world

Growing tensions between the United States and Europe are being underscored by a shifting political landscape, particularly concerning Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s previously strong relationship with Friedrich Merz, the leader of Germany’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU). This evolving dynamic, highlighted by Italian media outlet Tg3, signals a potential realignment of transatlantic alliances and raises questions about European unity in the face of increasing protectionist pressures from the US.

The apparent cooling of the Meloni-Merz axis comes at a critical juncture, as the European Union navigates complex trade disputes with the United States. Earlier this month, President Donald Trump introduced, then paused, 20% tariffs on EU goods, prompting concerns about a full-blown trade war. Italy, with approximately 10% of its exports – valued at around €67 billion in 2024 – destined for the US market, is particularly vulnerable to these trade disruptions, leading to a halving of Rome’s growth forecast, according to reports from April 2025.

Meloni’s visit to Washington in April 2025, the first by a European leader since Trump announced the tariffs, was framed as an effort to champion a “zero-for-zero” tariffs deal on behalf of the entire EU, rather than solely pursuing Italian interests. Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani affirmed this stance, stating Meloni “isn’t going to negotiate for Italy against Europe but is going to champion a European stance.” This positioning reflects a broader strategy by Meloni to present a united European front to the US administration.

The initial alliance between Meloni and Merz was built on shared conservative values and a desire to strengthen transatlantic ties. However, recent developments suggest a divergence in priorities and approaches. The reasons for this shift remain somewhat opaque, but it appears to be linked to differing assessments of how to engage with the Trump administration and navigate the escalating trade tensions. The Italian Prime Minister has cultivated a notably cordial relationship with Trump, who has publicly praised her as a “fantastic woman” who has “really taken Europe by storm.”

Italy’s Strategic Pivot

This evolving situation is part of a larger trend, described as Italy’s “transatlantic pivot,” where the country is attempting to position itself as a bridge between the US and Europe. This strategy is complicated by the fact that Meloni, leading a right-wing coalition government since 2022, is ideologically closer to Trump than some of her European counterparts. In February 2025, she echoed some of Trump’s key talking points, including criticisms of mass migration, “globalist elites,” and “woke ideology” during a video message to a US conservative conference.

The stakes are high for both Italy and the EU. According to the Atlantic Council, Italy’s economy is among the most vulnerable in Europe to US trade retrenchment, with two-way trade exceeding $126 billion. Sectors like industrial machinery, pharmaceuticals, chemicals, textiles, and food exports – including cheese, pasta, and wine – are particularly exposed. Approximately $76 billion worth of Italian exports went to the US in 2024, representing 10 percent of the country’s total exports.

The Role of Ursula von der Leyen

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has been closely coordinating with Meloni ahead of and during her engagement with the Trump administration. A commission spokesperson indicated the outreach is “closely coordinated,” highlighting the EU’s desire to present a unified front. Von der Leyen recognizes Meloni’s unique position to engage with Trump, given their existing rapport. The EU is defending what it calls “the most important commercial relationship in the world,” with annual trade reaching €1.6 trillion ($1.8 trillion).

However, negotiations remain challenging. Trump administration officials have yet to publicly signal a willingness to compromise on his insistence on a baseline 10% tariff on all foreign imports, despite pausing a retaliatory increase to 20% for 90 days. Experts suggest Meloni’s primary goal is to gain clarity on Trump’s objectives rather than secure immediate concessions.

As tensions escalate between the US and Europe, Meloni finds herself in a delicate position, attempting to balance Italy’s economic interests with the need for transatlantic unity. The future of US-European relations hinges, in part, on her ability to navigate this complex landscape.

The coming months will be crucial in determining whether a trade war can be averted and whether the transatlantic alliance can be preserved. Further developments are expected as the 90-day pause on the increased tariffs nears its conclusion, and as the EU continues to seek a comprehensive trade agreement with the US. The evolving relationship between Italy and Germany, and the broader implications for European cohesion, will as well be key factors to watch.

What are your thoughts on the shifting dynamics between the US and Europe? Share your perspectives in the comments below.

Wellington, New Zealand – In a largely empty courtroom, the appeal of Brenton Tarrant, the perpetrator of New Zealand’s deadliest mass shooting, concluded Friday with a muted hearing that underscored the nation’s deliberate effort to minimize attention to his extremist views. Tarrant, who murdered 51 worshippers at two Christchurch mosques in March 2019, is seeking to revoke his guilty pleas to charges of terrorism, murder, and attempted murder.

The three-judge panel in the Court of Appeal in Wellington heard final arguments from Crown lawyers opposing Tarrant’s application. If successful, the case would return to court for a full trial. Tarrant, 35, told the court earlier this week that he did not want to plead guilty and that his admissions in 2020 were made during a “nervous breakdown” brought on by solitary confinement and austere prison conditions.

Crown lawyers countered that there was no evidence to support Tarrant’s claims of mental incapacitation at the time of his pleas. They argued that experts had previously deemed him fit to enter pleas, and neither his former legal representation nor prison staff raised concerns about his mental state. “It’s difficult to see what more could’ve been done,” Crown lawyer Barnaby Hawes told the court, characterizing Tarrant as “an unreliable witness” whose narrative should be treated with caution.

Lawyers for the Crown emphasized the overwhelming evidence against Tarrant, including his own livestream of the massacre, which depicted his face throughout the attack. They asserted that a guilty verdict would have been assured had he proceeded to trial. “Pleading guilty to charges where his guilt is certain can’t be seen to be irrational,” Hawes stated.

The hearing itself was notable for what was not discussed. Lawyers on both sides largely avoided referencing Tarrant’s white supremacist motivations for the attacks, maintaining a restrained and formal tone consistent with typical New Zealand court proceedings. This approach reflects a broader strategy by New Zealand officials to suppress the spread of Tarrant’s ideology, which included a legal ban on his racist manifesto and the video of the shooting.

Access to the proceedings was highly restricted. The courtroom contained only nine reporters, nine lawyers, a few court staff, and an empty public gallery. Tarrant appeared via video conference from Auckland Prison, but his image was not visible in the courtroom except when he was giving evidence. A livestream of the hearing was available to bereaved families and survivors in Christchurch, but elsewhere, the gunman remained largely unseen.

Crown lawyer Madeleine Laracy urged the appeal judges to deny Tarrant’s bid, arguing that allowing the case to return to court would inflict further distress on the victims and their families. “Keeping this case alive is a source of immense distress,” she said. “It doesn’t allow them to heal.”

A ruling on Tarrant’s appeal is not expected immediately. According to the court’s website, the New Zealand Court of Appeal typically delivers 90 percent of its judgments within three months of a hearing’s conclusion. Should Tarrant’s attempt to revoke his guilty pleas fail, his case will return to the appeals court for a separate hearing to review his life sentence without the possibility of parole.