Italy’s decision to formally withdraw from China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) in December 2023 represents a pivotal Italy BRI Move, sending a strong signal about the evolving nature of EU-China relations. As the only G7 nation to have joined the massive infrastructure project, Italy’s initial embrace was seen as a diplomatic coup for Beijing. Its subsequent departure underscores a re-evaluation of strategic alignments in Europe.
Italy initially joined the BRI in 2019, driven by hopes of boosting its struggling economy through increased trade and Chinese investment, particularly in its ports. The government at the time sought to “rebalance an imbalance” in trade. However, over the years, the expected economic benefits largely failed to materialize, with Italy’s trade deficit with China actually doubling. This economic disappointment laid the groundwork for the eventual withdrawal.
The decision for this Italy BRI Move was heavily influenced by the new right-wing government led by Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, who had consistently criticized the BRI agreement as a “big mistake.” Geopolitical considerations also played a crucial role, as Italy sought to align more closely with its traditional Western allies, particularly the United States, amidst growing concerns about China’s global ambitions.
The implications of this Italy BRI Move for Rome’s relationship with Beijing are multifaceted. While Italy aims to avoid severely damaging bilateral ties, focusing instead on other areas of cooperation, the withdrawal undeniably signals a shift in priorities. It also means Italy will likely align more closely with the EU’s “de-risking” strategy, reducing economic dependencies on China in sensitive sectors.
For the broader EU-China relationship, Italy’s withdrawal is a significant symbolic event. It reinforces the growing skepticism within Europe regarding the tangible benefits and strategic implications of the BRI. This Italy BRI Move strengthens the EU’s collective stance on scrutinizing Chinese investments and promoting its own connectivity initiatives, like the Global Gateway, as alternatives.