Germany updates: Chancellor Merz to meet Italy's Meloni
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz to meet with Italian Prime Minister Georgia Meloni in Rome Police officer in Berlin seriously injured in attack Former minister Christian Lindner bids farewell as business-focused FDP picks new leader
Here are all the top news stories from Germany on May 17.
Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni will receive German Chancellor Friedrich Merz in Rome on Saturday.
Merz is traveling to the Italian capital on the occasion of the inauguration of Pope Leo XIV on Sunday and will use the opportunity for a bilateral meeting with Meloni on the eve of the event in the Vatican.
Merz is a member of the conservative Christian Democratic Union party. Meloni is Italy's first female prime minister since World War II and holds strong conservative views on issues such as migration.
Merz's visit comes after a media report suggesting that the German government has downgraded the importance of diplomacy with Italy caused a stir in Rome.
On Thursday, the conservative German daily Die Welt reported that an early draft of the new German government's coalition agreement listed Italy as an important partner and member of an expanded European axis, alongside France and Poland.
However, in the final agreement, Rome is no longer mentioned in this context. According to the newspaper, the center-left Social Democratic Party (SPD), Merz's coalition partner, reportedly insisted on the change.
Lars Klingbeil, a member of the SPD who serves as vice chancellor and finance minister, will be accompanying Merz on the trip to Italy.
Several high-ranking Italian politicians have expressed outrage at the news.
However, a German Foreign Office spokesman denied the report, stating that Italy is welcome as a member of the Weimar Plus format, which is an extension of the Weimar Triangle diplomatic forum with representatives from Germany, France and Poland.
Guten Tag and welcome to our coverage of political developments in Germany on Saturday, May 17, 2025.
Since officially taking office, Germany's new chancellor, Friedrich Merz, has largely focussed on setting up his foreign policy agenda.
On Saturday, he will travel to Rome to meet with Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni.
This blog will provide you the latest news, analysis, multimedia content and DW on-the-ground reporting in regards to events in Germany. Stay tuned for more!
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Atlantic
9 hours ago
- Atlantic
How to Assess the Damage of the Iran Strikes
In August 1941, the British government received a very unwelcome piece of analysis from an economist named David Miles Bensusan-Butt. A careful analysis of photographs suggested that the Royal Air Force's Bomber Command was having trouble hitting targets in Germany and France; in fact, only one in three pilots that claimed to have attacked the targets seemed to have dropped its bombs within five miles of them. The Butt report is a landmark in the history of 'bomb damage assessment,' or, as we now call it, 'battle damage assessment.' This recondite term has come back into public usage because of the dispute over the effectiveness of the June 22 American bombing of three Iranian nuclear facilities. President Donald Trump said that American bombs had 'obliterated' the Iranian nuclear program. A leaked preliminary assessment from the Defense Intelligence Agency on June 24 said that the damage was minimal. Whom to believe? Have the advocates of bombing again overpromised and underdelivered? Some history is in order here, informed by a bit of personal experience. From 1991 to 1993 I ran the U.S. Air Force's study of the first Gulf War. In doing so I learned that BDA rests on three considerations: the munition used, including its accuracy; the aircraft delivering it; and the type of damage or effect created. Of these, precision is the most important. World War II saw the first use of guided bombs in combat. In September 1943, the Germans used radio-controlled glide bombs to sink the Italian battleship Roma as it sailed off to surrender to the Allies. Americans developed similar systems with some successes, though none so dramatic. In the years after the war, precision-guided weapons slowly came to predominate in modern arsenals. The United States used no fewer than 24,000 laser-guided bombs during the Vietnam War, and some 17,000 of them during the 1991 Gulf War. These weapons have improved considerably, and in the 35 years since, 'routine precision,' as some have called it, has enormously improved the ability of airplanes to hit hard, buried targets. Specially designed ordnance has also seen tremendous advances. In World War II, the British developed the six-ton Tallboy bomb to use against special targets, including the concrete submarine pens of occupied France in which German U-boats hid. The Tallboys cracked some of the concrete but did not destroy any, in part because these were 'dumb bombs' lacking precision guidance, and in part because the art of hardening warheads was in its infancy. In the first Gulf War, the United States hastily developed a deep-penetrating, bunker-busting bomb, the GBU-28, which weighed 5,000 pounds, but only two were used, to uncertain effect. In the years since, however, the U.S. and Israeli air forces, among others, have acquired hardened warheads for 2,000-pound bombs such as the BLU-109 that can hit deeply buried targets—which is why, for example, the Israelis were able to kill a lot of Hezbollah's leadership in its supposedly secure bunkers. The aircraft that deliver bombs can affect the explosives' accuracy. Bombs that home in on the reflection of a laser, for example, could become 'stupid' if a cloud passes between plane and the target, or if the laser otherwise loses its lock on the target. Bombs relying on GPS coordinates can in theory be jammed. Airplanes being shot at are usually less effective bomb droppers than those that are not, because evasive maneuvers can prevent accurate delivery. The really complicated question is that of effects. Vietnam-era guided bombs, for example, could and did drop bridges in North Vietnam. In many cases, however, Vietnamese engineers countered by building 'underwater bridges' that allowed trucks to drive across a river while axle-deep in water. The effect was inconvenience, not interdiction. Conversely, in the first Gulf War, the U.S. and its allies spent a month pounding Iraqi forces dug in along the Kuwait border, chiefly with dumb bombs delivered by 'smart aircraft' such as the F-16. In theory, the accuracy of the bombing computer on the airplane would allow it to deliver unguided ordnance with accuracy comparable to that of a laser-guided bomb. In practice, ground fire and delivery from high altitudes often caused pilots to miss. When teams began looking at Iraqi tanks in the area overrun by U.S. forces, they found that many of the tanks were, in fact, undamaged. But that was only half of the story. Iraqi tank crews were so sufficiently terrified of American air power that they stayed some distance away from their tanks, and tanks immobilized and unmaintained for a month, or bounced around by near-misses, do not work terribly well. The functional and indirect effects of the bombing, in other words, were much greater than the disappointing physical effects. Many of the critiques of bombing neglect the importance of this phenomenon. The pounding of German cities and industry during World War II, for example, did not bring war production to a halt until the last months, but the indirect and functional effects were enormous. The diversion of German resources into air-defense and revenge weapons, and the destruction of the Luftwaffe's fighter force over the Third Reich, played a very great role in paving the way to Allied victory. At a microlevel, BDA can be perplexing. In 1991, for example, a bomb hole in an Iraqi hardened-aircraft shelter told analysts only so much. Did the bomb go through the multiple layers of concrete and rock fill, or did it 'J-hook'back upward and possibly fail to explode? Was there something in the shelter when it hit, and what damage did it do? Did the Iraqis perhaps move airplanes into penetrated shelters on the theory that lightning would not strike twice? All hard (though not entirely impossible) to judge without being on the ground. To the present moment: BDA takes a long time, so the leaked DIA memo of June 24 was based on preliminary and incomplete data. The study I headed was still working on BDA a year after the war ended. Results may be quicker now, but all kinds of information need to be integrated—imagery analysis, intercepted communications, measurement and signature intelligence (e.g., subsidence of earth above a collapsed structure), and of course human intelligence, among others. Any expert (and any journalist who bothered to consult one) would know that two days was a radically inadequate time frame in which to form a considered judgment. The DIA report was, from a practical point of view, worthless. An educated guess, however, would suggest that in fact the U.S. military's judgment that the Iranian nuclear problem had suffered severe damage was correct. The American bombing was the culmination of a 12-day campaign launched by the Israelis, which hit many nuclear facilities and assassinated at least 14 nuclear scientists. The real issue is not the single American strike so much as the cumulative effect against the entire nuclear ecosystem, including machining, testing, and design facilities. The platforms delivering the munitions in the American attack had ideal conditions in which to operate—there was no Iranian air force to come up and attack the B-2s that they may not even have detected, nor was there ground fire to speak of. The planes were the most sophisticated platforms of the most sophisticated air force in the world. The bombs themselves, particularly the 14 GBU-57s, were gigantic—at 15 tons more than double the size of Tallboys—with exquisite guidance and hardened penetrating warheads. The targets were all fully understood from more than a decade of close scrutiny by Israeli and American intelligence, and probably that of other Western countries as well. In the absence of full information, cumulative expert judgment also deserves some consideration—and external experts such as David Albright, the founder of the Institute for Science and International Security, have concluded that the damage was indeed massive and lasting. Israeli analysts, in and out of government, appear to agree. They are more likely to know, and more likely to be cautious in declaring success about what is, after all, an existential threat to their country. For that matter, the Iranian foreign minister concedes that 'serious damage' was done. One has to set aside the sycophantic braggadocio of Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, who seems to believe that one unopposed bombing raid is a military achievement on par with D-Day, or the exuberant use of the word obliteration by the president. A cooler, admittedly provisional judgment is that with all their faults, however, the president and his secretary of defense are likely a lot closer to the mark about what happened when the bombs fell than many of their hasty, and not always well-informed, critics. *Photo-illustration by Jonelle Afurong / The Atlantic. Source: Alberto Pizzoli / Sygma / Getty; MIKE NELSON / AFP / Getty; Greg Mathieson / Mai / Getty; Space Frontiers / Archive Photos / Hulton Archive / Getty; U.S. Department of Defense
UPI
12 hours ago
- UPI
G-7 agrees to exclude U.S. companies from 15% minimum tax
Leaders of the G-7 nations pose for a photo in Kananaskis, Alberta, Canada, on Monday: (from left) Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, French President Emmanuel Macron, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, U.S. President Donald Trump, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. The G-7 announced the U.S. would be excluded from the 15% minimum tax on American companies. Photo via G7/UPI | License Photo June 29 (UPI) -- Group of Seven nations agreed to exempt U.S. companies from a 15% minimum corporate tax rate, the countries said in a joint statement. The nonbinding deal was announced Saturday but still requires approval from the 38-member Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development that established the 2021 agreement on taxing companies. G-7 nations are part of the OECED. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent had proposed a "side-by-side solution" for American-headquartered companies that would be exempt from the Income Inclusion Rule and Undertaxed Profits Rule "in recognition of the existing U.S. minimum tax rules to which they are subject." The massive spending bill now being considered in Congress originally included a "revenge tax" that would have imposed a levy of up to 20% on investments from countries that taxed U.S. companies. "I have asked the Senate and House to remove the Section 899 protective measure from consideration in the One, Big, Beautiful Bill," Bessent wrote in a multi-post thread on X on Thursday. The House has approved the massive legislation and the Senate is considering it. "It is an honorable compromise as it spares us from the automatic retaliations of Section 899 of the Big, Beautiful Bill," Italian Finance Minister Giancarlo Giorgetti told local media. "We are not claiming victory, but we obtained some concessions as the U.S. pledged to engage in OECD negotiations on fair taxation," an unnamed French official told Politico Europe. The official called the "revenge tax" a potentially "huge burden for French companies." Trump has criticized this provision because he said it would limit sovereignty and send U.S. tax revenues to other countries. "The Trump administration remains vigilant against all discriminatory and extraterritorial foreign taxes applied against Americans," Bessent wrote Thursday. Trump has imposed a July 9 deadline for U.S. trading partners to lower taxes on foreign goods, threatening high duties on the worst offenders, including 50% on goods from the 27 European Union members. In April, a baseline tariff was imposed on most U.S. trading partners, with higher rates on certain companies and products. In 2021, nearly 140 countries agreed to tax multinational companies at the 15% minimum, regardless of where they were headquartered. In late April, the European Union, Britain, Japan and Canada agreed to exempt the United States from the 15% minimum tax on companies. "Delivery of a side-by-side system will facilitate further progress to stabilize the international tax system, including a constructive dialogue on the taxation of the digital economy and on preserving the tax sovereignty of all countries," the joint statement read. The agreement, according to the statement, would ensure that any substantial risks identified "with respect to the level playing field, or risks of base erosion and profit shifting, are addressed to preserve the common policy objectives of the side-by-side system." The G-7 includes Britain, France, Germany, Italy in Europe, as well as Canada, Japan and U.S. Before 2014, the group was known as the G-8 until Russia was expelled after annexing the Crimea region of Ukraine. The chairs of the House and Senate committees responsible for tax policy cheered the agreement. "We applaud President Trump and his team for protecting the interests of American workers and businesses after years of congressional Republicans sounding the alarm on the Biden Administration's unilateral global tax surrender under Pillar 2," Idaho Sen. Mike Crapo, chair of the Senate Finance Committee, and Missouri Rep. Jason Smith, chair of the House Ways and Means Committee, said in a press release. The agreement also, however, has its critics. "The U.S. is trying to exempt itself by arm-twisting others, which would make the tax deal entirely useless," Markus Meinzer, director of policy at the Tax Justice Network, told Politico Europe. "A ship with a U.S.-sized hole in its hull won't float."
UPI
a day ago
- UPI
Record turnout anticipated for Budapest Pride march
Tens of thousands of people gathered at the Budapest Pride march despite a law passed earlier this year banning Pride events. Photo by Zoltan Balogh Hungary Out/EPA June 28 (UPI) -- Saturday's Budapest Pride march is expected to have drawn record attendance and participation in opposition to Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban's anti-LGBTQ policies. The parade is being held in the Hungarian capital amid threats of legal consequences by Orban and the Hungarian government, including a ban on gatherings that promote homosexuality, the BBC reported. Hungary's child protection law restricts such gatherings, but Pride march organizers are being joined by Hungarians and politicians from other European nations to support those who identify as LGBTQ. "This weekend, all eyes are on Budapest," European equality commissioner Hadja Lahbib told media in Budapest on Friday. "This is bigger than one Pride celebration, one Pride march," Lahbib said. "It is about the right to be who you are, to love who you want, whether it is in Budapest, in Brussels or anywhere else." March organizers expected between 35,000 to 40,000 people to participate in the march, but the BBC reported said organizers estimated as many as 200,000 people showed up. Orban and Hungary's Fidesz party earlier this year enacted the nation's child protection law and have said it applies to the Pride march and similar events. The law also bans the display of LGBTQ promotional materials, which might include the rainbow flag. Orban has said there won't be a violent police crackdown on the event, but organizers and participants might be subject to legal prosecution afterward. Facial recognition technology could identify participants, each of whom could be fined up to $500. "The police could break up such events because they have the authority to do so," Orban told state-run radio on Friday. "Hungary is a civilized society [and] a civic society," Orban continued. "There will be legal consequences, but it cannot reach the level of physical abuse." Event participants waved Pride flags and signs mocking Orban, including at least one depicting the prime minister in drag.
