In March 2003, as the US was preparing to invade Iraq, European leaders were publicly and irreparably divided. France and Germany said no. Britain, Italy and Spain said yes. Europe as a whole had no single voice. Twenty-three years later, as American fighter jets strike Iran with logistical support from bases on Italian soil, that rift has never quite closed — and the question that went unanswered then has returned, intact, to the floor of Montecitorio.

A classroom, a briefing, and something more

On Tuesday, 7 April 2026, Defence Minister Guido Crosetto appeared before the Chamber of Deputies to account for the use of Italian military installations in operations against Tehran. The debate could easily have collapsed into a procedural standoff — a majority backing the government’s line, an opposition flatly against it. Ettore Rosato, deputy secretary of Action, chose to step outside that sterile game entirely.

He acknowledged that the question of the bases “exists,” took note of the minister’s remarks, and reaffirmed his confidence in the Supreme Defence Council chaired by the President of the Republic. Then he raised his eyes from the text. “Either Europe is there, or we are nothing.“

The problem is not the values

The Italian position, Rosato explained, is clear:“We cannot share Trump and Netanyahu’s theory that bombing is enough to achieve anything. This is not the Italian theory and neither is it the European one.” The point, however, is not the lack of an alternative vision. It is the lack of strength to assert it.

It is an important distinction, and not a new one.‘Europe has the values but does not have the tools‘, it was said years ago, describing European impotence during the Syrian crisis. Since then, those tools have not been built, not even after the start of the dramatic Ukrainian war. The Strategic Compass approved in 2022 has remained largely on paper. Common defence is still an open construction site, slowed down by national vetoes and the difficulty of reconciling sovereignty and integration.

A structurally divided continent

Europe’s problem is not just one of political will. It is architectural. Decisions on foreign and security policy require unanimity among the twenty-seven member states – a rule that turns every international crisis into an internal before an external negotiation. When the Middle East burns, Brussels argues. When Washington decides, Rome, Paris and Berlin take note.

It is in this context that Rosato’s intervention gains its real weight. It is not a principled pro-European appeal: it is an observation of realpolitik. Italy, alone, does not have the critical mass to influence Washington, mediate between the parties or propose credible alternatives at the diplomatic level. A united Europe, in theory, does. But that Europe, for now, is struggling to exist as an autonomous political subject.

The challenge to the government

The speech also contained a direct provocation to the executive.‘I say this to a government that does not have this priority in its DNA,’ Rosato said. Faced with a change ‘so epochal’, he added, a change of posture is also necessary.

It was an invitation to historical responsibility addressed to a majority that on European integration has always shown more caution than impetus – and which today finds itself dealing with a crisis that crosses national borders by definition.

The question that remains

‘We must be able to get Europe back on its feet, to speak forcefully on these issues,’ Rosato concluded. Measured words, urgent subtext.

The world is changing with an acceleration that few had anticipated. Military operations in the Middle East, American pressure on NATO partners, global trade tensions: everything is converging towards a scenario in which political weight matters more than ever – and in which countries that fail to exercise it risk being subject to the decisions of others. If Europe cannot make itself heard even when the Middle East is burning, when will it do so?