Italy signals openness to EU reform as unanimity rule comes under pressureItaly’s prime minister, Giorgia Meloni, has signalled what could become a significant shift in Rome’s European posture. Speaking about the future of the European Union, she warned that “there is no more time,” suggesting that the bloc must accelerate reform if it wants to remain politically and strategically relevant.Most notably, Rome appears to be opening, at least cautiously, to discussions about overcoming the principle of unanimity in certain EU decision-making processes. For a country that has traditionally defended national sovereignty in Brussels, this is not a minor rhetorical adjustment.From Sovereignty to Efficiency?The unanimity rule requires all EU member states to agree before decisions can be adopted in key areas such as foreign policy and taxation. Supporters argue it protects smaller states and preserves national control. Critics say it paralyses the Union, especially in moments of crisis. Meloni’s remarks suggest that Italy may now be weighing efficiency against sovereignty more pragmatically. The geopolitical backdrop is difficult to ignore: war on Europe’s borders, rising global competition, transatlantic uncertainty, and mounting pressure for common defence and coordinated foreign policy. If unanimity continues to allow individual capitals to block strategic initiatives, the EU risks appearing fragmented at precisely the moment it needs coherence. A Calculated OpeningMeloni did not present a detailed institutional blueprint. Instead, the tone was one of urgency rather than ideology. The message: Europe must become faster, stronger, and more decisive. This is politically significant. Her government emerged from a political tradition often sceptical of deeper European integration. An openness, however cautious, to revisiting unanimity reflects both the pressures of governance and Italy’s recognition that being inside decision-making circles matters more than symbolic resistance. It is also a signal to Brussels that Rome wants to shape the debate, not merely react to it. The Domestic DimensionThere is, however, a balancing act at home. Any move perceived as diluting national sovereignty risks criticism from parts of the governing coalition and segments of the electorate wary of EU centralisation. Meloni’s framing is therefore strategic: reform not as surrender, but as empowerment. A stronger, more efficient Europe, in this narrative, serves Italy’s interests rather than constrains them. What Happens Next?Institutional reform in the EU is slow and politically delicate. Treaty change would require wide consensus and likely referendums in some countries. More realistically, the debate may move toward “enhanced cooperation” mechanisms or qualified majority voting in limited sectors. What is clear is that Rome has placed itself inside a conversation that is gaining momentum across the continent: how to prevent paralysis in an era of permanent crisis. “There is no more time” is less a slogan than a recognition of structural pressure. The question now is whether Italy will translate that urgency into concrete proposals, or whether the statement will remain a signal of intent rather than a turning point. Either way, the tone has shifted. And in European politics, tone often precedes change.

Italy’s prime minister, Giorgia Meloni, has signalled what could become a significant shift in Rome’s European posture. Speaking about the future of the European Union, she warned that “there is no more time,” suggesting that the bloc must accelerate reform if it wants to remain politically and strategically relevant.Most notably, Rome appears to be opening, at least cautiously, to discussions about overcoming the principle of unanimity in certain EU decision-making processes. For a country that has traditionally defended national sovereignty in Brussels, this is not a minor rhetorical adjustment. The unanimity rule requires all EU member states to agree before decisions can be adopted in key areas such as foreign policy and taxation. Supporters argue it protects smaller states and preserves national control. Critics say it paralyses the Union, especially in moments of crisis. Meloni’s remarks suggest that Italy may now be weighing efficiency against sovereignty more pragmatically. The geopolitical backdrop is difficult to ignore: war on Europe’s borders, rising global competition, transatlantic uncertainty, and mounting pressure for common defence and coordinated foreign policy. If unanimity continues to allow individual capitals to block strategic initiatives, the EU risks appearing fragmented at precisely the moment it needs coherence. Meloni did not present a detailed institutional blueprint. Instead, the tone was one of urgency rather than ideology. The message: Europe must become faster, stronger, and more decisive. This is politically significant. Her government emerged from a political tradition often sceptical of deeper European integration. An openness, however cautious, to revisiting unanimity reflects both the pressures of governance and Italy’s recognition that being inside decision-making circles matters more than symbolic resistance. It is also a signal to Brussels that Rome wants to shape the debate, not merely react to it. There is, however, a balancing act at home. Any move perceived as diluting national sovereignty risks criticism from parts of the governing coalition and segments of the electorate wary of EU centralisation. Meloni’s framing is therefore strategic: reform not as surrender, but as empowerment. A stronger, more efficient Europe, in this narrative, serves Italy’s interests rather than constrains them. Institutional reform in the EU is slow and politically delicate. Treaty change would require wide consensus and likely referendums in some countries. More realistically, the debate may move toward “enhanced cooperation” mechanisms or qualified majority voting in limited sectors. What is clear is that Rome has placed itself inside a conversation that is gaining momentum across the continent: how to prevent paralysis in an era of permanent crisis. “There is no more time” is less a slogan than a recognition of structural pressure. The question now is whether Italy will translate that urgency into concrete proposals, or whether the statement will remain a signal of intent rather than a turning point. Either way, the tone has shifted. And in European politics, tone often precedes change.