The face of Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni was erased from a church fresco in Rome following a controversy over the artwork earlier this week. The affair began with painter Bruno Valentinetti’s restoration of a fresco at Rome’s Basilica of San Lorenzo in Lucina, which he first painted in the early 2000s. One of the figures in the restored fresco, it was noticed, bore an uncanny resemblance to Meloni. The likeness sparked outrage among opposition parties, prompting the Ministry of Culture and the Diocese of Rome to open an inquiry. According to a Wednesday report in La Repubblica, a daily paper, the painter said he had since painted over the face on Tuesday night. “That’s what the Vatican wanted,” Valentinetti told Italian media. “Yes, it is the prime minister’s face,” he confessed, “but based on the previous painting.” POLITICO reached out to the Vatican for comment but did not receive an answer ahead of publication. The culture ministry said in a statement on Wednesday that following the erasure of the face, Rome’s special superintendent had informed the rector of the basilica of the applicable rules. “Any restoration work requires an authorization request to the Religious Buildings Fund of the Interior Ministry, which owns the property, as well as to the Vicariate and the Special Superintendency of Rome, accompanied by a sketch of the image,” the statement said. While Meloni had previously laughed off the issue, noting “I definitely don’t look like an angel,” it remained unclear on Wednesday how Italy’s right-wing leader felt about being so unceremoniously erased. POLITICO contacted Meloni’s office as well as the rector of the basilica for comment but did not immediately receive a response.

LONDON — Britain’s pubs are in distress. The beer-loving Nigel Farage has spied an opening. The Reform UK leader and his chief whip Lee Anderson are set to unveil a raft of new policies Tuesday meant to support struggling publicans — and punch a Labour bruise. It comes days after Chancellor Rachel Reeves — under pressure from a highly-organized pubs industry — was forced to U-turn on plans from her budget and announce a three-year relief package for the U.K.’s ailing hospitality sector. Farage isn’t alone — the government’s other rivals are setting out pub-friendly policies too, and are helping to push the plight of the British boozer up the political agenda.  But it’s the latest populist move by the right-wing outfit, whose leader often posts pictures from the pub on social media and has carefully cultivated an ale-drinking man-of-the people persona, to capture the attention of an electorate increasingly soured on Labour’s domestic efforts. ‘GENUINE PISS ARTIST’ Reform will on Tuesday lift the lid on a five-point plan to “save Britain’s pubs,” promising a slew of tax cuts for the sector — including slashing sales tax VAT to 10 percent, scrapping the employer National Insurance increase for the hospitality sector, cutting beer duty by 10 percent, and phasing out business rates for pubs altogether. The party will also pledge to change “beer orders” regulation, which sees large pub companies lock landlords into contracts that force them to buy beer from approved suppliers at much higher prices than the open market. Reform says the plan would be funded through social security changes — reinstating a two-child cap on universal credit, a move the party claims would save around £3 billion by 2029-30. “Labour has no connection to how real life works,” Farage said earlier this month as he lambasted government plans to lower the drink drive limit. One of the British pub industry’s biggest names thinks Farage could have a genuine opening with voters on this front. The Reform boss has “got the massive advantage in that he’s a genuine piss artist,” Tim Martin, the outspoken owner of the British pub chain JD Wetherspoons, said. “He genuinely likes a sherbet, which, when it comes to pubs, people can tell that, whereas I don’t think [they do] with the other party leaders,” he said. The pub boss recounted watching as Farage “whacked down two pints and had two cigarettes” ahead of an appearance on BBC Question Time in which Martin also featured, as other politicians hovered over their briefing notes. The dangers of upsetting the pub industry have not been lost on Labour’s political opponents. | Ben Stansall/AFP via Getty Images Green MP Siân Berry is less impressed with Farage’s pub shtick, however. She accuses him of “playing into a stereotype of pubs as spaces for older white men to sit and drink.” “Most people who run a pub business these days know that it needs to be a family space,” she said. SHOW US THE POLICY Either way, Farage is exploiting an opening left by Labour, which riled up some pubs with its planned shake-up of business rates. “When the Labour government came in, the pub industry was already weak — and they piled on more costs,” said Wetherspoons’ boss Martin. Since Labour won power in 2024 Reeves has also hiked the minimum wage employers must pay their staff, increased employer national insurance contributions, and raised beer duties. While the industry cautiously welcomed Reeves’ business rate U-turn last month, they say there’s still more to do. “This will make a significant difference, as three quarters of pubs are now going to see their bills staying the same or going down,” Andy Tighe, the British Beer and Pub Association (BBPA)’s strategy and policy director, said of the U-turn — but “it doesn’t solve everything,” he added. “For most operators, it’s those big sorts of taxes around business rates, VAT, duty, employment-related taxes that make the real difference, ultimately, to how they think about the future,” he said.  A U.K. Treasury spokesperson said: “We are backing Britain’s pubs — cutting April’s business rates bills by 15 percent followed by a two year freeze, extending World Cup opening hours and increasing the Hospitality Support Fund to £10 million to help venues. “This comes on top of capping corporation tax, cutting alcohol duty on draught pints and six cuts in interest rates, benefiting businesses in every part of Britain,” they added. ALSO PITCHING The dangers of upsetting the pub industry have not been lost on Labour’s political opponents. Politicians of all stripes are keen to engage with the industry, Tighe says. “Pubs matter to people and that’s why I think political parties increasingly want to ensure that the policies that they’re putting forward are pub-friendly,” he said.  Polling found that nearly half (48 percent) of Farage’s supporters in 2024 think pubs in their local area have deteriorated in recent years. | Henry Nicholls/AFP via Getty Images The Tories say they will abolish business rates for pubs, while the Liberal Democrats have pledged to cut their VAT by 5 percent. The Greens’ Berry also wants to tackle alcohol advertising which she says pushes people to drink at home. “A pub is a different thing in a lot of ways, it is more part of the community — drinking second,” the left-wing party’s representative said. “I think the evidence base for us is not to be anti-pub, but it might be against advertising alcohol.” Industry bigwigs like Martin have consistently argued that pubs are being asked to compete with supermarkets on a playing field tilted against them.  “They must have tax equality with supermarkets, because they can’t compete with supermarkets, which are much stronger financial institutions than pubs,” he said, citing the 20 percent VAT rate on food served in pubs — and the wider tax burden pubs face.  GLOOMY OUTLOOK The plight of the local boozer appears to be occupying British voters too. Polling from the think tank More in Common conducted in August 2025 found almost half of Brits (44 percent) go to the pub at least once a month — and among people who voted Labour in 2024 that rises to 60 percent. The same polling found nearly half (48 percent) of Farage’s supporters in 2024 think pubs in their local area have deteriorated in recent years — compared to 31 percent of Labour voters. “Reform voters are more likely than any other voter group to believe that their local area is neglected,” Louis O’Geran, research associate at More in Common, said. “These tangible signs of decline — like boarded up pubs and shops — often come up in focus groups as evidence of ‘broken Britain’ and drive support for Reform,” he added.  The job now for Farage, and his political rivals, is to convince voters their local watering hole is safe in their hands.

Listen on * Spotify * Apple Music * Amazon Music Keine Brandmauer in München: Nach zwei Jahren sind drei AfD-Politiker wieder auf die Münchner Sicherheitskonferenz eingeladen. MSC-Chef Wolfgang Ischinger setzt auf Dialog statt Ausgrenzung, auch wenn die Entscheidung für Kritik bei den Grünen und Sicherheitsbedenken in der Union sorgt. Pauline von Pezold und Gordon Repinski analysieren die Hintergründe der Einladung und das juristische Tauziehen hinter den Kulissen.  Wahlkampf-Check Mecklenburg-Vorpommern: In Schwerin zeichnet sich ein Zweikampf zwischen SPD und AfD ab, während die CDU in Umfragen bei 13 Prozent stagniert. Im 200-Sekunden-Interview bezieht CDU-Spitzenkandidat Daniel Peters Stellung: Wie viel „Politikwechsel“ ist mit ihm machbar und wo zieht er die Linie gegenüber der AfD?  Eskalation im Iran: Während das Regime in Teheran mit äußerster Brutalität gegen die eigene Bevölkerung vorgeht und die Armeen der EU-Staaten als Terrororganisationen einstuft, stellt sich die Frage nach der Rolle des Westens. Nahost-Experte Daniel-Dylan Böhmer, Korrespondent für Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik von  WELT, ordnet ein, warum ein US-Militärschlag unter Donald Trump aktuell unwahrscheinlich bleibt und welche Vermittler jetzt gefragt sind. 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 Host und POLITICO Executive Editor Gordon Repinski: Instagram: @gordon.repinski | X: @GordonRepinski. 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

U.S. President Donald Trump’s increasingly overt attempts to bring down the Cuban government are forcing Mexico’s President Claudia Sheinbaum into a delicate diplomatic dance. Mexico is the U.S.’s largest trading partner. It is also the primary supplier of oil to Cuba since the U.S. seized control of Venezuela’s crude. Now, Sheinbaum must manage her relationship with a mercurial Trump, who has at times both praised her leadership and threatened to send the U.S. military into her country to combat drug trafficking — all while appeasing her left-wing party Morena, factions of which have historically aligned themselves with Cuba’s communist regime. That balance became even more difficult for Sheinbaum this week following reports that Mexico’s state-run oil company, Pemex, paused a shipment of oil headed for Cuba, which is grappling with shortages following the U.S. military action earlier this month in Venezuela. Asked about the suspension, the Mexican president said only that oil shipments are a “sovereign” decision and that future action will be taken on a “humanitarian” basis. On Thursday, Trump ramped up the pressure, declared a national emergency over what he couched as threats posed by the Cuban government and authorized the use of new tariffs against any country that sells or provides oil to the island. The order gives the administration broad discretion to impose duties on imports from countries deemed to be supplying Cuba, dramatically raising the stakes for Mexico as it weighs how far it can go without triggering economic retaliation from Washington — or worse. “It’s the proverbial shit hitting the fan in terms of the spillover effects that would have,” said Arturo Sarukhán, former Mexican ambassador to the U.S., referring to the possibility of a Pemex tanker being intercepted. Sheinbaum still refuses to hit back too hard against Trump, preferring to speak publicly in diplomatic platitudes even as she faces new pressure. Her posture stands in marked contrast to Canada’s Mark Carney, whose speech at Davos, urging world leaders to stand up to Trump, went viral and drew a swift rebuke from the White House and threats of new tariffs. But the latest episode is characteristic of Sheinbaum’s approach to Trump over the last year — one that has, so far, helped her avoid the kinds of headline-grabbing public ruptures that have plagued Carney, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and French President Emmanuel Macron. Still, former Mexican officials say Trump’s threats — though not specific to Mexico — have triggered quiet debate inside the Mexican government over how much risk Sheinbaum can afford to absorb and how hard she should push back. “My sense is that right now, at least because of what’s at stake in the counter-narcotics and law enforcement agenda bilaterally, I think that neither government right now wants to turn this into a casus belli,” Sarukhán added. “But I do think that in the last weeks, the U.S. pressure on Mexico has risen to such a degree where you do have a debate inside the Mexican government as to what the hell do we do with this issue?” A White House official, granted anonymity to speak candidly about the administration’s approach, said that Trump is “addressing the depredations of the communist Cuban regime by taking decisive action to hold the Cuban regime accountable for its support of hostile actors, terrorism, and regional instability that endanger American security and foreign policy.” “As the President stated, Cuba is now failing on its own volition,” the official added. “Cuba’s rulers have had a major setback with the Maduro regime that they are responsible for propping up.” Sheinbaum, meanwhile, responded to Trump’s latest executive order during her Friday press conference by warning that it could “trigger a large-scale humanitarian crisis, directly affecting hospitals, food supplies, and other basic services for the Cuban people.” “Mexico will pursue different alternatives, while clearly defending the country’s interests, to provide humanitarian assistance to the Cuban people, who are going through a difficult moment, in line with our tradition of solidarity and respect for international norms,” Sheinbaum said. The Mexican embassy in Washington declined further comment. Cuba’s Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez, in a post on X, accused the U.S. of “resorting to blackmail and coercion in an attempt to make other countries to join its universally condemned blockade policy against Cuba.” The pressure on Sheinbaum to respond has collided with real political constraints at home. Morena has long maintained ideological and historical ties to Cuba, and Sheinbaum faces criticism from within her coalition over any move that could be seen as abandoning Havana. At the same time, she has come under growing domestic scrutiny over why Mexico should continue supplying oil abroad as fuel prices and energy concerns persist at home, making the “humanitarian” framing both a diplomatic shield and a political necessity. Amid the controversy over the oil shipment, Trump and Sheinbaum spoke by phone Thursday morning, with Trump describing the conversation afterward as “very productive” and praising Sheinbaum as a “wonderful and highly intelligent Leader.” Sheinbaum’s remarks after the call point to how she is navigating the issue through ambiguity rather than direct confrontation, noting that the two did not discuss Cuba. She described it as a “productive and cordial conversation” and that the two leaders would “continue to make progress on trade issues and on the bilateral relationship.” With the upcoming review of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement on trade looming, even the appearance of defying Trump’s push to cut off Cuba’s oil lifelines carries the potential for economic and diplomatic blowback. It also could undo the quiet partnership the U.S. and Mexico have struck on border security and drug trafficking issues. Gerónimo Gutiérrez, who served as Mexican ambassador to the U.S. during the first Trump administration, described Sheinbaum’s approach as “squish and muddle through.” “She obviously is trying to tread carefully with Trump. She doesn’t want to irritate him with this matter,” Gutiérrez said, adding that “she knows that it’s a problem.” Meanwhile, Cuba’s vulnerability has only deepened since the collapse of Venezuela’s oil support following this month’s U.S. operation that ousted President Nicolás Maduro. For years, Venezuelan crude served as a lifeline for the island, a gap Mexico has increasingly helped fill, putting the country squarely in Washington’s crosshairs as Trump squeezes Havana. With fuel shortages in Cuba triggering rolling blackouts and deepening economic distress, former U.S. officials who served in Cuba and regional analysts warn that Trump’s push to choke off remaining oil supplies could hasten a broader collapse — even as there is little clarity about how Washington would manage the political, humanitarian or regional fallout if the island tips over the edge. Trump has openly suggested that outcome is inevitable, telling reporters in Iowa on Tuesday that “Cuba will be failing pretty soon,” even as he pushed back on Thursday that the idea he was trying to “choke off” the country. “The word ‘choke off’ is awfully tough,” Trump said. “It looks like it’s not something that’s going to be able to survive. I think Cuba will not be able to survive.” The administration, however, has offered few details about what would come next, and Latin American analysts warn that the U.S. and Mexico are likely to face an influx of migrants — including to Florida and the Yucatán Peninsula — seeking refuge should Cuba collapse. There is no evidence that the Trump administration has formally asked Mexico to halt oil shipments to Cuba. Trump’s executive order leaves it to the president’s Cabinet to determine whether a country is supplying oil to Cuba and the rate at which it should be tariffed — an unusual deferral of power for a president for whom tariffs are a favorite negotiating tool. But former U.S. officials say that absence of an explicit demand to Mexico does not mean the pressure is theoretical. Lawrence Gumbiner, who served as chargé d’affaires at the U.S. embassy in Havana during the first Trump administration, believes Washington would be far more likely to lean on economic pressure than the kind of military force it has used to seize Venezuelan oil tankers. At the same time, the administration’s push on Venezuela began with a similar executive order last spring. “There’s no doubt that the U.S. is telling Mexico to just stop it,” Gumbiner said. “I think there’s a much slimmer chance that we would engage our military to actually stop Mexican oil from coming through. That would be a last resort. But with this administration you cannot completely discount the possibility of a physical blockade of the island if they decide that it’s the final step in strangling the island.”

The center-right European People’s Party is eyeing “better implementation” of the Lisbon Treaty to better prepare the EU for what it sees as historic shifts in the global balance of power involving the U.S., China and Russia, EPP leader Manfred Weber said on Saturday. Speaking at a press conference on the second day of an EPP Leaders Retreat in Zagreb, Weber highlighted the possibility of broadening the use of qualified majority voting in EU decision-making and developing a practical plan for military response if a member state is attacked. Currently EU leaders can use qualified majority voting on most legislative proposals, from energy and climate issues to research and innovation. But common foreign and security policy, EU finances and membership issues, among other areas, need a unified majority. This means that on issues such as sanctions against Russia, one country can block agreement, as happened last summer when Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico vetoed a package of EU measures against Moscow — a veto that was eventually lifted. Such power in one country’s hands is something that the EPP would like to change.  As for military solidarity, Article 42.7 of the Lisbon Treaty obliges countries to provide “aid and assistance by all the means in their power” if an EU country is attacked. For Weber, the formulation under European law is stronger than NATO’s Article 5 collective defense commitment. However, he stressed that the EU still lacks a clear operational plan for how the clause would work in practice. Article 42.7 was previously used when France requested that other EU countries make additional contributions to the fight against terrorism, following the Paris terrorist attacks in November 2015.  Such ideas were presented as the party with a biggest grouping in the European Parliament — and therefore the power to shape EU political priorities — presented its strategic focus for 2026, with competitiveness as its main priority.  Keeping the pulse on what matters in 2026  The EPP wants to unleash the bloc’s competitiveness through further cutting red tape, “completing” the EU single market, diversifying supply chains, protecting economic independence and security and promoting innovation including in AI, chips and biotech, among other actions, according to its list 2026 priorities unveiled on Saturday. On defense, the EPP is pushing for a “360-degree” security approach to safeguard Europe against growing geopolitical threats, “addressing state and non-state threats from all directions,” according to the document. The EPP is calling for enhanced European defense capabilities, including a stronger defense market, joint procurement of military equipment, and new strategic initiatives to boost readiness. The party also stressed the need for better protection against cyberattacks and hybrid threats, and robust measures to counter disinformation campaigns targeting EU institutions and societies. On migration and border security, the EPP backs tougher asylum admissibility rules, faster returns, and strengthened external borders, including reinforced Frontex operations and improved digital systems like the Entry/Exit System.  The party also urged a Demographic Strategy for Europe amid the continent’s shrinking and aging population. The text, initiated by Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ), member of the EPP, wants to see demographic considerations integrated into EU economic governance, cohesion funds, and policymaking, while boosting family support, intergenerational solidarity, labor participation, skills development, mobility and managed immigration.  Demographic change is “the most important issue, which is not really intensively discussed in the public discourse,” Weber said. “That’s why we want to highlight this, we want to underline the importance.” 

BEIJING — Dialogue between the U.K. and China is essential for “world peace,” Chinese President Xi Jinping told Keir Starmer Thursday, heaping praise on Britain’s center-left prime minister as the two men marked a thawing of their relationship. The U.K. prime minister said he wanted “more sophisticated” ties with the world’s second-largest economy, during a visit where he is seeking growth for the British economy and co-operation on issues such as climate change. It is the first visit by a U.K. prime minister to China for eight years, which has proven controversial in Britain due to concerns over Beijing’s human rights record, economic imbalances and accusations of cyber sabotage in Britain by Chinese entities. But in remarks at the start of their meeting in Beijing’s Great Hall of the People, both men avoided difficult issues and heaped praise on each other’s countries. After years of chilled relations under Conservative U.K. governments, Starmer said: “China is a vital player on the global stage and it is vital to build a more sophisticated relationship, where we can identify opportunities to collaborate, but also to allow meaningful dialogue on areas where we disagree.” Communist leader Xi, speaking through an interpreter, singled out Britain’s Labour Party, saying it had in the past “made important contributions to the growth of China-U.K. relations.” He added that there had been “twists and turns that did not serve the interests of our countries” in recent years. Describing the state of the world as “turbulent and fluid,” Xi said more dialogue between the two nations was “imperative,” whether “for the sake of world peace and stability or for our two countries’ economies and peoples.” He added the two men would “stand the test of history” if they could rise above their differences. Acknowledging the furor over China in the U.K., Xi said: “Your visit this time has drawn a lot of attention. Sometimes good things take time. “As long as it is the right thing that serves the fundamental interests of the country and the people, then as leaders we should not shy away from difficulties.” Starmer has tried to take a more measured approach than Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, who warned the world order was fractured after his recent trip to Beijing and was later threatened with tariffs by U.S. President Donald Trump. Starmer has insisted he can pursue trade with the U.S., EU and China at the same time in a way that protects national security. The U.K. prime minister said he wanted to focus on “global stability and security, growth and shared challenges like climate change.” Starmer did not raise specific human rights concerns or policy detail during his brief on-camera remarks, though he did make reference to having “meaningful dialogue” on areas where the countries disagree. Ahead of the meeting, Starmer declined to say whether he would raise Russia’s war in Ukraine with Xi, or whether he would ask the Chinese leader to put pressure on Russian President Vladimir Putin to end the fighting. China and the U.K. are due to sign a series of deals later on Thursday. They are expected to cover areas including visa-free travel and mutual recognition of professional qualifications, but collaboration on deeper technology including wind farms appeared less likely.

Hungarian prosecutors said they are bringing charges against Budapest Mayor Gergely Karácsony over his role in organizing a pride rally last June in the Hungarian capital, which authorities had previously banned. The case stems from Hungary’s 2021 “Child Protection Act,” a law that restricts the public depiction of homosexuality and gender transition for minors and has been widely criticized as curbing LGBTQ+ rights. In March, the Hungarian parliament passed an amendment to the 2021 act that effectively bans assemblies like Pride events. Karácsony, a Green politician and strong opponent of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, opposed the ban and invited people to join the 2025 Budapest Pride rally. The event took place in June, joined by over 100,000 participants, including several European politicians. Two months later, Karácsony was questioned by Hungary’s state police. Last December, he told his followers in a social media post he would face government charges for the case. According to the Budapest prosecutor’s office, Karácsony faces a fine, not a trial. The indictment says the Budapest mayor had published a video message announcing that the city’s Metropolitan Municipality would organize the rally, and inviting his followers to attend. The event qualified as an assembly outlawed under the new amendment, the prosecutors argue. By proceeding with the event, Budapest’s mayor is accused of committing the “misdemeanor of violating freedom of association and assembly,” the federal prosecutor office’s statement says. Budapest’s mayor expressed outrage over the prosecutor’s statement, writing on X: “Prosecutors are seeking to fine me without a trial for announcing and organizing Budapest Büszkeség.” In a separate post, he wrote: “I refuse to be intimidated or silenced. I will never accept that standing up for freedom, free speech, or love can be treated as a crime. Despite threats or punishment, I will continue to fight. Freedom and love cannot be banned!” Karácsony could not be immediately reached for comment. He is one of the ’10 to Watch’ in the POLITICO 28: Class of 2026.

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen welcomed talks between U.S. President Donald Trump and NATO chief Mark Rutte that led to the “framework for a future deal” on Greenland — but she stressed that the island’s sovereignty was not negotiable. “NATO is fully aware of the Kingdom of Denmark’s position. We can negotiate about everything politically — security, investments, the economy. But we cannot negotiate about our sovereignty,” Frederiksen said in a statement published Thursday morning. “I have been informed that this has not been the case either. And, of course, only Denmark and Greenland themselves can make decisions on matters concerning Denmark and Greenland,” she added. “The Kingdom of Denmark continues to seek a constructive dialogue with allies on how we can strengthen security in the Arctic, including the United States’ Golden Dome, provided that this takes place with respect for our territorial integrity.” Frederiksen’s exhalation came as Trump sought to dial down weeks of incendiary rhetoric over Greenland, signaling openness to negotiations while retreating from threats of force or tariffs against European allies to grab the island. Frederiksen also said Arctic security was a matter for the entire NATO alliance and welcomed discussions between NATO leadership and Washington, signaling openness to deploying the Golden Dome missile defense system, “provided that this takes place with respect for our territorial integrity.” Speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Trump said he had “tremendous respect” for the people of Greenland and Denmark but added that “every NATO ally has an obligation to be able to defend their own territory.” Later Wednesday, Trump said he and Rutte had formed a “framework of a future deal with respect to Greenland” and backed down from his previous tariff threats against EU countries who opposed him on the issue. Observers were relieved earlier Wednesday after Trump said he would not use “force” to obtain Greenland — but demanded “immediate negotiations” with relevant European countries.

STRASBOURG — The European Parliament plans to ask the European Commission on Monday to start the process for activating the bloc’s most powerful trade weapon against the United States, a senior trade lawmaker said on Wednesday. “I expect that the coordinators will decide to request to start the investigation procedure of the [Anti-Coercion Instrument]. Of course, between now and Monday there’s a lot of time and we will see what will happen,” trade committee chair Bernd Lange told reporters in Strasbourg. The statement by Lange, a German Social Democrat, comes as relations between the EU and the United States hit an all-time low, following President Donald Trump’s threats to seize Greenland, a self-governing Danish territory. Trump has also threatened to impose tariffs on European countries that have rallied to Copenhagen’s side. Resolve within the bloc is growing to hit back against Trump, with the Parliament also formally freezing on Wednesday the ratification of the EU-U.S. trade deal that was struck last summer. “Europe must speak the language Trump understands. We are ready to move forward with the ACI. I would have preferred a decision today, but I hope for a strong and united statement on Monday. We don’t have time to waste,” said Swedish MEP Karin Karlsbro of the liberal Renew group. Jörgen Warborn, the European People’s Party top trade MEP, took a more cautious line, reflecting the party’s transatlantic leanings. “It’s too early to say” if he will agree to ask Commission to launch the ACI, Warborn told reporters. Further, Warborn told POLITICO: “We now need to coordinate further and discuss which options we have in case of further actions. Nothing is off the table.” EU leaders are toughening their position and want the European Commission to ready its trade “bazooka,” with Germany joining France in saying it will ask the Commission to explore unleashing the tool at an emergency meeting of leaders on Thursday unless Trump walks back on his threats, POLITICO reported on Tuesday. The trade weapon, which can be deployed at the request of any affected party, including the European Parliament, is one of the EU’s main levers against the U.S.: It includes a wide range of possible measures such as imposing tariffs, restricting exports of strategic goods, or excluding U.S. companies from tenders. A decision to use the instrument would not be taken lightly because it would have a significant impact on the EU economy. This story has been updated.

U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Denmark was “irrelevant” and that he was not concerned about Europe pulling out of the U.S. government bond market, amid fears of U.S. President Donald Trump annexing Greenland and imposing new tariffs. “Denmark’s investment in U.S. Treasury bonds, like Denmark itself, is irrelevant,” Bessent told journalists in Davos on Wednesday morning. “They’ve been selling treasuries for years. I am not concerned at all.” Bessent was responding to chatter that European capitals might try to put pressure on the U.S. government by selling its bonds, driving up its borrowing costs. One Danish pension fund, AkademikerPension, said Tuesday it had decided to divest its holdings of U.S. treasuries, citing Trump’s Greenland threats as one of various factors suggesting that the U.S. is no longer a top-quality credit. The issue of divestment had been raised in a weekend note to clients by Deutsche Bank’s chief foreign exchange strategist George Saravelos. But Bessent said he had received a call from Deutsche Bank Chief Executive Christian Sewing to say that Saravelos’ arguments didn’t represent the bank’s views. “Of course, the fake news media, led by the Financial Times, amplified it,” Bessent said. U.S. bond and stock markets had sold off sharply on Tuesday in response to growing concerns that the U.S.-Europe rift over Greenland could reignite the trade war that was feared in 2025, but which failed to materialize. Bessent also noted that the selloff had been aggravated by volatility in the Japanese bond market, where fears about the country’s long-term ability to pay its debt flared up again. “I think it is very difficult to disaggregate any of the noise around Greenland,” Bessent said, adding that his Japanese counterpart had reassured him that Tokyo would act to keep its bond market stable. Earlier in the press conference, Bessent had repeated his criticism of European leaders’ “inflammatory” commentary on the Greenland dispute and blasted European countries’ announcement that they will deploy military personnel to Greenland. “For those countries to activate their troops, I’m not sure what signal that is supposed to send,” he said. “It’s pretty quixotic.” Bessent’s comments landed a few hours before a highly anticipated speech by Trump. The U.S. president’s arrival in Davos was delayed about three hours due to technical issues with Air Force One.