Originally envisioned to stimulate economic growth in Italy’s underdeveloped south, the bridge is now touted for its military utility. In a government report, officials described it as “fundamental infrastructure with respect to military mobility,” especially given the presence of NATO bases in southern Italy and growing geopolitical concerns in the Mediterranean. Meloni, speaking during the NATO summit in June, underscored fears over Russia’s expanding influence in the region, particularly its growing links to Libya.

The government aims to include the project within the 1.5% of GDP earmarked for strategic infrastructure under NATO’s military expenditure framework. Italian officials argue the bridge will “facilitate the movement of Italian and NATO allied armed forces” across a region they now see as increasingly contested.

Controversy Over Military Relevance And Cost

Despite Meloni’s framing, defence analysts remain skeptical. Alessandro Marrone of Rome’s Institute for International Affairs argued that the bridge does not meet NATO’s main strategic priority—rapid eastern deployment—and suggested Italy focus on upgrading ports and roads near its eastern-facing military zones. “If you have to go east, it’s via the Adriatic, by plane, or the Alps,” he said.

Others warn that classifying the bridge as military infrastructure could actually increase security risks. General Gualtiero Corsini, writing as far back as 1987, noted that the suspension design is highly vulnerable and would require extensive air and missile defences. Marrone echoed that assessment, stating the bridge may be a symbolic target but not one that Russian planners would prioritize for a major military strike.

Meanwhile, local resistance remains strong. Residents in Messina are mobilizing against the project once again, protesting the expected disruption, including relocation of key transport hubs. The bridge’s estimated cost has more than tripled from its original projection in the early 2000s.

Still, the Meloni government appears determined to proceed, arguing that the bridge now serves both national defence and development goals. As Italy seeks to project strategic relevance within NATO, the decades-old dream of bridging Sicily may finally move forward—under a very different justification.