Funforgegames

Home

Edition

Africa Australia Brasil Canada Canada (français) España Europe France Global Indonesia New Zealand United Kingdom United States Skip to content

Edition: Global

Africa
Australia
Brasil
Canada
Canada (français)
España
Europe
France
Indonesia
New Zealand
United Kingdom
United States

s Newsletters

Academic rigour, journalistic flair ICE at the Winter Olympics and the reshaping of intelligence and security in Europe Published: January 30, 2026 4.53pm GMT Robert Dover, University of Hull

Author

Robert Dover
Professor of Intelligence and National Security & Dean of Faculty, University of Hull

Disclosure statement

Robert Dover does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Partners

University of Hull provides funding as a member of The Conversation UK.

View all partners

DOI

https://doi.org/10.64628/AB.g637vvu4p

Italians holdng up banners protesting about US plans to use ICE agents as part of their security team at the Winter Olympics in Milan.

Italians protest against US plans to use ICE agents as part of their security team at the Winter Olympics in Milan. EPA/Riccardo Antimiani https://theconversation.com/ice-at-the-winter-olympics-and-the-reshaping-of-intelligence-and-security-in-europe-274551 https://theconversation.com/ice-at-the-winter-olympics-and-the-reshaping-of-intelligence-and-security-in-europe-274551 Link copied Share article

Copy link Email Bluesky Facebook WhatsApp Messenger LinkedIn X (Twitter)

Print article

A diplomatic row is brewing over US plans to involve agents from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in its security arrangements for the 2026 Winter Olympics in Milan.

The city’s mayor, Giuseppe Sala, described ICE as “a militia that kills,” adding that: “They’re not welcome in Milan.” While this specific deployment has created a strong political debate in Italy, it can be seen as an element in a wider recalibration of European security.

This is due to the perception that there is a widening gap in values and security practice between the US and Europe, with only the Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orban remaining uncritical of the US administration.

The changes in cooperation can also be put down to the dwindling trust European powers have in the US as an ally. This is not without precedent. But it is notable that disruptions to intelligence are happening more often and more deeply under the two Trump presidencies, suggesting this is becoming the norm.

Many people in Italy are aware of the Trump administration’s use of ICE in an enforcement capacity in Minneapolis and other US cities. The recent shootings of two US citizens whose were protesting against ICE’s mission to identify, round up and deport people considered to be illegal immigrants in Minneapolis have exacerbated Italian unease.

Alessandro Zan, a politician representing Italy’s Democratic party, took to social media to register a strong objection. He posted on X: “In Italy, we do not want those who trample on human rights and act outside of any democratic control. It is unacceptable to think that an agency of this kind could have any role whatsoever in our country.”

Italy’s foreign minister, Antonio Tajani, has attempted to play matters down, saying, “It’s not like the SS are coming.” But the perception of ICE agents as poorly trained and tending towards violence has been compounded by an incident between agents and a news crew from the Italian state broadcaster RAI in Minneapolis on January 25. RAI footage showed agents armed and wearing bulletproof vests threatening to smash the journalists’ car window and pull them out of the vehicle.

Until the recent controversies in its domestic immigration enforcement role, the use of ICE abroad has been uncontroversial. Jason Houser, a former ICE chief of staff, told journalists that ICE is regularly deployed at events the US is involved with in other countries as part of coordinated security provision.

ICE, he said, will be “supporting the US Department of State’s Diplomatic Security Service and host nation to vet and mitigate risks from transnational criminal organizations”. ICE will also be under the control of the Diplomatic Security Service (DSS). But Elly Schlein, the leader of Italy’s Democratic party, expressed concern about hosting “an armed militia that is not respecting the law on American soil”, raising the prospect that ICE agents would not respect Italian law either.

Principled approach

Perceptions that US intelligence or law enforcement agencies sometimes push the boundaries of international law – or breach it altogether – have led to friction in the past. There was a definite chill between the US and its allies over the US rendition programme in the global “war on terror” in the early 2000s.

Suspects could be rendered (which is another way of describing, in effect, sanctioned kidnapping) and taken to prisons in third countries. In the case of British resident Binyam Mohamed (2004), his rendition and torture by US authorities, and the disclosure of evidence revealing this in a British court, resulted in the then US president, Barack Obama, restricting the flow of intelligence to the UK.

Rendition and torture were widely considered to be American failures to comply with international law. It resulted in the UK changing its intelligence sharing through what are known as the Fulford principles.

Named after Sir Adrian Fulford, the former investigatory powers commissioner who in 2010 published the UK’s official guidance for intelligence agencies detaining and interviewing detainees abroad, this stopped British officials providing intelligence that might lead to torture.

In 2020, the UK Supreme Court ruled that the UK government had acted unlawfully in sharing information with US authorities regarding El Shafee Elsheikh and Alexanda Kotey (two of the so-called “Isis Beatles” terror cell). The two men faced prosecution in a US court which could have resulted in them facing the death penalty. The decision meant that British intelligence and security agencies cannot share information that might lead to the death penalty. This strengthened the Fulford principles.

Two black men sit out of focus inthe background of a photograph. IN the foreground is a pair of handcuffs.

Alexanda Kotey and El Shafee Elsheikh were two of the four British nationals who were members of the Islamic State cell known as ‘the Isis Beatles’. AP Photo/Hussein Malla

But even back-office intelligence roles have been disrupted in the recent past. After the bombing of Ariana Grande’s concert in Manchester in 2017, there were US administration leaks to the New York Times of forensic evidence and the identities of the perpetrators. The prime minister at the time, Theresa May, then cut the flow of UK intelligence to the US for 24 hours in response.

The UK has also restricted the flow of intelligence around Latin American drug movements to avoid potential breaches of international law as the US has sought to eliminate seaborne drug traffickers in the Caribbean.

Where now for intelligence sharing?

The deployment of a branch of ICE at the Winter Olympics has become controversial because of how Europeans perceive ICE’s domestic operations. It is also because Europeans are seeking ways to say no to Donald Trump and the manner in which his administration is projecting US power abroad.

Consequently ICE, as an agency seen as having close ties to the US president, has become an attractive option for this opposition and they will remain under close scrutiny.

This small but politically divisive issue is important because it tells us a lot about the current state of transatlantic security. The shared values that have shaped the world since the second world war are under considerable strain. The practice and conduct of the respective sides has increasingly been called into question.

Europe seems close to trying to work out how to do security without America. If so, that would be an era-defining change.