entirely, instead of landing in Italian ports and being transported by Italian railways. Italian ports are already connected by rail to Central and Eastern Europe, so could serve as major hubs for trade coming from China via the Suez Channel.

Boxed in by Others, Italy Is Looking Out for Its Own Interests

Granted, signing up for the BRI does not come without risks. There is a risk that BRI financing could leave Italy further indebted, given that Italy, along with Greece, is already one of the two most indebted countries in the eurozone.

A second risk is that Italy will be perceived as drifting away from its traditional partners, other EU members and the United States. Yet, as Italy still suffers from the 2008 global financial crisis, feels betrayed by the United States because of the Libya disaster, and contends with being abandoned by Europe over the immigration and economic crises, Rome’s priority is to spur domestic economic growth. Other EU countries, especially France, may have expressed concerns about Italy’s engagement with China. But they have been quick to sign their own deals with Beijing too.

In some respects, Italy’s Western partners have limited its choices. As for Washington, it was Trump’s dismissal of both the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership trade deals that made the BRI so attractive to Rome in the first place. The BRI is now the only major global initiative designed to link Europe with Asia, in terms of infrastructure, trade, and finance. It is only natural that Italy wants a piece of the pie.

About the Author

Federiga Bindi

Former Nonresident Scholar, Europe Program

Federiga Bindi was a nonresident scholar in the Europe Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace working on European politics, EU foreign policy, and transatlantic relations.

    Recent Work

  • Commentary
    Trump’s Middle East Peace Plan Is in the Works. What Does the Region Think?
      • Zaha Hassan
      • Sarah Yerkes
      • +5

      Zaha Hassan, Sarah Yerkes, Yasmine Farouk, …

  • Commentary
    The Real Meaning of Mogherini

      Federiga Bindi

Federiga Bindi
Former Nonresident Scholar, Europe Program
EconomyTradeForeign PolicyEast AsiaChinaWestern EuropeIran

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

  • Europe far right MAGA Trump
    Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Why MAGA’s Far-Right European Ties Will Endure

    In supporting Europe’s far-right, MAGA and Russia both want the same thing: a weaker EU. Europe must defend itself without abandoning the openness these forces exploit.

      • Armida van rij

      Armida van Rij

  • People gathered in a parking lot of buses
    Commentary
    Emissary
    The Iran War Has Sparked a Domestic Crisis in Kenya

    The conflict has sent economic and political shock waves through a country with no representation at the negotiating table—and Kenya is not alone.

      Georgia Schaefer-Brown, Jane Munga

  • Commentary
    China Financial Markets
    Who Paid for China’s Last Debt Cleanup, and Who Will Pay for the Next?

    China’s banking crisis in the 2000s was resolved by transferring the costs to households through financial repression—a decision that recapitalized the banks while exacerbating the structural imbalances that continue to shape the Chinese economy today.

      Michael Pettis

  • Japanese troops take part in a counter-landing live fire exercise as part of the annual Balikatan joint military drills on May 04, 2026 in Laoag, Ilocos Norte province, Philippines.
    Article
    The Two Logics Driving Japan’s Security Policy

    Japan’s revision of its three strategic documents reflects an intention to keep the United States engaged in the region while Japan fills any vacuums of U.S. power to preserve the Indo-Pacific order.

      • Ryo Sahashi

      Ryo Sahashi

  • Robot arm with disposable test tube virus sampling in laboratory
    Commentary
    Caught in the Middle: Chinese Biotech Firms’ Divergent Responses to U.S. Sanctions

    Chinese biotech companies have been on the receiving end of U.S. economic coercion. Yet their responses have differed significantly because firm and state interests are not uniformly aligned. For Washington, treating all Chinese tech firms the same, irrespective of their actual interests, risks pushing them farther into Beijing’s corner.

      Xue Gong

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.