Chinas Exporte treffen die deutsche Kernindustrie in nie da gewesener Härte und Geschwindigkeit. Weil massiv Arbeitsplätze wackeln, sucht Europa händeringend nach einer politischen Notbremse. Rixa Fürsen spricht mit Janka Oertel über die existenzielle Bedrohung für den Autobau und Maschinenbau. Oertel ist Politikwissenschaftlerin und China-Expertin, bei der Denkfabrik „European Council on Foreign Relations“ ist sie Direktorin des Asienprogramms und Senior Policy Fellow.

Wie hart Peking inzwischen zurückschlägt, zeigt die Reaktion auf jüngste EU-Sanktionen. Binnen 24 Stunden konterte China mit Exportrestriktionen gegen Rüstungskonzerne wie Rheinmetall. Trotzdem wächst in Europa der Widerstand, sodass beim EU-Rat im Oktober scharfe Handelsschutzmaßnahmen folgen könnten.

Während wir noch über E-Autos diskutieren, plant China längst die nächste industrielle Revolution. Im Bereich der sogenannten Biomanufaktur will Peking eine globale Dominanz aufbauen, um unabhängiger von fossilen Rohstoffen zu werden. Oertel warnt davor, dass Europa auch bei dieser Zukunftstechnologie seine aktuelle Führungsrolle verspielen könnte.

Das Berlin Playbook als Podcast gibt es jeden Morgen ab 5 Uhr. Gordon Repinski und das POLITICO-Team liefern Politik zum Hören – kompakt, international, hintergründig.

Für alle Hauptstadt-Profis: Der Berlin Playbook-Newsletter bietet jeden Morgen die wichtigsten Themen und Einordnungen. Jetzt kostenlos abonnieren.

Mehr von Rixa Fürsen gibt es auch hier:
Instagram: @rixafu | X: @rixa_fursen.

POLITICO Deutschland – ein Angebot der Axel Springer Deutschland GmbH
Axel-Springer-Straße 65, 10888 Berlin
Tel: +49 (30) 2591 0
information@axelspringer.de
Sitz: Amtsgericht Berlin-Charlottenburg, HRB 196159 B
USt-IdNr: DE 214 852 390
Geschäftsführer: Carolin Hulshoff Pol, Mathias Sanchez Luna

LONDON — The personal mobile phone numbers of three U.K. Cabinet ministers — including Defense Secretary Wes Streeting — have been found published online alongside their names.

The discovery comes after POLITICO reported that Prime Minister Andy Burnham fell victim to a texting scam — engaging with messages from someone impersonating Susie Wiles, Donald Trump’s White House chief of staff, before becoming suspicious the contact was illegitimate and ending the conversation.

After checking through a list of Cabinet members, POLITICO found three published on the web, for Streeting, Justice Secretary Alex Norris and Northern Ireland Secretary Chris Bryant. POLITICO is not pointing to where the numbers can be found to avoid further risking security.

All three ministers declined to comment on the record. The reference to Streeting’s number online has since been deleted, and officials are working to remove the other two.

Ministers are given secure government devices to conduct business for their briefs, in particular for high-risk roles like defense, and are expected to use those for non-personal comms.

A government spokesperson said: “The government has robust procedures in place to ensure the security of sensitive information.”

But Prerana Joshi, research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) think tank, said that having direct numbers for Cabinet ministers in the public domain is a risk, warning that numbers could be spoofed and used to call others at a time when the U.K. is “in a high threat situation” globally.

“In any civil space, if your number is exposed, a whole host of malign, nefarious or even opportunistic cyber criminals or cyber actors could get hold of it, and they have tactics,” Joshi said.

‘No significance’

Downing Street would not comment on the revelation that Burnham exchanged messages with the impersonator, citing “national security.”

One person briefed on the communications said a “few messages” were exchanged after the PM entered No. 10 but insisted they were “of no significance.”

It is unclear how the fraudster obtained Burnham’s number. POLITICO could not find it published online.

British officials initially feared Wiles’ phone had been hacked again. But a White House official said: “This incident had nothing to do with the Chief of Staff’s devices being hacked.”

It is not clear whether Burnham will change his phone number, as Boris Johnson did after the Popbitch newsletter revealed in 2021 that the then-prime minister’s details had been sitting online for years.

‘Full of traps’

The episode has sharpened questions over whether Burnham — who built his political brand on his informal style and being more approachable than other prime ministers — can carry on that way in No. 10.

A former national security adviser, granted anonymity to speak frankly, said the prime minister needs to “get into the habit” of having his security staff verify that messages reaching him are authentic.

National Security Adviser Jonathan Powell “could have phoned the White House in five minutes and checked whether Susie Wiles genuinely was texting the prime minister,” they said.

“Being a domestic politician and going on listening tours around the U.K. is one thing, but when you engage in the international world, it’s full of traps and full of risks,” the former adviser added.

“What starts off as a very informal chat can quickly get into some kind of business, and you could give away key details of an upcoming trip or the movements of Donald Trump,” they said.

Former Defense Secretary Ben Wallace — himself targeted by imposters posing as Ukraine’s prime minister in 2022 — said the incident “demonstrates our adversaries are always looking for weak points in our communications.”

While Downing Street has said nothing significant was discussed in the exchanges between Burnham and the imposter, Wallace said “there is always a risk of kompromat” being obtained by hostile actors.

As technology, such as AI voice cloning, improves, these sort of incidents are going to “happen more and more,” Wallace added.

Others have urged Burnham not to change tack.

Guto Harri, Johnson’s former director of communications, said: “It’s only a threat and it’s only an embarrassment if they give something away — and it doesn’t seem that he’s done anything like that.”

Harri said it was “good to have someone big enough not to have his calls screened from everyone” as prime minister.

“I don’t think it’s healthy that the civil service wants to control all access to the principal. If they had their way, nobody would be able to talk to a prime minister without going through them,” he said.

“We can’t say that politicians are not living in the same world as us … and then moan about them speaking to people like a normal human being.”

Harri conceded a new number might be a “good idea,” giving the prime minister a “clean slate.”

Dan Bloom contributed to this report.

RIGA — Latvian Prime Minister Andris Kulbergs wants Brussels to hand over €7 billion to help cover the military and economic costs of confronting Russia, as pressure grows over the price of the country’s hard line on Moscow.

The money should come from the EU’s next seven-year budget, under a new Competitiveness Fund, to offset higher defense spending and the collapse in trade with Russia since Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Kulbergs told POLITICO’s Brussels Playbook in an interview.

The cash, which Riga wants to come on top of other funds earmarked for the country, would amount to almost half of Latvia’s projected €15.1 billion defense bill over the seven-year budget period.

The demand comes at a sensitive moment. Latvia has been one of Europe’s staunchest supporters of Ukraine, sharply increasing defense spending since Moscow’s full-scale invasion, even as sanctions and the collapse of bilateral trade have cut deeply into economic links that once ran eastward. But ahead of an Oct. 3 national election, parties arguing that Riga should demand more in return for sanctions and military support are gaining ground.

The European Commission has proposed substantially increasing EU-level defense funding in the 2028-2034 budget, including a €125.2 billion security, defense industry and space pot in the European Competitiveness Fund. That money is designed to finance projects across the bloc rather than provide Latvia with a pre-agreed €7 billion allocation, and the entire budget remains subject to negotiations between EU governments and the European Parliament.

Kulbergs argues that Latvia deserves special consideration because it is borrowing to provide security for countries much farther from the front line. “We are getting our budget deficit to the maximum […] and from that debt we’re paying […] the defense of the whole [of] Europe,” the prime minister said at the government chancellery.

Much of Latvia’s military spending ultimately flows back to richer Western European economies, Kulbergs added, pointing to arms purchases from Germany, France, Spain, Sweden and the Netherlands. “We fuel their economies,” he added.

Election pressure

A sharper version of the same argument is emerging on the campaign trail.

Ainārs Šlesers, a veteran populist businessman whose party sits with the far-right Patriots for Europe group in Brussels, says Latvia should demand compensation when it backs EU sanctions on Russia. Šlesers condemns Moscow’s invasion and says support for Ukraine should continue, but argues that Latvia cannot absorb the costs indefinitely.

“We are losing money … we are talking about how to support Ukraine, but we are a victim,” he told POLITICO at his Riga campaign headquarters.

When EU sanctions come up for renewal, Šlesers said Latvia should “get in return support.” Asked whether that could mean withholding Riga’s backing for sanctions, he stopped short of threatening a veto but did not rule it out. “I don’t want to talk about [a] veto [now],” he said. “I guess that we […] will find a peaceful solution.”

Šlesers, who has business ties with Russian oligarchs, said the country needs to eventually restore economic ties with Moscow, and advocated for a quick end to the war. “There are things which we cannot replace because if it’s your neighboring country and you’re connected historically […] we need to find the right model.”

He argued that whether to hand over territory to Russia should be “a decision by Ukraine” but argued that other countries have lost territory to Russia after conflicts, including Latvia, “to reach [a] peace agreement.”

Kulbergs’ center-right party currently leads the polls, but coalition arithmetic could determine how far Latvia’s Russia policy shifts after October.

The far-right, pro-Russia Sovereign Power party, polling second, wants to restore ties with Moscow but is considered off-limits by mainstream parties. Šlesers, polling third, is a more plausible coalition partner — and Kulbergs has left the door open to governing with him.

The center-left Progressives, polling fourth and also hoping to enter government with Kulbergs, warn that bringing Šlesers into the coalition would gradually soften Riga’s line on Russia.

“I’m 100 percent sure Latvia’s foreign policy towards Russia is going to soften over time,” the party’s prime ministerial candidate Andris Šuvajevs told POLITICO outside parliament. He pointed to possible sanctions exemptions for Russian business interests and ministers “speaking in a more friendly tone towards Russia.”

Tough on Russia

Ahead of a new sanctions package due in the fall, Kulbergs called for a total EU visa ban on Russians. EU countries granted more than 630,000 visas to Russian citizens in 2025.

In the last sanctions package, France and Italy resisted a blanket ban on Russian combatants, arguing this issue should be covered by EU visa rules rather than as part of sanctions, while northern and eastern countries pushed for tougher restrictions. The eventual deal created the legal and political basis for barring Russian combatants and ex-combatants who took part in the war — leaving it up to EU countries to decide when the ban would take effect. 

“Are we nuts?” said Kulbergs on the delay. “We allow Russian military soldiers to be given visas, the ones killing [Ukrainians] on the field.”

He also urged EU countries to revisit sending Russia’s €210 billion in sovereign assets frozen in Europe to Ukraine, dismissing concerns Moscow could challenge the move after the war.

Kulbergs also rebuked European Council President António Costa’s decision to open a communications channel with the Kremlin, saying doing so should be “a decision of all the countries together.”

He called any Kremlin outreach “a useless exercise,” arguing there’s no sign President Vladimir Putin is ready to negotiate and that talks would merely give Russia “breathing time” to make its “next move.”

Despite Latvia severing ties with its eastern neighbor, and Kulbergs’ hawkish position on relations with Moscow, he said “we have to be open” to reestablishing ties once Russia pays reparations to Ukraine and those responsible for war crimes face justice, pointing to postwar Germany as the example to follow. “Do we isolate Germany because of that? No, it’s acceptance of guilt, acceptance of wrongdoing, punishment, and retribution,” he said.

After a ceasefire, Kulbergs concluded, “the insecurity of the border will only rise” as the real threat will be a wave of migration as hundreds of thousands of “screwed up” soldiers return from the battlefield seeking a better life and other citizens flee as Moscow’s war economy crumbles.

Dave Brat, Australia’s freshly confirmed U.S. ambassador, didn’t need to learn another language to qualify for his new gig. But he’s coming into the job fluent in a niche dialect that could give him a big advantage.

“He can speak Trump,” James Braid, President Donald Trump’s director of legislative affairs, said in a recent interview. “He can understand Trump, and he’s recognized as a longtime Trump ally. And I think that will really help him facilitate Aussie-United States relations.”

This dynamic could be key as Brat gets to work in Canberra, where political leaders have been rattled by the Trump administration’s aggressive trade agenda resulting in the implementation of a 12.5 percent tariff on Australian goods.

A longtime economist and academic, Brat is an avowed free trade advocate, which could quell some nerves on the ground. But Brat has also defended the Trump administration’s tariff regime as a kind of reset of the U.S. economic relationship with the world, telling a local news outlet in his home state of Virginia last year that “these tariffs are an attempt to bring some balance.”

At the same time, he has the ear of the White House, having earned Trump’s trust and respect long ago as a Republican member of the U.S. House of Representatives from 2014 to 2019. There, Brat was a member of the House Freedom Caucus — a contingent of conservative hard-liners known for taking uncompromising positions on federal spending — and in 2016 he embraced then-presidential candidate Trump as other more establishment Republicans turned their noses.

“The president hasn’t forgotten that,” said Braid, who was policy director of the Freedom Caucus during that period.

The Freedom Caucus was, as it is now, perpetually at war with party leadership on Capitol Hill, but the group harnessed Brat’s affable disposition and deft touch in high-stakes policy negotiations. He was obsessed with making sure that the group’s goals would be understood both by negotiators across the table and the public — something his former colleagues expect him to bring to the international stage.

Justin Ouimette, a former longtime executive director of the House Freedom Caucus, said in an interview that Brat’s approach has always been, “here’s the message and here’s where it is coming from” — a tactic that “tends to lower the temperature.”

“He was one of those guys that’s typically dispatched to disagree without being disagreeable,” Braid agreed. “Brat is really effective at stating a position, being firm while also collaborating to reach an outcome, and so that that experience will serve him well in his new diplomatic post.”

There’s hope among some in Washington that Brat’s views on trade, coupled with his ties to the Trump administration, could help soothe existing tensions and result in a positive working relationship between the U.S. and Australia. That optimism is shared by Virginia’s two Democratic U.S. senators, Tim Kaine and Mark Warner, who supported Brat’s nomination.

“He will be very focused on commerce, trade, and economic opportunity. You know, things that are good for the U.S. and good for the Australian economies,” said Kaine, who as governor once relied on Brat’s contributions to a bipartisan economic advisory panel to build the state’s budget.

“He’ll be very mindful of the commercial relationship, and I think that’s something that will be viewed positively by the Aussies,” Kaine added.

He noted that Virginia’s massive naval base would now have an advocate in Brat amid the continued implementation of AUKUS, a trilateral security pact among Australia, the U.K. and the U.S. in 2021 aimed at helping Australia acquire nuclear-powered submarines.

Warner was less effusive, saying he has “disagreed with Dave on a lot of issues,” but acknowledged he also was “a smart guy” he supported for the ambassadorship.

Brat also has long been vocal about the competitive threats to the U.S. posed by China, a concern shared by Australia in its diplomatic engagement with the Pacific region. Ouimette speculated that “his clear-mindedness and alignment with the administration on that particular issue weighed in his favor” as the White House was making its ambassador selection.

There are still some unknowns, however, including whether Brat will be living in Canberra full time and how he’ll handle staffing issues at the U.S. Embassy.

“I understand that Mission Australia’s current staffing and facilities are insufficient to meet the demands of our expanding Alliance activities,” Brat said in a written response to U.S. Sen. Brian Schatz, a Hawaii Democrat, as part of his confirmation proceedings. “Our investment in diplomatic infrastructure reflects our commitment to this vital partnership.”

Brat’s arrival heads a wave of new senior appointments at the embassy including Robert T. Koepcke as deputy chief of mission and Jonathan A. Habjan as counselor for political affairs.

A slew of new military postings at the embassy includes Col. Richard Bush as defense attaché; Col. Pete Roongsang as Army attaché; and Col. Kabir Rao as chief of MILGROUP, which manages security cooperation, foreign military sales and defense relations with the Australian Armed Forces.

Brat also hasn’t spoken publicly or at length about how or why he was recommended for this particular posting, though he said during his confirmation hearing that he “loved the Australian people I have met in my life and appreciate their decency, wit and sense of humor” — as well as being a “tennis fanatic” eager to engage in “sports diplomacy across the board.”

Australian Prime Anthony Albanese is also a keen tennis player, known to invite dignitaries and journalists to play on the court at his official Canberra residence, The Lodge.

“I’m very much looking forward to having a hit of tennis with David Brat,” Albanese told POLITICO, adding that he believes Brat’s appointment will “bolster” the existing alliance.

Brat did not respond to POLITICO’s requests for interviews.

But Braid made clear that sending Brat to Australia is not a vanity posting or just a favor for a longtime Trump loyalist, calling Brat “a serious lawmaker with serious chops.” He conceded that while Brat “comes from a political tradition that may be a little bit unfamiliar to the Australians,” he brings relationships and experiences to the table a career foreign service officer could not.

“This is a serious person,” Braid said.

President Donald Trump directed the Pentagon on Sunday to substantially scale back planned joint military exercises with South Korea, saying that South Korea declined to help with denuclearizing Iran.

“These exercises are not only costly, with much of these costs paid for by the United States of America (as usual!), but send a signal that is totally inappropriate and hostile,” Trump wrote on Truth Social, while emphasizing his “very good relationship” with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un.

The move directing Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth — who in May praised South Korean leaders for their commitment to “alliance burden-sharing” in defense of the Korean Peninsula — to scale back the plans comes just a day before the 11 days of exercises were set to start on Monday, part of an annual practice to deter threats from North Korea.

Trump also sought to end the exercises during his first administration, similarly arguing at the time that doing so “will save us a tremendous amount of money.”

North Korea launched its latest round of ballistic missile tests just last week, seen in part as a response to the announcement of the U.S. and South Korea’s planned military exercises.

The U.S. and South Korea have held joint military exercises for more than 70 years. This year’s iteration, termed Ulchi Freedom Shield, was expected to involve about 18,000 South Korean troops and a sizable portion of the 28,500 American troops stationed in the country.

Pentagon leaders are considering plans to withdraw about 4,500 troops from South Korea, to be redeployed elsewhere in the Indo-Pacific region.

Congress has generally opposed the idea, including language in last year’s national defense authorization act to prevent the administration from reducing the American footprint there below the 28,500 level.

A Spanish F-18 fighter jet on a NATO air-policing mission Sunday shot down a drone that had illegally entered Romanian airspace.

The drone was detected by radar about 24 kilometers north of the eastern city of Galați after entering Romania from Moldova. Having established radar contact, the fighter jet was authorized to shoot it down at 5:01 a.m. Authorities said debris from the destroyed aircraft had fallen in an uninhabited area between two villages.

Martin O’Donnell, spokesperson for NATO operation headquarters, said additional details regarding Sunday’s incident remained under investigation but that the drone “appears to be Russian.”

“The Ministry of National Defence is constantly monitoring the situation and informs in real time the allied structures about such events,” the ministry added in a statement.

It is the fourth drone shot down by NATO over Romania since the beginning of 2026. In July, Romanian F-16s downed three Russian drones that breached the country’s airspace — the first such interceptions after dozens of incursions since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. In May, a Russian drone crashed into an apartment building in Galați, injuring two people.

Meanwhile, Russia and Ukraine traded strikes over the weekend. Russian forces launched missile and drone attacks on Kyiv early Sunday, sparking fires in at least two districts and injuring three people, according to the city’s military administration.

Ukrainian drones also struck the Moscow region overnight in what the regional governor Andrei Vorobyov described as one of the largest attacks to target the area, killing an 83-year-old man.

Hungary is sinking two barges to ensure a key nuclear power plant stays online, Prime Minister Péter Magyar said Saturday.

Europe’s summer of extreme heat has caused the Danube’s water level to hit record lows, affecting power production at the Paks nuclear plant. Nuclear power stations are typically built by rivers and along coastlines so they can use water to cool down reactors.

Hungarian authorities are sinking the two barges to raise water levels so Paks, which provides the country with more than a third of its electricity, can continue to operate normally. The sinking began Saturday morning and Hungarian media are quoting the prime minister saying the water level at the plant has risen by 1 centimeter.

Magyar said on X that the current water level near Hungary’s only nuclear energy facility is 122 cm lower than normal and it is projected to drop below 132 cm on Monday, which would force one of the plant’s two turbines to shut down.

On Wednesday, Magyar announced that they would be building a riverbed sill with 150,000 cubic meters of stone and was considering sinking the two 80-meter barges. A sill is an underwater dam meant to slow down the current and raise water levels. Hungary’s Defense Ministry has assigned 100 troops to work around the clock on the project, the prime minister said on X.

Nuclear energy facilities across Europe have been affected by this summer’s droughts and soaring temperatures. Romania shut down a nuclear power plant earlier this week due to the Danube’s water levels.

France — one of Europe’s biggest producers of nuclear power — has seen its fleet of nuclear power plants affected throughout the summer. Le Monde reported authorities had to shut down six of the country’s 57 nuclear reactors as yet another heat wave broiled much of the country. Earlier in the week, a climate change-fueled jellyfish invasion forced workers to bring parts of a different plant offline.

Magyar has also cast doubt on completing an expansion of the Paks plant by a Russian state-owned firm in a deal signed by Magyar’s predecessor, the Kremlin-friendly Viktor Orbàn, citing the water issue.

Jets from NATO’s Baltic Air Policing mission shot down a drone that entered Latvian airspace overnight, the country’s armed forces reported on X.

The drone was downed near the village of Rugāji in northeastern Latvia, close to the Russian border, after Italian Eurofighters based in Lithuania and Turkish F-16s based in Estonia were scrambled.

The uncrewed aerial vehicle appeared in Latvian airspace “as a result of Russian electromagnetic warfare,” said the Latvian National Armed Forces in a press release. Earlier Friday, more than 50 Ukrainian drones attacked targets in Russia’s western regions, including Leningrad and Tver, where they struck Ust-Luga — the second-largest port in Russia — and a warehouse belonging to e-commerce giant Wildberries.

Latvia’s military warned that similar incidents may happen again in the future. “While the Russian aggression in Ukraine is ongoing, the recurrence of such cases when a foreign unmanned aircraft enters or approaches Latvian airspace is possible,” it said.

An air raid alert was declared in four eastern Latvian municipalities at around 4 a.m. local time. The military urged people to stay indoors and away from exterior walls.

After the drone was downed, Sandra Kapteine, head of the Rugāji village administration, told the Latvian Information Agency that the incident “caused no casualties,” as the drone wreckage fell in a “wooded area.”

There has been an uptick in similar incidents over recent months in countries close to the war-zone. A week ago, Bulgarian Defense Minister Dimitar Stoyanov said a Ukrainian-made drone crossed Bulgarian airspace from Romania and exploded near the village of Kardam.

LONDON — Nigel Farage’s victory in the Clacton by-election is emphatic — but it won’t let him off the hook.

Winning back his seaside House of Commons seat by an increased margin allows the Reform UK leader to claim victory in the “people vs the establishment” contest he triggered in response to intense scrutiny of his finances.

Farage won the backing of 22,239 constituents, or 63 percent of the vote. That’s 1,014 more votes in this by-election than at the U.K. general election two years ago, and a 17-point swing in his favor.

But second-placed this time was Count Binface, a comedian with a trash can on his head who secured — by many thousands — his highest ever vote count in a palpable protest against Farage. None of Britain’s mainstream parties took part in the contest, branding it a circus.

The Reform UK leader’s refusal to turn up at the count to hear the result Friday — a move that would have seen him pictured alongside a cast of comedy characters — underlined the struggle for him to get back on the front foot he is used to contesting politics from. 

More significantly, Farage’s triumph means that parliamentary investigations into his financial affairs will now resume. That could lead to another by-election — one in which serious rivals are far less likely to stand aside to allow Farage to face-off against a long list of no-hopers.

Labour MPs switched out their own leader in part because of Farage’s storming success at local elections in May, but the focus on this contest has also made it harder for Farage to land blows on Britain’s new Prime Minister Andy Burnham.

This week, Labour overtook Reform in POLITICO’s Poll of Polls after months on the back-foot for the governing party.

Snubbing the count

Clacton is Farage’s fiefdom. It was one of the most Brexit-voting constituencies in the country and was the place that first sent him to the Commons on his eighth time of trying.

But Binface, a proud proponent of the British tradition of satirical candidates contesting elections, had never won more than 308 votes in a parliamentary election before. Against Farage, he secured 9,455 votes. That means 28 percent plumped for the comedy candidate with a bin on his head.

Farage on Friday snubbed the leisure center count and the mild embarrassment of accepting victory alongside Binface that three prime ministers — Boris Johnson, Rishi Sunak and Andy Burnham — have endured before him. 

He told his own “Farage Fest” jamboree organized in secret away from the results venue that he’d been advised by Essex Police of an “organized campaign to disrupt and degrade the result.”

“I’m not scared of these people, far from it,” he told fans. “But I’m damned if I’m going to stand on a stage, having won a resounding victory, a ringing endorsement of all that I’ve tried to fight for, and you’ve tried to fight for, and be demeaned and humiliated by nobodies, and I will not sadly be attending the count.”

That meant, according to reports, Farage became the first winning candidate not to turn up for a result since jailed Irish Republican Army hunger striker Bobby Sands won Fermanagh and South Tyrone in 1981.

Instead, Farage railed against the media and the “establishment” in his own event fit with branded pint cups, a ferris wheel and yurts for overnight stays. It was yet another demonstration of his attempt to bend the norms that accompany mainstream politics to his will.

Essex Police assured a “proportionate and robust policing operation” was in place at the count — while it was made clear that Farage was not advised to avoid the event. He cancelled a scheduled speech in Clacton, too.

Farage had gambled that a strong victory would inhibit the chances of parliamentary watchdogs imposing a severe enough sentence to set up a recall, should he be found to have breached the rules. “The bigger the vote, the bigger the message. Let’s tell the establishment where to go,” Farage said as polls opened on Thursday.

In the event, the turnout — at 44 percent — was not astonishing. That it’s less than the general election may not be surprising, but it was lower than another high-profile by-election held in this seat a decade earlier.

In 2014 Douglas Carswell resigned as the Conservative MP for the area to run for Ukip, Farage’s Eurosceptic party that helped drive Brexit. 

Clacton returned Carswell in his new guise, making him the first MP elected under the Ukip banner. He won 60 percent of the vote, on a 51 percent turnout.

That day was described as a “mini-earthquake in British politics” — but Friday’s result is producing less stable ground for Reform. “Farage’s distraction by-election doesn’t clear his name – it just shows he likely has so much more to hide,” argued Labour Party Chair Bridget Phillipson Friday morning.

Probes continue

So now the uphill battle. The parliamentary standards commissioner will resume two investigations into Farage — one centering on a £5 million donation from a crypto-entrepreneur, the other into support provided by a convicted fraudster.

The MP denies wrongdoing in both instances, arguing he didn’t need to declare the donations because they were given in a personal capacity before he was elected. 

But if there’s a finding of a serious rule breach then the Commons could vote to suspend Farage and trigger a recall petition.

The signatures of just 10 percent of registered voters in Clacton would then be needed to expel Farage from parliament — and trigger another by-election in which he could stand. Farage has expressed hopes that there isn’t such an appetite in his constituency — but the support for Binface throws that into doubt.

Clacton’s electorate is 79,785 — the 9,455 votes that Binface secured represents around 12 percent of those eligible voters, a comfortable margin for recall to be successful. 

Tactical errors?

That is all potential peril for the future. Right now, the August by-election has even some supporters questioning whether this was a rare miscalculation from a veteran campaigner.

Farage has in recent years dominated the summer break when many MPs vacate the political playing field.

But broadcasting rules on election periods stymied this year’s effort. Media invites to the press conferences Farage did throw had to assure broadcasters he would not be mentioning Clacton. And every mention of Clacton meant presenters were obliged to read the full 34-candidate list — namedropping Nick the Incredible Flying Brick and Baron Von Thunderclap in the process. 

Reform has also been struggling to grapple with a squeeze on its right from Rupert Lowe’s Restore Britain splinter party. Farage’s one-time Reform comrade touted the possibility of a pact to unite the right — but deeply held grievances on both sides mean the distraction has dragged on.

A row over one of Reform’s most senior officials, Zia Yusuf, calling a Conservative former defense secretary a “traitor to Britain” has also been generating unwanted headlines and exposing rifts inside Reform.

If that second by-election does emerge in the coming months then the Conservatives have already vowed to fight it. Farage, should he choose to stand again, would face a far tougher contest against the backdrop of parliament having ruled against him, and many voters in Clacton had been unimpressed by the “laughing stock” caused by the first election.

The Reform hardcore may be buoyed by Farage’s railing against the “establishment” — but what this saga does to his reputation with the wider electorate he needs to propel him into Downing Street remains the biggest unanswered question.

Volodymyr Zelenskyy has a problem: Nobody wants the hardest job in Washington.

The Ukrainian president is struggling to find someone of sufficient influence to represent Kyiv to the Trump administration, with prospective candidates proving reluctant to take on the grueling assignment at a critical moment in the war, according to two former senior Ukrainian officials and four lawmakers.

The need to replace the previous envoy, Olga Stefanishyna, helped trigger Zelenskyy’s still-incomplete government reshuffle. Stefanishyna was formally dismissed on Aug. 3 over impending embezzlement charges. 

Zelenskyy moved his reshuffle plans forward so he could offer the ambassadorship to Yulia Svyrydenko, the outgoing prime minister, according to a former senior Ukrainian official and a Republican foreign expert familiar with the background to the shake-up. But she declined, disrupting his plans. 

“It is no secret that I counted on and offered Yulia Svyrydenko the post of ambassador to the United States,” Zelenskyy said at a press conference in late July. He added that he was looking for a candidate with the highest possible qualifications: “a person at the level of a deputy prime minister, minister, or prime minister.”

Since then, however, other prospective candidates have proved equally reluctant, spurning what would in any case be the difficult job of handling Donald Trump’s unpredictable White House.

Ukrainians with sufficient heft and skill for the ambassadorship are looking at it askance, “worrying that they would not enjoy the conditions they would need to do the job properly,” said Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze, a prominent Ukrainian opposition lawmaker and former deputy prime minister who is a regular critic of Zelenskyy.

“Certainly that would be the case without having the ear of the president or his trust,” she added. That narrows Zelenskyy’s options sharply. The person would likely have to come from his tight inner circle of trusted aides, Klympush-Tsintsadze said, but there is no one there who seriously fits the bill. 

“Framing it as if nobody wants the job would be a kind of oversimplification,” said a former Ukrainian diplomat who was granted anonymity in order to speak freely. “Of course, there are people who want the job, but there’s no one who really measures up to it. Zelenskyy is having a hard time filling the position.”

Wrong direction

The trouble filling the Washington post is part of a broader problem for Zelenskyy, whose office did not respond to a request for comment. The president’s approval ratings have deteriorated since he embarked a month ago on a government shake-up that remains incomplete and has proved turbulent. According to a Socis Center for Social Research survey, more than 55 percent of Ukrainians believe their nation is moving in the wrong direction.

Zelenskyy’s dismissal in July of popular defense minister Mykhailo Fedorov sparked street protests and a political backlash, while several key posts remain unresolved. The reshuffle has also raised questions about how Zelenskyy chooses his senior team — and how far beyond his tight circle of trusted aides he is prepared to look. 

“No one has explained to Ukrainians why exactly the government had to be changed,” Mykola Knyazhitskiy, an opposition lawmaker from Lviv and founder of Ukraine’s Espreso TV channel, said.

“There had been no clearly articulated public complaints about Svyrydenko. In her farewell address to parliament, Svyrydenko received applause. MPs gave her a standing ovation. So why was she dismissed if her performance was considered so successful and was so highly regarded?” 

Difficult timing

The ambassadorial vacancy comes at an especially fraught moment for Kyiv. Washington remains central to Ukraine’s ability to sustain the war, and whoever takes the job will have to navigate a Trump administration that has repeatedly shifted course on military support and on how — and when — the war should end.

In an interview with POLITICO’s Dasha Burns earlier this year, Stefanishyna acknowledged she had experienced “diplomatic whiplash” in the role. 

Kyiv is trying to persuade Trump to give Ukraine a license to manufacture Patriot air defense systems, something he promised in June, only to reverse himself in July. The issue is becoming more urgent as Ukraine heads toward another winter of Russian attacks on its energy and civilian infrastructure and is already struggling to intercept intensified ballistic missile strikes. Zelenskyy has said this year’s deliveries of air defense missiles from Ukraine’s allies have fallen by two-thirds compared with 2025.

At the same time, there are signs the White House may soon seek to revive stalled peace negotiations. That would put a premium on having an ambassador in Washington with the political weight to get through the door, the authority to speak for Zelenskyy and the skill to navigate an administration where policy can change quickly. And also to lobby Congress. 

Leaving the post vacant, therefore, carries risks well beyond diplomatic protocol. Ukraine could find itself without a heavyweight operator in Washington just as decisions are being made over weapons, air defense, logistics and intelligence sharing, as well as the terms of any renewed peace push.

“It is quite likely that Zelenskyy won’t appoint anyone this side of the midterm elections in the United States,” said Yaroslav Yurchyshyn, an opposition lawmaker. “It will be hard to judge who would fit the political landscape best until those elections have been held.”

NATO plans to fortify its eastern edge using drones, sensors and artificial intelligence in a massive network designed to spot and help repel a potential Russian attack.

Western officials say the alliance is exploring AI-assisted drone operations as part of the broad effort to bolster its defenses. The aim, however, isn’t full autonomy; instead, machines could help to pilot the drones while human operators make the call on what they strike.

The approach echoes what Ukraine is already doing. The embattled country is increasingly incorporating AI into its drone operations, but both soldiers and defense tech firms have repeatedly emphasized that humans must remain at the center of the fight, even as the war becomes more robotic.

For NATO, AI-assisted drones would be part of the Eastern Flank Deterrence Initiative — a digital battlespace network the alliance is building to track threats along its borders with Russia and Belarus, which stretch from northern Finland to the Black Sea.

The new concept includes thousands of drones, sensors and satellites linked with AI to detect potential breaches of allied territory and repel attacks as the first line of defense. Conventional military forces, such as tanks, fighter jets and artillery, will remain the backbone.

U.S. Army Maj. Ben Schiff, a software operations officer, told Bild — which, like Business Insider and POLITICO, is part of the Axel Springer Global Reporters Network — that both Ukraine and Russia still rely on humans to control drones.

While some systems have AI or machine-learning capabilities that allow brief moments of autonomy in flight, piloting is primarily performed by operators on the ground. Schiff said that “the most boring parts of flying”— drones loitering above the battlefield looking for targets — should be automated. But when it comes to deciding what the drone should strike, that’s where a human comes into play.

“So the humans are deciding what the drone does, but they don’t necessarily need to take the action of flying it because we don’t have a million pilots. We can’t fly a million drones at the same time,” said Schiff at the U.S. Army Europe and Africa headquarters in Wiesbaden, Germany.

Schiff is a product manager for the EFDI Data Backbone, a developing framework designed to help NATO forces detect, classify, share and act on information at speed and scale. The backbone bridges incompatible computer and command systems across multiple allied nations, allowing real-time data to flow from forward-deployed sensors all the way back to headquarters.

The goal is to help NATO move beyond today’s linear system — called a “kill chain” — where information moves from the front line back to a decision-maker and then back again to the battlefront to a “kill web,” where data from sensors can be rapidly passed to weapons systems and operators.

“The value of a drone, sensor or other capability is not determined solely by its individual performance,” said Maj. Matt Blubaugh, a spokesperson for U.S. Army Europe and Africa. “Its effectiveness depends on how well it integrates into the broader operational ecosystem.”

Learning from Ukraine

Ukraine is already pioneering the integration of AI into military operations.

On the battlefield, Ukraine has made significant progress in using AI to support functions like decision-making, drone navigation, terminal guidance and precision, said Andrii Hrytseniuk, the CEO of the Ukrainian state-backed innovation platform Brave1.

This spring, Hrytseniuk told Business Insider in Kyiv that more than 200 local companies were developing AI-based components for drones, missiles, radars and other systems. However, they insist machines won’t control drones from start to finish.

Wild Hornets, the manufacturer of the popular Sting interceptor drone, also told Business Insider in May that AI will be gradually integrated at almost every stage of flight operations — target detection, identification and, later, terminal guidance.

A spokesperson for the company said humans will still make the final decision on what to strike. Since Russia is constantly changing its tactics, interceptor operators must keep tabs on these changes and make necessary adjustments, they said.

As autonomous systems become more common on the battlefield in Ukraine, commanders also told Business Insider that humans need to remain in the loop.

Grek, the call sign of a company commander overseeing robots with Ukraine’s 21st Unmanned Systems “Kraken” Regiment, said the goal is to “allow people to focus on the tasks where human judgment has the greatest value.”

U.S. Army officers stressed that NATO is using the operational environment in Ukraine to inform military planning for a potential future confrontation.

“We’re not copying Ukraine,” said Capt. Ronan Sefton. “We’re learning from Ukraine.”

The Axel Springer Global Reporters Network harnesses the resources of the company’s newsrooms to publish ambitious scoops, investigations, interviews, opinion pieces and analysis. It allows journalists — including those from POLITICO, Business Insider, WELT, BILD, The Telegraph, Onet and Fakt — to collaborate on major stories for an international audience of hundreds of millions across platforms: online, print, TV and audio.

BERLIN — German Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s government is moving to turn the country’s foreign intelligence agency into a more potent weapon to counter mounting threats from adversaries including Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Ministers in the chancellor’s cabinet adopted the intelligence reform on Wednesday, marking a major step forward in long-running plans to strengthen the country’s intelligence agencies by giving its spies vast new powers.

Under the proposed reform, spies working for Germany’s foreign intelligence agency, the BND, could carry out acts of sabotage, conduct offensive cyber operations and pursue more aggressive espionage operations. Until now, those spies have been limited to information-gathering operations due to intentional restraints put in place after World War II to prevent a repeat of the abuses perpetrated by the Nazi spy apparatus.

But with the threat of sabotage and influence operations from Russia growing — and concerns that U.S. President Donald Trump could halt or leverage the intelligence sharing Germany heavily relies on — Merz’s government has moved to push through a historic strengthening of the country’s foreign intelligence apparatus.

“We are daily targets of espionage, sabotage, cyberattacks and covert actions by foreign powers aimed at destabilizing Germany, at harming our country and at bringing about political and social changes within our country,” Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt told reporters after the cabinet meeting in Berlin.

“Our mission is to continually adapt the state’s protective mandate to these new threat scenarios,” he added.

The reforms must still be passed by both chambers of parliament before going into effect by 2027.

Nina Warken, the chancellery chief overseeing the BND reforms, suggested Germany can no longer afford to rely so heavily on foreign allies for sophisticated intelligence operations it has long been unable conduct itself.

“So far — and this must be stated objectively — we have relied too heavily in too many security-related areas on our partners to help ensure our security,” Warken said. “In short, we are simply too dependent on the support of other countries’ intelligence services. And in too many areas, this assistance is a one-way street.”

Germany’s postwar foreign intelligence service was founded in 1956 with far more legal constraints than intelligence agencies elsewhere. Those restraints have had the side effect of making Germany particularly dependent on the U.S. for intelligence gathering.

In view of the growing threat from Russia, leading politicians now argue that it is time for Germany’s spies to be given the ability to hit back harder. That argument took on new urgency following the sighting of an explosive-laden drone at Leipzig-Halle Airport in eastern Germany last week that was found near a Ukrainian Antonov plane used to transport munitions.

Dobrindt, in remarks after the incident, stopped short of naming Russia as responsible for the drone incursion, but said that “a hybrid threat is evident” and that such perils do not originate from amateurs but are “often linked to foreign powers.” On Wednesday, he said results of an investigation into the drone incident were still pending.

Germany’s security “worsened significantly” in the wake of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, according to a report by the country’s domestic intelligence agency last year.

Germany’s intelligence reform would allow authorities to actively respond to hybrid threats such as the Leipzig drone incident. Measures could range from exposing those involved or destroying their property to sabotaging explosives before an attack or feeding adversaries false intelligence afterward, according to the proposed reform. Any response would have to be directly linked to the original incident and could not endanger life or physical safety.

“We are expanding the technical capabilities of the intelligence services and granting them active, operational powers,” Dobrindt said. “This is not just about enabling the services to see and hear better in the future and analyze information more quickly. Above all, it is about being able to take active measures against our attackers and adversaries.”

The BND will also face fewer data-protection restrictions, allowing it to make greater use of tools such as AI and facial recognition and to store data for longer periods of time, according to the proposed reform. The agency is also set to receive more funding in the coming years. Merz’s government increased the agency’s budget by about 26 percent to €1.51 billion this year.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu this week publicly rejected President Donald Trump’s latest Gaza peace plan.

The Trump administration can live with it — for now.

The administration says it’s less concerned with what Netanyahu says than what the Israeli Defense Forces do. A U.S. official, who, like others in the story, was granted anonymity to discuss internal thinking, said that the administration was initially “disappointed” that Israel responded to the 15-point peace proposal by ramping up attacks in Gaza — but is pleased that it has since eased its assault.

Now, the administration is willing to give the Israeli prime minister some leeway to message the peace plan in the way he needs to, the official said. There is broad understanding that he is two months from a tough reelection — and needs to please his own hard-right allies to win. Few expected the president’s roadmap to be wholesale embraced, even as Trump on Truth Social trumpeted it as a “major milestone” in the conflict.

“We recognize the complexities that come from the Israeli elections, and we’re obviously going to give Bibi a space to try and navigate that,” the official said. But in turn, “they need to give us a little bit of space in terms of no targeted killings in order to allow us to try to get to the next phase, so there’s a lot more challenges to go to get there.”

U.S. officials and Hamas negotiated the latest peace framework separately, with help from Middle East allies. The proposal, announced last month, called for Hamas to disarm and relinquish governance in Gaza and Israel to withdraw its military from the territory. The plan stalled when Hamas said it would not disarm until Israel withdrew, and Israel said it would not withdraw until Hamas disarmed.

Even as skeptics of the Trump plan criticized the president for overhyping its achievement, U.S. officials believed that they needed to go public once Hamas was on board to lock in its pledge to disarm. Despite the president’s public confidence, administration officials privately expected that the proposal would likely face pushback from Netanyahu but that talks could continue with Israel.

Still, they considered the roadmap a significant win.

“Nobody’s ever gotten to this point where they got Hamas to agree to this, so that’s a necessary step before actually disarming it,” the U.S. official said.

And there are signs that Israel is preparing for the possibility of withdrawal anyway, with Israeli media reporting Israel’s defense establishment began weighing contingencies to do so in the days after Netanyahu’s public rejection.

Another administration official said the Board of Peace, a 27-country initiative formed as part of Trump’s deal last year to end the war between Israel and Hamas in the Gaza Strip, has been “getting good cooperation on the ground of late.”

“That’s what’s important,” the administration official said.

And it’s not just Trump administration officials hailing the framework as a step in the right direction. Former ambassadors and administration officials, including some who served in the Biden and Obama administrations, see the recent commitment the U.S. secured from Hamas to disarm — a monthslong sticking point in the peace process — as a small, but meaningful step, even as doubts remain whether Hamas will follow through. A member of the Hamas political bureau, according to the Associated Press, said this week that Hamas remains “committed to the roadmap.”

“For Netanyahu, his primary objective, of course, is getting through his election so he’s going to at least voice rejection even while he may allow some aspects of it to move forward,” said Dan Shapiro, a U.S. ambassador to Israel during the Obama administration. “It looks like Trump is tolerating the Netanyahu two-step. These two have done a dance like this before and as long as certain elements of it are moving forward … Trump seems to be willing to tolerate Netanyahu’s stated rejection.”

Even Trump appeared in little hurry Monday to escalate the dispute with Netanyahu, insisting to reporters in the Oval Office that he had a “good relationship” with the Israeli prime minister despite the very public rejection of his peace proposal.

The White House referred requests for comment to the Board of Peace.

A Board of Peace official added that “separate discussions with Israel are continuing.”

“The objective remains the full decommissioning of weapons and ensuring Gaza can never again pose the kind of threat Israel faced on October 7,” the official said. “Plans are moving forward in this regard. We have seen important elements of cooperation in recent days and we are intensifying our efforts to accelerate progress.”

The U.S. official added that Israel remains skeptical that Hamas will follow through on their commitments, while noting the country was similarly skeptical that Hamas would release the Israeli hostages.

“We basically have built a lot of credit with them. And I think that they’re willing to give us more of a shot to see if we can get to the next phase,” the official said. “We’re in an uncomfortable position for everyone, but I think that there’s a pathway to get through it.”

The idea that Israeli troops are at least planning to withdraw — especially if that withdrawal goes to the yellow line in Gaza, a key point of the plan the Board of Peace proposed — is giving Trump allies hope that Netanyahu’s words are meant for a domestic audience, while his actions are meant to demonstrate he might consider a deal in the future.

“Netanyahu’s playing a fairly tricky tightrope, where on the one hand he flexes his muscle for domestic audiences, given his situation at election eve, and on the other hand, he’s doing some baby steps in the direction of the 15-point plan — testing the tolerance of the American or Board of Peace team,” said Nimrod Novik, who served as senior diplomatic adviser to former Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres.

James Jeffrey, a former ambassador who served in the Middle East during three presidential administrations, including Trump’s first term, said that “of course it’s a win” to get Hamas to agree to disarm. And, behind the scenes, he said there continues to be movement between the U.S and Israel.

“Slowly we and Israel are moving forward on both Lebanon and Gaza even in the face of Israeli elections,” Jeffrey said.

Still, the incremental movement leaves fundamental questions, which have repeatedly stymied efforts to create a lasting peace between Israel and Gaza. U.S. allies are also concerned that Netanyahu’s public rejection of the latest peace plan is undermining confidence in the Board of Peace and the broader Middle East peace efforts.

Hamas’ willingness to disarm is conditioned on Israel withdrawing from Gaza, leaving unresolved how — and in what order — either side would carry out its commitments.

Hamas is supposed to turn over its weapons to a United Nations-created body responsible for governing the day-to-day operation in Gaza, and that governing authority is supposed to eventually run the territory, supervised by the Board of Peace, though the timeline for leadership handover remains uncertain. And Israel, meanwhile, has not agreed to the withdrawal in the plan, even as its military is preparing for the possibility.

But administration allies don’t really expect some big peace ceremony at Camp David or in Geneva. They’ll settle for dialogue, however tenuous.

“You have to judge these things incrementally in the Middle East,” a person familiar with the White House’s discussions around the peace process said.

Jerry Wu and Daniella Cheslow contributed to this report.

Russian authorities said Ukraine’s overnight bombardment of the western Krasnodar region killed two people and injured at least 12.

Andrei Kravchenko, mayor of the Russian city Novorossiysk, said the attack killed one child and injured eight people. Drone debris damaged four businesses and 21 residential buildings, including apartment blocks, he said. Krasnodar Krai regional governor, Veniamin Kondratyev, said on his Telegram channel that more buildings were damaged elsewhere in the region, killing one man and injuring four people.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy confirmed the attack on Wednesday but insisted that Kyiv’s forces had targeted the naval base in Novorossiysk, which he called “the last major stronghold of the Russian fleet in the Black Sea.”

“Our Palianytsia jet-powered drones, Neptune missiles, and unmanned naval systems successfully struck the designated targets. Hits on air defense positions, piers, and seaport infrastructure have been confirmed,” wrote Zelenskyy on X.

“The occupation fleet and all the infrastructure supporting it will not be safe as long as Russian aggression continues,” he warned Moscow.

Russia’s defense ministry said the country’s air defenses had intercepted and destroyed 502 Ukrainian drones over several regions and the Black Sea overnight.

Moscow has stepped up its missile attacks on Ukraine in recent months, killing dozens of Ukrainian civilians, while Kyiv has hit back at Russian targets, including oil refineries and warehouses belonging to Russian e-commerce giant Wildberries.

Last week, an intercepted Ukrainian drone crashed onto a Russian beach, killing seven people and injuring 40.

PRISTINA — Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s weekend trip to Serbia triggered reverberations in the Balkans long after the Ukrainian president jetted back to Kyiv.

Zelenskyy visited Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić — who has refused to join the EU’s sanctions regime against Russia and maintains a cozy relationship with the Kremlin — for the first time on Saturday. He then waded into the thorniest regional dispute by declaring Ukraine would continue not to recognize the independence of Kosovo, a former province of Serbia.

Kosovo’s response was swift. A building-sized blue-and-yellow “Free Ukraine” banner that has been up on Pristina’s main thoroughfare since 2022 came down immediately, with Mayor Përparim Rama declaring that while his sympathies remain with “peoples facing war, violence and persecution … respect must be mutual.”

Since Zelenskyy’s visit, Vučić threatened to physically redirect the Iber River that runs from Serbia to Kosovo in retaliation for Kosovo demolishing Serb-owned houses along the reservoir’s shore. Such a move would drain the reservoir supplying much of Kosovo’s water and crucial cooling capacity to its largest power plant.

In addition, Serbian Foreign Minister Marko Djurić and Albanian Prime Minister Edi Rama exchanged barbs on X, with the latter accusing Serbia of being in “a political bubble” and being in denial over the fact that “Serbia lost Kosova” long ago.

Kosovo was an Albanian-majority southern province of Serbia for most of the 20th century. Its people held broad political rights under socialist Yugoslavia until a decade-long Serb crackdown on dissent led to the armed conflict of 1998-99. A three-month NATO bombing campaign drove Serbian forces out and made the province a U.N. protectorate.

Kosovo declared independence in 2008 and, to date, it is recognized by over 100 nations, including the U.S., U.K. and 22 of the 27 EU member countries. It is also a potential EU candidate country, submitting its application in December 2022.

The country’s status has long been a favorite talking point for Russian President Vladimir Putin, who has used it to justify invading Georgia in 2008 and annexing Crimea in 2014. Kosovo’s Foreign Minister Glauk Konjufca said he took note of Zelenskyy’s views “with regret” and that such rhetoric echoes “Russia’s attempts to invoke Kosova as a precedent.”

As for why Ukraine’s leader would wade into the intractable Balkan issue at all, it likely comes down to weaponry.

Serbia still produces considerable quantities of ammunition in the Soviet-standard calibers which would be impossible to acquire from Kyiv’s Western allies, who use the NATO standard instead. Ukraine retains Soviet-era heavy howitzers and tanks that remain key to the fight in the Donbas and beyond. And despite his pro-Russian stance, Vučić is happy to provide them to Kyiv quietly.

“Ukraine is in a position where it cannot care about things beyond the more immediate needs for Ukraine, and Vučić matters to him more,” explained Florian Bieber, who directs the Centre for Southeast European Studies at the University of Graz.

Vučić’s overtures towards Zelenskyy could be in part an effort to placate criticism from Brussels. EU leaders have condemned the “explosion of violence” during the ongoing anti-government protest movement and the “collapse in democratic standards” in Serbia.

“He’s hoping that he will get less critical remarks in the coming months because of his close, at least symbolically closer, ties with Zelenskyy. Vučić is doing this for leverage with the EU ahead of possible elections in the country,” Bieber continued.

Kosovo’s supporters have long cast its independence as a one-off, not a template. But the circumstances of its journey away from Serbia remains divisive, particularly for EU members like Spain and Cyprus, who have their own separatist headaches and still refuse to recognize Kosovo’s independence.

“Depending on which side of this argument you’re coming down on, you will have a different view over what Kosovo’s independence means for other conflicts and other territorial disputes around the world,” said Bieber.

U.S. allies see Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s rejection of Washington’s 15-point plan for Gaza as undermining confidence in the Board of Peace — and in the Trump administration’s ability to influence the Middle East more broadly.

It increasingly appears that the U.S. either doesn’t have — or isn’t willing to exercise — the leverage needed to deliver on Gaza, a number of diplomats and others familiar with U.S. strategy in the region told POLITICO. And that has them concerned about U.S. efforts at negotiations across the region.

“Netanyahu’s rejection of the peace plan carries significant implications for long-term regional stability and Israeli security,” said an Arab diplomat familiar with U.S. policy in the Middle East. “President Trump is the only one to have the potential to influence this situation, as he could seek to reassert his political relevance by pressuring Netanyahu to reconsider his position.”

Netanyahu’s defiance adds to the growing list of woes Washington faces as it struggles to reshape the Middle East, from ending the Iran war to winding down the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon.

The Arab diplomat warned: “Arab and regional leaders may find themselves in a complex position, needing to balance their interests amid these evolving dynamics.”

Netanyahu disavowed the White House-backed peace plan for Gaza on Sunday, declaring that Israel requires Hamas to have “genuinely disarmed” before it withdraws its troops from the territory. That hard line could further threaten the viability of Trump’s Board of Peace, a 27-country initiative formed as part of Trump’s deal last year to end the war between Israel and Hamas in the Gaza Strip.

“The Board of Peace has a distinct limp to its gait at the moment,” said Robert Jordan, who served as U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia during the George W. Bush administration.

“It never appeared to be a broadly based, highly viable substitute for the United Nations,” he added, referring to Trump’s assertions in January that the board could be used as an alternative to the world body. “That’s compounded by the political situation in Israel at the moment.”

The Board of Peace declined to comment, but an official with the organization insisted that work is continuing apace, with Israel’s buy-in. The official pointed to a logistical support area under construction that is meant to serve hundreds of troops expected to deploy to Gaza as part of the international stabilization force envisioned by the board.

“The roadmap is between the Board of Peace and Hamas,” said the board official. “Separate discussions with Israel are continuing. Israel is not being asked to rely on trust or to make irreversible moves before verified steps are taken on the ground.”

The official, like others, was granted anonymity because of the sensitivity of the negotiation process.

A Western diplomat familiar with Middle East policy argued Netanyahu’s action is a sign that U.S. strategy toward Israel is misguided.

“This latest rejection once again shows that appeasing Israel only leads to more maximalist demands,” the diplomat said. “I don’t think it kills the [Board of Peace] but what it does do is once again show that Israel remains one of the obstacles to a viable two-state solution.”

Trump has avoided clashing publicly with Netanyahu over the roadmap, telling reporters Monday that he had a “good relationship” with the Israeli prime minister even though Netanyahu rejected the U.S. proposal. The White House declined to comment further on Israel’s rejection of the deal.

A Trump administration official, granted anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the issue publicly, said the White House doesn’t see Netanyahu’s action as derailing the peace process at all.

“Broadly speaking, we see this as election-posturing by Bibi for a domestic audience,” the official said. “The [Board of Peace] has actually been getting good cooperation on the ground as of late. So that’s what’s important.”

Netanyahu’s rejection of the road map comes as his popularity has been eroding in Israel ahead of an October parliamentary vote that could lead to his unseating.

In Europe, some governments are still holding out hope that the Board of Peace can rescue the Gaza peace process.

“I extremely appreciate the work of chief negotiator [Nickolay] Mladenov on behalf of the Board of Peace, his achievements in the 15-point plan are absolutely substantial,” said Hildegard Bentele, a center-right German lawmaker in the European Parliament. He said he was confident the U.S.-led effort would make progress “if re-submitted after Israeli elections and targeting the core point of full weapons’ decommissioning.”

Others with experience in the region said that Netanyahu appeared to be successfully pushing the Board of Peace in a direction more favorable to Israel.

Netanyahu’s actions are “testing the tolerance of the American or Board of Peace team,” said Nimrod Novik, who served as senior diplomatic adviser to former Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres and is now a fellow at the New York-based Israel Policy Forum.

“It’s really a Trump personal enterprise,” said Zaha Hassan, who advised the Palestinian negotiating team during its bid for U.N. membership from 2010 to 2012 and is now a fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. “So if it can’t get Israel to stand down in Gaza, to withdraw, to allow the Board of Peace to do its work, how can any other regional actor believe that the U.S. can restrain Israel in their neighborhood?”

A European diplomat said the disillusionment with Trump’s sway in the Middle East was already evident in his failure to wrap up the war in Iran quickly.

“The solution is not as close as anticipated or as Trump told us at some point. I think Trump is losing credibility,” said the diplomat, granted anonymity because they weren’t authorized to discuss the issue publicly. “Everything seems to be in limbo and in a high degree of uncertainty that affects us all.”

Jerry Wu, Megan Messerly, Myah Ward and Nicholas Vinocur contributed to this report.

Russia bombarded Ukraine with North Korean missiles overnight, according to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

The Russian attack killed six people and injured at least 19 in Zaporizhzhia, said the city’s mayor, Rehina Kharchenko. Four apartment buildings and several non-residential buildings were damaged in the southeastern city, Kharchenko wrote on her Telegram channel.

According to Zelenskyy, the city was struck with North Korean ballistic missiles, Zircons and guided aerial bombs. In a post on X, he wrote: “It was a vicious attack, calculated to inflict maximum damage specifically on civilian infrastructure.”

Russian President Vladimir Putin and North Korean ruler Kim Jong Un have deepened ties since the Kremlin’s war on Ukraine began. In September last year during a meeting in Beijing, Kim vowed to do “everything we can to assist Russia.”

Zelenskyy also reported attacks on a Kyiv hospital and businesses overnight, with at least one person injured. The capital’s mayor, Vitali Klitschko, urged residents late Monday to seek shelter.

Moscow also attacked substations in Kherson and Kharkiv, causing power outages, Zelenskyy said. Further attacks took place in the Donetsk, Dnipro and Mykolaiv regions.

“Every step Russia takes — increasing ballistic missile production, bringing in North Korean equipment, preparing for mobilization — all of this shows that Moscow is preparing not for peace, but for escalation,” Zelenskyy wrote.

Russia has stepped up its missile attacks this summer, with Zelenskyy urging Western allies to help Kyiv strengthen its air defenses and to heap sanctions pressure on companies fueling Moscow’s war. However, Europe is running out of Patriot interceptors to shoot down Russian missiles, according to the continent’s military officials.

Ukraine, meanwhile, has struck back, targeting Russian infrastructure including oil refineries and buildings belonging to e-commerce giant Wildberries.

Russian state media on Tuesday reported that two Wildberries warehouses in the Voronezh region, several hundred kilometers south of Moscow, caught fire following drone strikes, killing one person.

BERLIN — Europe is scrambling for more Patriot interceptors to donate to an increasingly desperate Ukraine, which is racing to reinforce its ballistic missile defenses before Russia’s expected winter assault.

Kyiv is seeking hundreds of interceptors, but new production will come too late, the war with Iran has strained U.S. supplies, and several of Ukraine’s leading European backers say they have few left that they can safely donate.

“Over the last few months, Russia fires more missiles a week at us than we get from partners over months,” former Ukrainian Defense Minister Mykhailo Fedorov said last week. In July, Ukrainian air defense intercepted only 29 out of 195 Russian ballistic missiles, with another 40 failing to reach their targets, Ukraine’s defense ministry said.

Germany, one of Ukraine’s top military aid donors, has already transferred Patriot systems and missiles to Ukraine. But Berlin must now balance Kyiv’s increasingly urgent needs against the minimum stocks required to protect Germany and meet its NATO commitments. Other European countries are also weighing whether to hang on to their interceptors or give them to Ukraine.

“We are really reaching our limits here,” Brig. Gen. Jürgen Schrödl, a senior German defense ministry official, said at a panel in Berlin shortly after last month’s NATO summit in Ankara. “We also have to ensure our own protection.” 

Berlin and other Northern European capitals have urged counterparts elsewhere on the continent to examine what more military equipment and financial support they could release.

“I think it’s not sustainable for Europe in the long run,” Norwegian Defense Minister Tore O. Sandvik told POLITICO. “All the European countries have to step up.”

That’s putting pressure on countries with stocks of Patriot interceptors like Poland, Spain and Greece. The shortage primarily concerns Patriot PAC-3 and PAC-2 missiles, which are among Ukraine’s few effective defenses against fast-moving Russian ballistic weapons.

Ukraine can use other, often cheaper, air-defense systems against drones and cruise missiles. The country is racing to develop its homegrown Freyja interceptor, but the anti-ballistic system still requires investment, engineering work and testing before it can fill that role.

Until Freyja is ready, Ukraine needs an immediate answer to Russia’s ballistic missiles. “One of the priority directions is Patriot — PAC-3 or PAC-2,” Mykhailo Podolyak, adviser to the head of Ukraine’s presidential office, told POLITICO.  “The first [solution] is buying, or receiving from stockpiles, PAC-3 and PAC-2 interceptors.”

Stuck in Washington

The Patriot dependence makes U.S. President Donald Trump essential to Kyiv: Most PAC-3 interceptors are produced in America, which means their sale and any production deals are subject to White House decisions.

During Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s meeting with Trump last month, “The main topic was Patriot interceptors,” according to a senior official familiar with the talks.

Trump raised hopes at the Ankara summit when he said Ukraine would be allowed to produce U.S.-designed Patriot interceptors under license — a step that could eventually reduce Kyiv’s dependence on scarce American deliveries. 

U.S. Ambassador to NATO Matthew Whitaker made clear that production would not solve the immediate shortage. 

“A long-term production agreement will not be concluded before this winter,” he told Fox Business, and manufacturing the first missiles would take longer still.

But Trump has now walked that back, last week saying: “We have not agreed to that. We’re talking about it. But it’s a hard thing to give away, that kind of technology.” 

Following a Reuters report that the U.S. had almost exhausted its missile stocks thanks to the war against Iran, Trump is now focusing on rebuilding U.S. supplies. Asked on Thursday about Zelenskyy’s calls for more Patriot missiles, he said: “We want missiles too.”

Ukraine has also signed a deal to get PAC-2 interceptors being made in Germany, but they are unlikely to arrive before next year.

Faced with a shortage of interceptors, Kyiv is now looking at a more aggressive campaign to hit Russian launchers.

“The Russians must understand that a few minutes after the launch, the entire team that launches the rocket must die from our ballistic missile,” Fedorov said.

Europe’s unbalanced effort

That puts the immediate burden on Europe, where allies are once again searching their own arsenals — and one another’s — for interceptors that could reach Ukraine before winter.

Germany supplied three Patriot systems from its own military stocks and subsequently arranged two more through a deal under which the U.S. would replenish the Bundeswehr. The Netherlands assembled the components for another complete system, including five launchers, a radar and missiles.

But with stocks now stretched thin, governments face limits of their own. 

Warsaw confirmed in July that it had released several PAC-3 interceptors after requests from NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte and senior U.S. commanders. Polish outlet Defence24 reported that just five missiles were transferred.

Even that triggered a political backlash. Opposition lawmakers accused the government of weakening the country’s defenses at a time when Russian missiles and drones have repeatedly strayed across its border.

Countries closer to Russia are now becoming less likely to give up existing Patriots because their armed forces already regarded their air defenses as insufficient for national requirements, according to a European diplomat granted anonymity to discuss sensitive diplomatic contacts.

That is shifting attention toward Southern European countries, which have contributed less to Ukraine than Germany and many Northern European donors.

Spain’s Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez confirmed in 2024 that Madrid was sending missiles to Ukraine, but the government has not disclosed their type or amount.

Spain’s defense ministry did not respond to a question from POLITICO whether it had recently been approached for more interceptors or was considering another transfer. It instead pointed to Spain’s wider military support for Ukraine and its NATO commitments.

Greece — which traditionally sees fellow NATO member Turkey as its greatest security threat — has not announced any Patriot transfers to Ukraine. Greek media reported in July that Ukraine had requested as many as 200 older PAC-2 interceptors from Athens.

The Greek defense ministry did not respond to POLITICO’s request for comment.

Prying open Europe’s arsenals

This isn’t the first time European allies have had to cobble together Patriot missile deliveries from their own limited stocks.

At a February meeting, Ukraine’s Fedorov said he and Rutte worked through a list of interceptors held by European allies, asking governments for whatever they could spare.

“Dear defense minister of Poland, can you give us five?” Fedorov recalled in this week’s interview. 

Berlin offered to top up the effort. “If you get 20 out of all the countries, I’ll give you an extra five,” Fedorov quoted German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius as saying. “That’s the exercise we had to perform to get more than 20. And it is a hard mission.”

Kyiv is continuing those types of talks with its allies. 

“Of course, Ukrainian diplomats have been working with Spain, Greece and everyone in the world who has [PACs],” said the senior official familiar with the talks. “Everything depends on the U.S., and the lack of political will to help influences everyone else.”

“The American administration could have helped, but they don’t do this. And as the result it’s been hard with everyone else,” they added.

For Kyiv, the arguments over allied stockpiles are unfolding against a ticking clock. With demand for PAC-3 interceptors surging in the Middle East, the Pentagon replenishing its own stock and many European countries worrying about their own ability to fend off a future Russian attack, Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha said Ukraine was struggling to buy, exchange or secure any available rounds.

“We are literally fighting for every missile,” Sybiha said.

Veronika Melkozerova reported from Kyiv.

PISA, Italy — Giorgia Meloni doesn’t want to be beaten at her own game.

With an election approaching next year and a new far-right rival emerging, the Italian prime minister — whose political origins lie in Italy’s post-fascist right — is putting aside the moderate image she has built over her four years in office and hardening her tone on migration and security.

Meloni’s government was the first in the EU to attack the Spanish government over a sudden influx of migrants from Morocco into the Spanish exclave of Ceuta last week. 

While France and other countries tightened border checks, Italy went further and announced it had suspended the EU’s free-movement Schengen agreement with Madrid. Now, in Italian airports, passengers from Spain are asked to join a different line. 

Meloni’s office has made clear it has no intention of lifting the controls until at least Aug. 15, escalating the clash with Spain, which retaliated by imposing checks on travelers from Italy.

“We will not back down one millimeter on illegal immigration,” Meloni posted on X while her allies attacked the socialist Spanish government, accusing it of failing to manage migration flows. “Defending our borders, stopping human traffickers, and ensuring effective repatriation will continue to be this government’s policy,” she added.

The clash with Spain is just the latest sign that the Italian leader is doing all she can to secure her core, hard-right electorate in the face of a challenge from the right by Roberto Vannacci, a former general and member of the European Parliament.

With an election expected as early as next spring, Vannacci’s far-right National Future party has been advancing in the polls, overtaking one of Meloni’s coalition partners, the far-right League party, and gaining on another, Forza Italia, according to POLITICO’s Poll of Polls. 

For Meloni, who began her political career in the youth wing of Italy’s post-fascist movement, the challenge strikes particularly close to home.

“There is no doubt that there is concern about containing the competition from National Future,” said Marco Tarchi, a leading right-wing political scientist. “It all boils down to a sharpening of tone. The issues — security, immigration, identity — remain the same as before.” 

During the electoral campaign that brought her to power in 2022, Meloni promised to crack down on illegal migration by putting in place a naval blockade off Italy’s coast. Though that project never ultimately happened, Meloni’s government did open detention hubs in Albania to house migrants while their asylum applications are processed. 

Vannacci, who is campaigning on security and a hard line on immigration, is calling for a more radical solution: “remigration” — a yet-to-be-detailed plan to encourage migrants to return to their countries of origin.

The crisis in Ceuta, during which tens of thousands of migrants crossed from Morocco into the Spanish exclave and nearly 100 died, provided Meloni with an opportunity to show that fighting irregular migration remains an absolute priority for her government.

Meloni’s reaction was “purely the result of domestic political calculations,” said Giorgio Gori, a member of the European Parliament from the left-wing Democratic Party. The Italian prime minister is trying to secure her electorate “by showing that she is loyal to the right-wing slogan and propaganda on migration and beyond.”

For Giovanni Orsina, director of the political science department at Rome’s Luiss Guido Carli University, Meloni’s priority at this stage is “that the Brothers of Italy [Meloni’s party] doesn’t start losing votes too” — in preparation for a potential alliance with Vannacci before or after next year’s election.

“Vannacci has been growing a lot in polls, especially over the past two months,” said Lorenzo Pregliasco from the YouTrend polling firm, noting that National Future is polling at over 7 percent. 

“Without Vannacci, the center-right could lose the upcoming election,” he said. “These seven points matter a lot.”

The Vannacci effect

Nicola Procaccini, Meloni’s lieutenant and co-chair of the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) group, denies that Meloni is shifting on policy to protect herself from Vannacci.

“She stands where she has always stood,” he told POLITICO. “She simply isn’t the racist, xenophobic fascist she was made out to be when she first took office. And she isn’t one now, either.” 

Meloni is also facing a challenge to her support for Ukraine, with both the League and Vannacci advocating a softer line on Moscow, opposing military aid to Kyiv and arguing against an increase in defense spending. 

Though Meloni has portrayed herself as a strong backer of Ukraine, her reliance on the League for support has meant Italy has contributed just €3 billion in four years, roughly the equivalent of €1 a month for every Italian citizen, less than the cost of an espresso.

Italy has also declined to join NATO’s PURL (Prioritized Ukraine Requirements List), an arms-buying scheme set up last summer after U.S. President Donald Trump ended new military aid commitments to Kyiv.

Ukraine is where Meloni’s real difference with Vannacci lies, argued Tarchi, who teaches at the University of Florence and is considered the key figure of a movement called the New Right.

“Otherwise, the gap is artificially exaggerated in rhetoric and posturing for tactical reasons,” he said.

Meloni’s allies haven’t ruled out an alliance with Vannacci but they stress that the possibility will depend on where he stands on key values such as foreign policy.

If he seeks “to position Italy, alongside Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea, clearly, it is not possible to stand together,” said Procaccini. “If, instead, he chooses the West — the democracies, Western nations, Western liberal democracies — then we can certainly stand together.”

A World Health Organization (WHO) warehouse storing emergency health supplies in Ukraine has been destroyed, as Kyiv and Moscow exchanged fresh missile strikes overnight, causing several deaths and leaving tens of people injured.

Russia launched a “massive” strike on Odesa overnight, according to Ukrainian emergency services, with at least eight people injured. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said in an X post on Sunday that the “brutal strike” on the city targeted energy infrastructure as well as residential buildings and the port.

A separate Russian strike on the Saltivka district of Kharkiv killed two people and injured at least 21 more, according to the head of the region’s state administration. Ukraine’s emergency services said firefighters rescued seven people from the upper floors of a high-rise building.

Another overnight strike on the Zhytomyr region injured three people, Ukrainian emergency services said.

Meanwhile, five people died in a Ukrainian overnight drone attack on the Russian city of Belgorod, the regional crisis centre said on Sunday. Acting governor Alexander Shuvayev said earlier on Sunday that three people were killed and 25 others injured in the “massive terrorist drone attack” by Kyiv. The death toll later rose to five.

Zelenskyy condemned what he described as “ballistic terror” attacks on Odesa, Kharkiv, Pavlohrad, and other regions. “Every such attack on human life serves as a constant reminder – we need more pressure, more sanctions against Russia, and more air defense for Ukraine,” he said.

Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, director-general of the World Health Organization, said on Sunday that a WHO warehouse in Dnipro in Ukraine was destroyed by a strike on Friday.

The warehouse held humanitarian supplies for frontline health facilities. No casualties were reported, as a WHO staff member and drivers managed to evacuate 130 of approximately 300 pallets and left the area before the attack.

“I cannot say loudly enough: attacks on health care MUST STOP. Otherwise, people are deprived of lifesaving healthcare,” Tedros said.