For much of Donald Trump’s return to the White House, Giorgia Meloni occupied an unusual position in Europe. She was conservative enough to speak the language of the American president, European enough to remain firmly anchored in Brussels and Atlanticist enough to convince Washington that Italy could act as a bridge between the two sides.
It was a role Meloni appeared comfortable playing. She was the only European Union leader invited to Trump’s inauguration in January 2025 and the ideological affinities were obvious. Both leaders shared strong positions on illegal immigration, identity politics and what Meloni herself describes as “woke culture”.
Yet in a revealing interview with the New York Times, the Italian prime minister has now acknowledged that the relationship did not develop as she had expected.
“With Donald Trump I thought things would be easier, given our common ground on immigration and woke culture,” Meloni said. “Things went differently.”
It is an unusually candid admission from a leader who invested considerable political capital in maintaining a privileged relationship with Trump.
The two have not spoken for several weeks. Asked whether they would resume contact after the summer, Meloni’s response was noticeably cautious: “Well, we’ll see.”
The significance of the interview, however, goes beyond the deterioration of a personal relationship between two conservative leaders. Meloni appears to be drawing a distinction between ideological affinity and national interest.
“I continue to believe that Western unity is very important,” she told the American newspaper. “I don’t decide Italy’s strategy based on my personal relationships.”
That sentence perhaps explains better than anything else what has happened between Rome and Washington.
The relationship began to unravel when the interests of Italy and the political expectations of the Trump administration ceased to coincide.
The most important rupture came over Iran.
Italy refused to allow American bombers to use the Sigonella air base in Sicily during the US war against Iran. For Rome, the decision reflected both the agreements governing the use of Italian bases and Meloni’s determination to keep Italy outside direct participation in the conflict.
For Trump, it was a failure by an ally to provide support when Washington expected it.
What had until then been a political disagreement rapidly became personal.
Trump accused Meloni of lacking support for the American operation. He subsequently claimed that she had “begged” him for a photograph during the G7 summit in France and that he had agreed because he felt sorry for her.
Meloni responded unusually sharply.
The story, she said, was invented. Neither she nor Italy begged anyone.
Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani cancelled a planned visit to Washington as the dispute escalated.
Trump then commented on Meloni’s standing in Italian opinion polls. Meloni replied that being his friend had hardly helped her popularity.
The exchange reached almost surreal levels when Trump posted an image of Meloni looking towards him accompanied by the words “RESTRAINING ORDER NEEDED”.
Meloni declined to respond when asked about the episode by the New York Times.
Behind the theatre, however, lies a more serious political transformation.
Meloni entered the Trump presidency believing she possessed something most European leaders did not: political access.
She could speak to Washington without the ideological hostility that characterised relations between Trump and several European governments. At the same time, she could speak to Brussels as the leader of one of the EU’s founding members and its third-largest economy.
This made the Italian prime minister potentially invaluable.
But the Iran crisis demonstrated the limitations of the strategy.
Ideological friendship with Washington could survive only for as long as American and Italian interests remained compatible. When Trump expected political loyalty to translate into military cooperation, Meloni chose Italian interests and the constraints of Italy’s international commitments.
The episode also illustrates how much Meloni herself has changed since entering Palazzo Chigi in 2022.
The opposition leader who once attacked Brussels and European elites has become one of the continent’s more pragmatic leaders. She has maintained support for NATO, defended Ukraine, worked closely with the European Commission and developed relationships well beyond the traditional European conservative family.
Her foreign policy has also become increasingly Mediterranean.
The Mattei Plan has placed Africa at the centre of Italian strategy. Rome has strengthened relations with North African and Gulf states while developing deeper partnerships with India and other Indo-Pacific powers.
Meloni’s conservatism therefore increasingly operates inside, rather than against, Italy’s European and Atlantic alliances.
That distinction matters.
Trump’s America First doctrine ultimately places American national interest above ideological solidarity. Meloni appears to be arriving at a similar conclusion from the Italian side.
Her remarks to the New York Times repeatedly return to the idea of national dignity.
She rejects what she describes as a submissive Italy, a country that considers itself inferior to others. Instead, she speaks of creating a “revolution of pride”.
“I don’t like people telling me my limits,” she said. “A ‘no’ is one of the things that most motivates me.”
Those words could easily have belonged to the Giorgia Meloni who built Fratelli d’Italia from a marginal party into the dominant force of the Italian right. Today, however, they are being applied to Italy itself.
This may ultimately be the most important consequence of the dispute with Trump.
Meloni does not appear to be abandoning Atlanticism. On the contrary, she explicitly insists that Western unity remains fundamental. Nor has she joined the European leaders who see strategic autonomy as an alternative to the transatlantic alliance.
Instead, she is defining the limits of alliance.
Italy can remain one of Washington’s closest European partners without automatically accepting every American decision. Friendship between leaders cannot substitute for national interests, and ideological similarity does not create an obligation of obedience.
There is also a domestic political advantage in this evolution.
When Trump returned to power, Meloni’s closeness to him distinguished her from most European leaders. Today that proximity carries greater political risk. The American president’s policies on tariffs, NATO and Iran have made Washington considerably more controversial among European voters.
The public rupture therefore allows Meloni to occupy another useful political space: conservative without being MAGA, Atlanticist without appearing subordinate to Washington and European without surrendering the nationalist instincts on which much of her political success was built.
The irony is considerable.
Meloni originally appeared capable of becoming Europe’s Trump whisperer precisely because she understood his political language.
She may now have discovered that understanding Trump is not the same thing as being able to influence him.
And Trump may have discovered something about Meloni as well.
The Italian prime minister was willing to be his friend. She was never willing to make Italy his follower.
Views: 15
