FRENCH FAR RIGHT CLAIMS MOMENTUM FOR PRESIDENCY AFTER LOCAL ELECTIONS Marine Le Pen’s National Rally failed to win big target cities such as Marseille, Toulon and Nîmes, but the party still thinks it has the upper hand nationwide. By CLEA CAULCUTT in Paris POLITICO illustration. The far-right National Rally may not have won the string of big target cities it was hoping for in France’s local election on Sunday, but its leaders said they had still built up a grassroots momentum that would propel them to victory in next year’s presidential contest. The 2027 presidential election is seen as a decisive moment for the EU as the Euroskeptic and NATO-skeptic National Rally is the current favorite to win the race for the Elysée. This week’s municipal elections are being closely scrutinized to gauge whether Marine Le Pen’s anti-immigration party is still France’s predominant political force. All in all, it was a mixed night for the far right. Its biggest victory came on the Riviera, where one of its allies won Nice, France’s fifth-biggest city. The National Rally had also campaigned hard in other significant southern cities such as Marseille, Toulon and Nîmes. It performed well in all of them but was beaten into second place. The races were close in Toulon and Nîmes, and Le Pen’s party won 40 percent of the vote in Marseille — a considerable share in France’s diverse and cosmopolitan second city. Putting a positive spin on the results, the party leaders stressed that they had won numerous smaller and mid-sized cities and towns, particularly in their southern heartlands, such as Carcassonne, Agde and Menton — adding to the first-round victory in Perpignan last week. National Rally President Jordan Bardella told supporters in Paris the far right had achieved the “biggest breakthrough of its history,” and was seizing “a strong momentum” that signaled “the end of an old world running out of steam.” National Rally mayoral candidate Laure Lavalette casts her ballot during the second round of France’s 2026 municipal elections in Toulon on March 22, 2026. | Miguel Medina/AFP via Getty Images National Rally leader Le Pen meanwhile hailed “dozens” of regional victories and “a strategy of local implantation” that was working. STRONG NATIONWIDE, WEAKER IN BIG CITIES The National Rally’s argument is that traditional parties, particularly on the left, are strong in the big cities but that these do not fully reflect the wider national political currents, which are running toward the right. In Paris, for example, the National Rally candidate and MEP Thierry Mariani scored a dismal 1.6 percent of the vote in the first round on March 15, but nationwide Bardella is still the favorite for next year’s presidential election.   A Harris Interactive poll conducted after Sunday’s municipal elections confirmed Bardella’s position as frontrunner ahead of the 2027 race. Bardella would get 35 percent of the vote in the first round of voting, the survey said, 17 points ahead of the center-right contender, former Prime Minister Édouard Philippe. Still, the municipal election results will definitely reignite concerns among National Rally strategists about whether they really can win in a second round next year, given that the tradition of uniting against the far right in runoffs — something that helped crush Le Pen’s presidential bids in 2017 and 2022 — was on full display on Sunday. In the Mediterranean port city of Toulon, Laure Lavalette, a high-profile National Rally politician and close Le Pen ally, had a promising start in the first round of voting, winning 42 percent of the vote, 13 points ahead of the incumbent conservative mayor Josée Massi. But in Sunday’s runoff, Massi pulled ahead, benefitting from the withdrawal of a conservative candidate. The National Rally had hoped that its swell of support could break that second-round Achilles heel in these municipal elections but this perennial electoral vulnerability — that it is the party everyone gangs up against — looks set to persist. NO RESPITE FOR BARDELLA’S RIVALS The National Rally’s rivals are certainly not dismissing the far right because of its losses in the bigger cities on Sunday. Gabriel Attal, presidential hopeful and leader of President Emmanuel Macron’s Renaissance party, said Sunday’s results showed a rise of the extremes, referring to not just the far-right National Rally but also the far-left France Unbowed, which won in the northeastern city of Roubaix and in the Paris suburb of Saint-Denis. “It’s a warning signal,” he said. “More and more citizens, who voted for them, want things to change, and to change more quickly.” For the conservative Les Républicains, Sunday’s elections were bittersweet. The right won the mayoral jobs in several mid-sized cities including Limoges, Tulle, Brest and Clermont-Ferrand. In France’s fourth city, Toulouse, a former conservative Jean-Luc Moudenc saw off a far-left challenger from France Unbowed, backed by a left-wing coalition. Les Républicains leader Bruno Retailleau on Sunday claimed the right was “the Number One local political force” in France. Les Républicains candidate Rachida Dati at a campaign rally after the announcement of her defeat in the second round of the 2026 Paris municipal elections on March 22, 2026. | Ian Langsdon/AFP via Getty Images But the right was wiped out in Paris, where former Culture Minister Rachida Dati lost to the Socialist Emmanuel Grégoire. And in France’s second-largest city Lyon, the conservative candidate Jean-Michel Aulas, a former football club owner, lost by a narrow margin to the Green incumbent mayor. Retailleau sought to cast the conservatives as the force that could appeal to voters wanting to shut out the extremes, and slammed the National Rally as “demagogues.” There is “a French way, expressed by millions of fellow citizens who want neither the social chaos of [France Unbowed] or the budgetary disorder that the [National Rally’s] economic manifesto would bring about,” he said.  But the Les Républicains party has several presidential hopefuls and no clear path to decide which one will represent them in the presidential race. On Sunday, conservative heavyweights were already calling for the right to agree on a candidate against Bardella. This race for a single candidate to emerge in the middle ground is also likely to accelerate because former Prime Minister Philippe, buoyed by his victory against a strong Communist challenger in Le Havre in Normandy, will now be looking to promote his candidacy. Bardella, by contrast, simply tried to present the National Rally’s onward progression toward the Élysée as inevitable. Borrowing a phrase from former President François Mitterrand’s campaign in 1981 to end the right’s dominance in France, Bardella said the National Rally was now “a tranquil force.” “Our successes are not an achievement, but a beginning,” he said. Laura Kayali contributed reporting.

BERLIN — German Defense Minister Boris Pistorus will spend next week touring the Indo-Pacific with a passel of corporate chiefs in tow to make deals across the region. It’s part of an effort to mark a greater impact in an area where Berlin’s presence has been minor, but whose importance is growing as Germany looks to build up access to natural resources, technology and allies in a fracturing world. “If you look at the Indo-Pacific, Germany is essentially starting from scratch,” said Bastian Ernst, a defense lawmaker from Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s Christian Democrats. “We don’t have an established role yet, we’re only just beginning to figure out what that should be.” Pistorius leaves Friday on an eight-day tour to Japan, Singapore and Australia where he’ll be aiming to build relations with other like-minded middle powers — mirroring countries from France to Canada as they scramble to figure out new relationships in a world destabilized by Russia, China and a United States led by Donald Trump. “Germany recognizes this principle of interconnected theaters,” said Elli-Katharina Pohlkamp, visiting fellow of the Asia Programme at the European Council on Foreign Relations. Berlin, she said, “increasingly sees Europe’s focus on Russia and Asia’s focus on China and North Korea as security issues that are linked.” The military and defense emphasis of next week’s trip marks a departure from Berlin’s 2020 Indo-Pacific guidelines, which laid a much heavier focus on trade and diplomacy. Pistorius’ outreach will be especially important as Germany rapidly ramps up military spending at home. Berlin is on track to boost its defense budget to around €150 billion a year by the end of the decade and is preparing tens of billions in new procurement contracts. But not everything Germany needs can be sourced in Europe. Australia is one of the few alternatives to China in critical minerals essential to the defense industry. It’s a leading supplier of lithium and one of the only significant producers of separated rare earth materials outside China. Australia also looms over a key German defense contract. Berlin is considering whether to stick with a naval laser weapon being developed by homegrown firms Rheinmetall and MBDA, or team up with Australia’s EOS instead. That has become a more sensitive political question in Berlin. WELT, owned by POLITICO’s parent company Axel Springer, reported that lawmakers had stopped the planned contract for the German option, reflecting wider concern over whether Berlin should back a domestic system or move faster with a foreign one. That means what Pistorius sees in Australia could end up shaping a decision back in Germany. TALKING TO TOKYO Japan offers something different — not raw materials but military integration, logistics and technology.  Pohlkamp said the military side of the relationship with Japan is now “very much about interoperability and compatibility, built through joint exercises, mutual visits, closer staff work, expanded information exchange and mutual learning.” She described Japan as “a kind of yardstick for Germany,” a country that lives with “an enormous threat perception” not only militarily but also economically, because it is surrounded by pressure from China, North Korea and Russia.  The Japan-Germany Acquisition and Cross-Servicing Agreement took effect in July 2024, giving the two militaries a framework for reciprocal supplies and services and making future port calls for naval vessels, exercises and recurring cooperation easier to sustain.  Pohlkamp said what matters most to Tokyo are not headline-grabbing deployments but “plannable, recurring contributions, which are more valuable than big, one-off shows of force.” But that ambition only goes so far if Germany’s presence remains sporadic. Bundeswehr recruits march on the market square to take their ceremonial oath in Altenburg on March 19, 2026. | Bodo Schackow/picture alliance via Getty Images Berlin has sent military assets to the region for training exercises in recent years — a frigate in 2021, combat aircraft in 2022, army participation in 2023, and a larger naval mission in 2024. But as pressure grows on Germany to beef up its military to hold off Russia, along with its growing presence in Lithuania and its effort to keep supplying Ukraine with weapons, the attention given to Asia is shrinking. The government told parliament last year it sent no frigate in 2025, plans none in 2026 and has not yet decided on 2027. Germany’s current military engagement in the Indo-Pacific consists of a single P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft, sent to India in February as part of the Indo-Pacific Deployment 2026 exercises.  Germany, according to Ernst, is still “relatively blank” in the region. What it can contribute militarily remains narrow: “A bit of maritime patrol, a frigate, mine clearance.” Pohlkamp said Germany’s role in Asia is still being built “in small doses” and is largely symbolic. But what matters is whether Berlin can turn occasional visits and deployments into something steadier and more predictable. The defense ministry insists that is the point of Pistorius’s trip. Ministry spokesperson Mitko Müller said Wednesday that Europe and the Indo-Pacific are “inseparably linked,” citing the rules-based order, sea lanes, international law and the role of the two regions in global supply and value chains.  The new P-8A Poseidon reconnaissance aircraft stands in front of a technical hangar at Nordholz airbase on Nov. 20, 2025. | Christian Butt/picture alliance via Getty Images The trip is meant to focus on the regional security situation, expanding strategic dialogue, current and possible military cooperation, joint exercises including future Indo-Pacific deployments, and industrial cooperation. That explains why industry is traveling with Pistorius.  Müller said executives from Airbus, TKMS, MBDA, Quantum Systems, Diehl and Rohde & Schwarz are coming along, suggesting Berlin sees the trip as a chance to widen defense ties on the ground. But any larger German role in Asia would have to careful calibrated to avoid angering China — a key trading partner that is very wary of European powers expanding their regional presence. “That leaves Germany trying to do two things at once,” Pohlkamp said. “First, show up often enough to matter, but not so forcefully that it gets dragged into a confrontation it is neither politically nor militarily prepared to sustain.”

President Donald Trump has often frustrated European allies with his overt entreaties to Russian President Vladimir Putin and harsh words for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. But behind the seeming imbalance is a longer-term strategic goal – countering China. The Trump administration believes that incentivizing Russia to end the war in Ukraine, welcoming it back economically and showering it with U.S. investments, could eventually shift the global order away from China. It’s a gamble – and one Ukrainians are concerned with – but it underscores the administration’s belief that the biggest geopolitical threat facing the United States and the West is China, not Putin’s Russia. While countering China isn’t the only reason the administration wants a truce, it does help explain why after more than 15 months of fruitless talks and multiple threats to walk away, the president’s team – special envoy Steve Witkoff and son-in-law Jared Kushner – keep looking for a breakthrough. A Trump administration official, granted anonymity to discuss ongoing negotiations, said finding a “way to align closer with Russia” could create “a different power balance with China that could be very, very beneficial.” The administration’s desire to use Ukraine peace negotiations to counter China has not been previously reported. But many observers believe this plan has little hope of succeeding – at least while Putin and Chinese leader Xi Jinping remain in charge. And the idea of giving Russia economic incentives to grow closer to the U.S. is concerning for Ukraine, said a Ukrainian official, granted anonymity to discuss diplomatic matters. “We had such attempts in the past already and it led to nothing,” they said. “Germany had [Ostpolitik, Germany’s policy toward the East], for that and now Russia is fighting the deadliest war in Europe.” And when it comes to banking on breaking apart China and Russia, the Ukrainian official noted that both countries “have one [thing] in common which you can not beat – they hate the U.S. as a symbol of democracy.” Still, the strategy is in keeping with the administration’s broader foreign policy initiatives aimed at least in part in countering Chinese influence. Taking out Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro and pressuring Cuba’s government to the brink of collapse all diminishes China’s influence in the Western Hemisphere. The administration threatened Panama, which withdrew from Chinese leader Xi’s Belt and Road Initiative a month after Trump took office and called Peru’s deal with China surrounding its deepwater port in Chancay a “cautionary tale.” And striking Iran shifted China’s oil import potential, as Tehran supplied Beijing with more than 13 percent of its oil in 2025, according to Reuters. Indeed, the Trump administration official noted that between Venezuela, Iran and Russia, China was buying oil at below-market rates, subsidizing its consumption “to the tune of over $100 billion a year for the last several years.” “So that’s been a massive subsidy for China by being able to buy oil from these places on the black market, sometimes $30 a barrel lower than what the spot market is,” the person said. Even as there are reports that Russia is sharing intelligence with Iran, the U.S. and Russia keep talking. Witkoff and Kushner met with Kirill Dmitriev, a top adviser to Putin, last week. The Russians called the meeting “productive.” Witkoff said they’d keep talking. These negotiations and the broader efforts to counter China now take place under the spectre of Trump asking several countries, including China, for help securing the Strait of Hormuz. The National Security Strategy, released in November, spilled a fair amount of ink on China, though it often doesn’t mention Beijing directly. Many U.S. lawmakers — from both parties — consider China the gravest long-term threat to America’s global power. “There is a longstanding kind of U.S. strategic train of thought that says that having Russia and China working together is very much not in our interests, and finding ways to divide them, or at least tactically collaborate with the partner who’s less of a long term strategic threat to us,” said said Alexander Gray, Trump’s National Security Council chief of staff in his first term. Gray, who is currently the CEO of American Global Strategies, a consulting firm, compared the effort to former Secretary of State and national security adviser Henry Kissinger, who spearheaded President Richard Nixon’s trip to China during the Cold War in an effort to pull that country away from the Soviet Union. The State Department declined to comment for this report. However, a State Department spokesperson previously told POLITICO that China’s economic ties with Latin American countries present a “national security threat” for the U.S. that the administration is actively trying to mitigate. The White House declined to comment. Fred Fleitz, another Trump NSC chief of staff in his first term, noted that the president has “pressed Putin to end the war to normalize Russia’s relationship with the U.S. and Europe,” and wants Russia to rejoin the G8. “It is clear that Trump wants to find a way to end the war in Ukraine and to coexist peacefully with Russia,” said Fleitz, who now serves as the vice chair for American Security at the America First Policy Institute. “But I also believe he correctly sees the growing Russia-China alliance as a far greater threat to U.S. and global security than the Ukraine War and therefore wants to find ways to improve U.S.-Russia relations to weaken or break that alliance.” Others, however, remain skeptical. Craig Singleton, senior director of the China program at Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said the goal to break Russia and China is “appealing in theory, but in practice the partnership between Moscow and Beijing is iron-clad.” “Obviously there is nothing wrong with testing diplomacy and President Trump is a dealmaker. But history probably suggests that this won’t really result in much,” Singleton added. “The likely outcome [with Russia] is limited tactical cooperation with the U.S., not some sort of durable break with Beijing.” And China seeks to keep Russia as an ally and junior partner in its relationship as a counter to Western powers. Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi reaffirmed the relationship in a press conference this month, saying, “in a fluid and turbulent world, China-Russia relationship has stood rock-solid against all odds.” Secretary of State Marco Rubio, shortly after his confirmation, hinted at the broader strategy, saying in an interview, that “a situation where the Russians are permanently a junior partner to China, having to do whatever China says they need to do because of their dependence on them” is not a “good outcome” for Russia, the U.S. or Europe. But Rubio, like the Trump administration official given anonymity to discuss ongoing negotiations, both acknowledged that fully severing those ties would be a tough lift. “I don’t know if we’ll ever be successful at peeling them completely off a relationship with the Chinese,” Rubio said in February of last year. Adam Savit, director for China policy at the America First Policy Institute, argued that “Russia matters at the margins, but it won’t be a decisive variable in the U.S.-China competition,” and that the “center of gravity is East Asia.” “Russia gives China strategic depth, a friendly border, energy supply, and a second front in Ukraine to sap Western attention,” he said. “Getting closer to Russia could complicate China’s strategic position, but Moscow is a declining power and solidly the junior partner in that relationship.”

LONDON — Trade Secretary Peter Kyle is expected to announce the U.K.’s steel strategy at Tata Steel UK’s mill in Port Talbot on Thursday. The strategy will set out new protections for Britain’s steel sector, slashing quotas on imports of many products from overseas while raising duties outside those caps to 50 percent, two people familiar with the announcement told POLITICO. “The tariff will be doubled to 50 percent in line with what the Europeans have done, the Canadians have done, the Americans have done,” a senior business representative familiar with the plans said. There will “be some exemptions” for products British steelmakers don’t make, they added. British officials have told both U.K. steel producers and downstream importers, who use steel in everything from construction to automotive manufacturing, to expect a 50 percent duty outside of new quotas in a move “likely to be similar to the EU,” said a second industry figure. Both industry figures were granted anonymity as they were not authorized to speak publicly. Last October, the EU announced plans to reduce its quotas on foreign steel imports by almost half and levy a 50 percent tariff on goods exceeding the cap. The move is part of an overhaul of so-called safeguard protections that expire in both the EU and U.K., under World Trade Organization rules, at the end of June. The U.K.’s strategy setting out the future of the sector has been repeatedly delayed. On Thursday, Kyle will set out a new scheme of trade protections to replace the so-called steel safeguards scheme. A Tata Steel UK executive told lawmakers in early February that the government “had eight weeks to save the British steel industry” by shielding it with new protectionist measures from a glut of cheap imports from countries like China. Steel importers, however, are unlikely to get the full gamut of exemptions under the scheme they had hoped for, said the second industry figure, noting they’re “prepared for the worst.” The government will “jeopardize downstream manufacturers if they make the import restrictions too prohibitive,” they said. “There will be some exemptions, but not as many as they hoped for,” said the senior business representative. “This government has been crystal clear in committing to a bright and sustainable future for steelmaking and steel jobs in the U.K., and we will publish a steel strategy shortly setting out how we can achieve a sustainable future for the sector,” said a government spokesperson.

The White House is considering waiving a century-old law that promotes the use of American vessels in maritime commerce, as the Trump administration faces rising fuel prices amid the ongoing war in Iran. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement that the administration may waive the Jones Act, a 1920 statute that requires cargo being moved by water between U.S. ports to be shipped on vessels that are built, owned and registered in the U.S. “In the interest of national defense, the White House is considering waiving the Jones Act for a limited period of time to ensure vital energy products and agricultural necessities are flowing freely to U.S. ports,” Leavitt said. “This action has not been finalized.” The development, which was first reported by Bloomberg News, comes as the White House faces growing political pressure over rising gas and oil prices, with Iran moving to choke off traffic in the critical Strait of Hormuz amid the U.S. and Israel’s ongoing war with the country. It also comes a day after the Trump administration announced it would release 172 million barrels of crude oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, joining more than two dozen member countries in the International Energy Agency’s biggest emergency oil release in history. The war has triggered the largest supply disruption in global oil market history, according to a Thursday report from the IEA, sending crude oil prices soaring to over $100 a barrel before later retreating. The Homeland Security secretary and the Defense secretary can request a waiver in specific circumstances that are in the “interest of national defense.” The federal government has in the past chosen to freeze the law in extreme circumstances that led to substantial supply disruptions, including Hurricane Harvey and Hurricane Maria. Trump administration officials have repeatedly said the rise in fuel prices is a small price to pay for the success of the war, with Leavitt saying Sunday the spike is “a short-term disruption for a long-term gain” during an interview on Fox News. The administration believes it can withstand the political pressure from a surge in prices for as long as a month, POLITICO previously reported. Suspending the Jones Act, however, could anger American-based shipbuilding and shipping interests. Since the White House is signaling the waiver will be temporary, the move, however, would likely not have a significant impact on the U.S.’s relatively small shipbuilding industry, but a waiver “would probably have a small but useful impact on prices,” said Peter Harrell, who served as the White House’s senior director for international economics under the Biden administration. Iran has warned that the war could send oil prices as high as $200 a barrel if the war rages on, but Energy Secretary Chris Wright said that was “unlikely” in a Thursday interview on CNN. Ari Hawkins contributed to this report.

LE HAVRE, France — Former Prime Minister Édouard Philippe is often seen as the centrist candidate best placed to challenge the far right in France’s presidential election next year — but his political future is under threat in the gritty industrial port of Le Havre. Philippe, one of President Emmanuel Macron’s most popular former lieutenants, has been mayor of this city in Normandy since 2020, but polling suggests he now faces a make-or-break battle not to lose it to a Communist rival in the municipal elections of March 15 and 22. If he does lose his northern stronghold — which he also ran from 2010 to 2017 — Philippe’s loss will send shockwaves through France. The center-right politician has said that will mean he won’t run in the 2027 election against the candidate from the far-right National Rally (RN) party — either Marine Le Pen or Jordan Bardella, the current frontrunners for the presidency. It will also be a grave personal disappointment for Philippe, who has long held ambitions to run for the Élysée. As prime minister from 2017 to 2020 he steered France through the Covid pandemic, but was ultimately sidelined by Macron when the president wanted to give his government a “new direction,” a decision that many in the administration believed was due to Philippe’s higher popularity ratings. This month’s local elections are an opportunity to launch his campaign ahead of the 2027 presidential race. But Philippe now risks slipping up before he even reaches the starting line. A shock poll from OpinionWay landed last month and predicted that Philippe could be squeezed out by the far right and far left in the second round of the contest in Le Havre. Philippe was seen winning only 40 percent, pipped by the Communist Jean-Paul Lecoq on 42 percent. Franck Keller, backed by the RN, was set to win 18 percent. The center-right politician has said that will mean he won’t run in the 2027 election against the candidate from the far-right National Rally (RN) party — either Marine Le Pen or Jordan Bardella. | Adnan Farzat/NurPhoto via Getty Images On Friday, POLITICO caught up with 55-year-old Philippe on the campaign train. He was dashing between events but still keen to grab a beer, drop the formalities and chat with voters — in true retail politician style. “Elections are always tight here,” he said in an interview with POLITICO between two campaign stops on Friday. “Le Havre is a working-class city where the Communist Party is very rooted and very strong.” While the Communist Party is no longer the national force it used to be, many of the issues close to the hearts of its voters are the same as those driving the National Rally vote in other parts of the country. Here in Le Havre, blue-collar voters stress job protection, early retirement and a strong welfare state. In the 2027 presidential race, Philippe would have to convince voters, disaffected after a decade under Macron, that his brand of center-right politics is what France needs. A SHAKY STRONGHOLD The man who might bring Philippe down is hardly a political big gun. Jean-Paul Lecoq is a 67-year-old electrician who spent much of his life repairing typewriters in Le Havre. Unlike Philippe, who was educated in France’s elite schools, Lecoq had a long career in local politics before becoming a member of parliament in 2017. Here in Le Havre, blue-collar voters stress job protection, early retirement and a strong welfare state. | Lou Benoist/AFP via Getty Images Lecoq’s team has been buoyed by the OpinionWay poll — the only one available on Le Havre — which showed Philippe leading in the first round with 37 percent, but Lecoq winning the runoff. In a market in the Sanvic neighbourhood of Le Havre, Lecoq lampooned Philippe for using the local election as a stepping stone for his presidential ambitions. “He wanted to link the local and the presidential election,” he said. “With Philippe, it’s me, me, me. I know best.” Le Havre’s incumbent mayor “has done some beautiful brand-new projects in Le Havre, turned it into a showcase. But he hasn’t taken care of the city property … the schools, the sports clubs,” Lecoq said. The idea he has one eye on the Élysée is getting some traction with voters. “If he’s elected, and then launches into a presidential campaign, who is going take over here?” asked Cédric Perisbeau, a former company manager and stay-at-home father. “If the person is not up to the job, it could all fall apart here.” While the political forces in Le Havre are different from the national dynamics, where the far-right National Rally is tipped to win the presidency, Le Havre is a testing ground for the type of politics Philippe wants to offer France: debt reduction, long-term investments, and fewer hand-outs. He describes himself as “offering very ambitious projects for Le Havre.” The man who might bring Philippe down is hardly a political big gun. Jean-Paul Lecoq is a 67-year-old electrician who spent much of his life repairing typewriters in Le Havre. | Lou Benoist/AFP via Getty Images “There are few freebies in our campaign, whether it’s free water or transport,” he told a group of voters. If you stop investing in the city, he argued, eventually “it hurts a lot.” But retiree Linda Deloge wanted him to put more resources into childcare and housing. “I’m fed up with all the road works,” complained Deloge, who voted for Philippe in the last election but is undecided this time. Deloge said Phillippe’s track record was “pretty good,” particularly on rehabilitating run-down neighborhoods, but added she wanted a greater focus on welfare. DOUBLE OR NOTHING The National Rally is relishing its position as potential kingmaker in Le Havre. In the 2020 municipal election the RN failed to make the second round, but this time it could do so, challenging Philippe to his right. The RN has betrayed no willingness to step back in the second round to help Philippe. “We’ll never pull out,” said one adviser to National Rally leader Marine Le Pen, who was granted anonymity to speak candidly about party strategy. Even if it lets the Communists in? “We don’t care,” he said. Philippe, one of President Emmanuel Macron’s most popular former lieutenants, has been mayor of this city in Normandy since 2020. | Pool photo by Benoit Tessier/AFP via Getty Images A poll published late last year showed that far-right leader Bardella would win in most second-round scenarios against mainstream candidates, but that Philippe posed the biggest threat, securing 47 percent to Bardella’s 53 percent. Indeed, Philippe’s supporters say the far right is deliberately exploiting local politics to wipe him out ahead of the presidential election. “The National Rally candidate is such a caricature of the outsider who has been parachuted in to stir things up,” said a former adviser from Philippe’s Horizons party, a reference to Keller, who was a councilor in the upscale Paris neighborhood of Neuilly-sur-Seine. “The National Rally isn’t going to win this election, so all they are going to do is favor a Communist candidate.” Although polls have repeatedly shown Philippe as having the best shot against the far right in 2027, he is being challenged within his own camp by a glut of presidential hopefuls including former Prime Minister Gabriel Attal, conservative former Interior Minister Bruno Retailleau, former Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin and many others. A hard-earned victory in a dockers’ city would propel Philippe ahead of his rivals, his supporters argue, and cement him as a locally-rooted politician who can appeal to voters beyond the center right. “It’s like a party primary for him,” said Gilles Boyer, an MEP and longtime ally of Philippe. “The Havre is a difficult city. If he wins this election … it’ll give him a boost.” Philippe also tells his electorate that his national ambitions could help them too. “I tell the people here, that if by an extraordinary chance, someone from Le Havre became president of France, it wouldn’t be a bad thing for Le Havre,” he said. Sarah Paillou contributed reporting.

PARIS — The rising price of oil is undermining the European Union’s efforts to rein in Vladimir Putin’s shadow fleet of sanctioned oil tankers. Russian oil is in high demand as the war in the Middle East and tensions around the Strait of Hormuz tighten global supply, sending benchmark crude prices above $100 per barrel on Monday. That risks weakening a central plank of the EU’s efforts to cut off funding for the Russian president’s war in Ukraine: making it harder and more expensive for Moscow to export oil through a network of aging vessels operating outside the Western shipping system. EU countries have already sanctioned hundreds of tankers and are working on new measures aimed at the insurance, crewing and other maritime services that allow those ships to operate — tools Brussels hopes will make the shadow fleet increasingly costly and difficult to run. But a tighter oil market means buyers may still be willing to purchase discounted Russian crude. As prices rise, the financial incentive to secure cheaper Russian barrels grows, offsetting the higher risks and costs associated with sanctioned ships. The demand is expected to be driven by Asian countries like China and India — the world’s first and third-largest importers of oil — which rely heavily on Middle Eastern supplies and are likely to turn to Russia to make up for any shortfalls. Indian refiners have already reportedly moved to buy more Russian crude after the U.S. temporarily eased pressure on the South Asian country by allowing purchases to resume last week. India imports, on average, 10 million metric ton of crude oil per month through the Strait of Hormuz, said Vaibhav Raghunandan, an EU-Russia analyst at the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air. “Even if half of this volume is replaced with Russian volumes at sea, it will translate to huge profits for the Kremlin.” The shift comes after millions of barrels of oil were stranded at sea last week as escalating tensions blocked the Strait of Hormuz, a maritime choke point through which a fifth of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas flows. Meanwhile, around €1.3 billion of Russian crude is currently at sea looking for buyers, Raghunandan estimates. SANCTIONS STALL The market squeeze also comes at a difficult moment for Brussels. The EU is trying to push through a new sanctions package aimed at tightening restrictions on Russia’s shadow fleet — including limits on maritime services — but the proposal is currently stalled after Hungary vetoed the plan. The shadow fleet includes hundreds of aging tankers used to transport Russian crude outside Western oversight. Last month, President Donald Trump announced a trade deal with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi that included a commitment from New Delhi to halt purchases of Russian oil in exchange for reduced trade barriers with the United States. | Andrew Harnik/Getty Images EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas warned last week that rising oil prices risk boosting Moscow’s war effort. “When the oil price goes up, it actually benefits Russia to fund its war,” she said, making the case for the maritime services ban at a virtual meeting of EU foreign ministers. Malte Humpert, founder and senior fellow at The Arctic Institute, said a prolonged Iran–U.S. conflict would likely benefit Moscow by pushing energy prices higher. “Rising prices for sure,” he said, noting that Russian oil and gas revenues have been declining in recent months.  “The question is how long the Hormuz situation is going to last,” he added. “If this is over in a week, the effects are probably negligible. If this continues for a few weeks … especially as we’re getting into the summer months, that’s when exports really pick up again from the Russian side.” Humpert argued that supply disruptions “always favor the seller who can deliver on time, reliably and discounted.” India has been a key buyer of Russian crude since the start of the war in Ukraine, though purchases had recently declined under pressure from Washington. Last month, President Donald Trump announced a trade deal with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi that included a commitment from New Delhi to halt purchases of Russian oil in exchange for reduced trade barriers with the United States. Before that, Indian ports had become a major destination for tankers carrying Russian crude that were shut out of Western markets by sanctions. Last September, the Boracay, a ship under EU sanctions carrying approximately $100 million in Russian oil, was boarded by the French navy, which found two Russian crew members presented by her captain as “security agents” on board.  Upon the ship’s release, it went on to the port of Vadinar in western India, home to an offshore oil terminal that supplies local refineries, maritime traffic data shows. Elena Giordano contributed reporting to this article.

The State Department is adding resources to evacuate stranded Americans in the Middle East, and the Pentagon is scrambling to increase the number of U.S. troops gathering intelligence for operations — the latest indications that the Trump administration was not fully prepared for the broader war it is now facing. Amid criticism that the administration has been too slow to alert U.S. citizens that they should leave or help those then caught in the maelstrom, the State Department is sending extra staff to Athens to aid U.S. citizens, according to a current and former department official familiar with consular issues. A State Department official familiar with the process said Wednesday morning that the top leaders in the department had taken charge of the evacuation operation, much of which would typically be handled by consular and bureau officials. U.S. Central Command, meanwhile, is asking the Pentagon to send more military intelligence officers to its headquarters in Tampa, Florida, to support operations against Iran for at least 100 days but likely through September, according to a notification obtained by POLITICO. It’s the first known call for additional intelligence personnel for the Iran war by the administration, and a sign the Pentagon is already allocating funding for operations that may stretch long beyond President Donald Trump’s initial four-week timeline for the conflict. The rush to add people and resources to support efforts that are often organized well in advance of U.S. military action highlights how the Trump team had not fully anticipated the wide fallout of the war it launched alongside Israel on Saturday. “What we’ve seen is a completely ad hoc operation where it appeared that nobody actually understood or believed that military action was imminent,” said Gerald Feierstein, a former senior U.S. diplomat who dealt with the Middle East. “It seems like they woke up on Saturday morning and decided that they were going to start a war.” The U.S. executed a massive and multi-pronged operation with Israel that targeted Iranian security infrastructure and killed off the country’s supreme leader and other top officials. But American and Israeli officials have not yet articulated a clear end goal for the operation. Trump and his aides also have struggled to offer solid reasons why the strikes had to happen now. Iran has retaliated by firing on U.S. and other targets across the Middle East. At least six U.S. troops died at port in Kuwait, raising questions about whether their facility had been fortified well enough against the apparent drone strike. Some U.S. diplomatic facilities have also been struck, and concerns are rising that the U.S. and its Middle East allies could run low on munitions. Several of the people interviewed for this article were granted anonymity because the issue is sensitive and in some cases they were not authorized to speak publicly. The Pentagon is also trying to ship more air defenses to the region, especially smaller, less expensive counter-drone systems that the department has been developing over the last several years, a U.S. official said. The strike that killed the American troops is of particular concern for war planners because it came from a relatively cheap Shahed drone that can often fly below existing radars. The U.S. is, at least right now, using missiles that cost as much as several million dollars to defeat the drones, which cost a fraction of that. Iran has thousands of such drones in its stockpiles, and dozens of them have already punched their way through existing air defenses. Many of the counter drones the U.S. could respond with have not been used in combat, the official added, since American forces have not faced a drone threat this pervasive up to this point. The Pentagon did not immediately respond to a request for comment. But the limited preparation to assist Americans wanting to leave the region has had the most immediate impact. While at least two U.S. embassies — in Lebanon and Israel — began sending staff and their families out in the final days before the strikes, most diplomatic missions in the region did not make such moves until after the war began. It also was Monday before the State Department issued its first major alert to Americans, urging them to “depart now” from 14 countries in the region. By that point, it was hard to get a ticket out because airspace closures had led to numerous canceled flights. The department has since expanded its alerts and evacuations to at least two other countries, Cyprus and Pakistan. “It’s been a complete dereliction of duty,” said Jeffrey Feltman, a former U.S. ambassador to Lebanon who oversaw the evacuation of thousands of American citizens from that country in 2006. “Iran is a menace without question, but there was no imminent threat to us, and yet [Trump has] left thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands of Americans in harm’s way without planning how to get them out.” The State Department official familiar with the process said relatively few people at the department had been read in on the war plans. That may have contributed to the challenges on evacuation orders and travel alerts, the official acknowledged. The goal is to stabilize the situation as quickly as possible. That includes staffing up in Athens, and potentially additional places if the crisis worsens. The additional staff can help Americans who arrive on charter or other flights if they need to renew their passports, loans to help them buy tickets or even temporary lodging, the current and former State Department official familiar with consular issues said. The State Department said in a statement that a 24-7 task force set up Saturday morning had helped more than 6,500 Americans abroad with guidance on security and travel options. State also noted it had issued travel alerts to Americans about the region starting in January, though those alerts were relatively routine for a region with many turbulent spots. Dylan Johnson, the assistant secretary of State for global public affairs, wrote on X Wednesday morning that since Feb. 28, the day the war began, “over 17,500 American citizens have returned to the United States from the Middle East.” But that number appeared to include many Americans who’d left without any assistance from the State Department. White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt said Wednesday that the president had told regional leaders “that we expect their help” in getting Americans home. “The administration is already rapidly chartering flights free of charge and booking commercial options, which we expect to become increasingly available as time goes on and the success of this mission further comes to fruition,” she said. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment about its broader preparations for the impact of a spreading war in the Middle East. The Trump administration has, in general, cut back the number of people involved in its national security policymaking process and reduced the meetings that would normally loop in many departments and agencies. Aside from Rubio and a handful of his top aides, much of the State Department has been left in the dark about many key decisions. Rubio also serves as national security adviser, meaning he spends much of his time at the White House. Still, current and former U.S. diplomats pointed out that the possibility the U.S. would go to war in the Middle East was not exactly a secret. The administration spent weeks dramatically ramping up its military presence in the region and issuing warnings to Iran. So people at the State Department, including political appointees in the consular affairs bureau, should have known to reduce embassy staffing and urged Americans to leave the region many days or weeks ago, some argued. “There was no reason not to prepare staff departure plans as this was ongoing, particularly since the Defense Department knew the likely Iranian military responses,” the former State Department official familiar with consular services said. “They also could have started messaging to the region about the fluid security situation.” Democrats have seized on the evacuation debacle to lambast the Trump administration. It was something of a reversal: Republicans ripped the Biden administration over its handling of the evacuation of Americans and Afghan allies in the final days of the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021. Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) called for oversight hearings on the State Department’s alleged failure to plan for aiding Americans in the region. “A core function of our foreign policy is to keep Americans safe,” Coons said in a statement. “Thus far, the president’s response to this reckless incompetence has simply been ‘that’s the way it is.’” In a letter shared with POLITICO, Democrats on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee urged Rubio on Wednesday to “take more concrete steps to facilitate the departure” of American citizens and embassy personnel now in harm’s way amid the widening conflict. The lawmakers want Rubio to explain by Friday how decisions are being made about which countries require departures and what criteria determine the use of charter planes versus the need for military aircraft. They also asked what alternative evacuation options are being considered amid frequent airspace closures, among other efforts. The letter was spearheaded by Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.). Several governors, including California’s Gavin Newsom, New York’s Kathy Hochul and Illinois’ JB Pritzker, have also been communicating with State Department staffers to get updates on Americans stranded in the region as the governors field calls from panicked residents. Governors’ staff questioned what the administration is doing to bring Americans back, including whether charter or military aircraft are being considered, according to a person familiar with the discussions. “Americans are stranded abroad, and we all have a responsibility to do everything in our power to safely get them home,” Pritzker wrote in a letter to Rubio on Wednesday. Daniella Cheslow, Oriana Pawlyk, Cheyanne Daniels, Shia Kapos, Nick Reisman and Jeremy B. White contributed to this report.

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán is seizing on fears of an energy price shock from the Iran war to try to claw back ground against his challenger Péter Magyar ahead of an April 12 election. About 10 percentage points behind in the polls, Orbán is now putting energy costs at the heart of the election race. He accuses Magyar’s Tisza party of conspiring with the EU and Ukraine to cut Hungary off from cheap Russian oil, arguing those flows could have cushioned Budapest from the spiraling crude costs triggered by the war on Iran. Sensing an electoral advantage in a showdown with Brussels, Orbán last month vetoed the EU’s all-important €90 billion funding line for Kyiv, accusing the Ukrainians of slow-walking repairs to the Druzhba pipeline that carries discounted Russian oil across Ukraine to Hungary. On Jan. 27 the pipeline was blown up in a drone attack, Kyiv reported at the time. That ruptured pipeline has now become even more politically sensitive thanks to the supply crisis in the Persian Gulf. Orbán is a close ally of Donald Trump, and the Iran war is a rare point of dissonance between him and the U.S. president. Still, the main target of Orbán’s attacks is not Washington but the domestic opposition, which he claims put Hungary in a vulnerable position by siding with the EU and Ukraine rather than fighting to preserve Russian oil supplies. Orbán and his ruling Fidesz party are also playing up alleged security threats from the war in the Middle East — raising the country’s terror level. ORBÁN PLAYS THE ENERGY CARD “Developments involving Iran may have an indirect impact on Hungary’s security, with particular regard to our energy security,” Orbán said on Sunday. “Due to the conflict, significant energy price increases are expected on global markets. In this situation, it is crucial that we break President [Volodymyr] Zelenskyy’s oil blockade against Hungary.” Orbán accuses Péter Magyar’s Tisza party of conspiring with the EU and Ukraine to cut Hungary off from cheap Russian oil. | Bálint Szentgallay/NurPhoto via Getty Images The Hungarian prime minister’s political director, Balázs Orbán, on Monday pushed to make the link to Magyar, accusing him of “acting against the Hungarian people” by teaming up with Brussels and Kyiv on oil supplies. “[Magyar] dismissed the government’s warnings about the Ukrainian oil blockade as fearmongering and panic-mongering, claiming there is no danger and no war, while at the same time openly campaigning for Hungary’s detachment from Russian energy — the very core of the Brussels- and Kyiv-backed program he represents,” he said. “Hungarians are not naïve. They can clearly see that, given the global instability and the escalating Middle East conflict, advocating for decoupling from Russian oil and accepting Ukrainian blackmail would be madness,” Balázs Orbán added. Members of the Hungarian government have posted satellite imaginary claiming Kyiv lied about the pipeline’s not being operational, and have demanded Zelenskyy immediately resume oil deliveries. Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó accused Zelenskyy of “not telling the truth,” claiming that “at a time when maritime oil transport is uncertain due to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, blocking a functioning land supply route is a direct attack against Hungary.” The Hungarian prime minister’s political director, Balázs Orbán, on Monday pushed to make the link to Magyar, accusing him of “acting against the Hungarian people.” | Attila Kisbenedek/AFP via Getty Images Hungary also raised the matter on Sunday when EU ambassadors met for crisis talks on the situation in Iran. Budapest’s top envoy, Bálint Ódor, used his intervention to accuse Kyiv of “weaponizing the pipeline” to interfere in Hungary’s elections, according to a diplomat who was present. MAGYAR’S REPLY Magyar has built his lead over Orbán by focusing on the government’s cronyism and economic mismanagement, and has been keen not to be cast as an ally of the EU and Kyiv. His Tisza party’s program does indeed vow to halt Russian energy supplies, by only by the distant date of 2035. Indeed, far from fighting the Fidesz government’s claims over the pipeline, he issued a letter on Monday proposing a joint on-site inspection of Druzhba. “The Hungarian people rightly expect their responsible leaders to make decisions based on facts and in a transparent manner, and not via messages on Facebook and in propaganda,” the letter read. Magyar has also insisted that if the Ukrainian threat to Hungary’s energy infrastructure is as serious as Orbán claims, he should trigger NATO’s Article 4, which allows member states to consult with their allies if they believe their territorial integrity or security is under threat. Geoffrey Smith and Jamie Dettmer contributed reporting to this article

Belgium working with France seized a Russian shadow fleet oil tanker in the North Sea late Saturday, as Europe ramps up the targeting of Moscow’s fleet of vessels suspected of carrying sanctioned oil or damaging undersea infrastructure. Armed forces boarded the ship on Saturday evening and were escorting it to the port of Zeebrugge, Belgium’s Defense Minister Theo Francken wrote on X around 1 a.m. local time Sunday. France’s President Emmanuel Macron said French helicopters participated in the “major blow for the ghost fleet.” Prime Minister Bart De Wever congratulated Belgium’s armed forces for “last night’s successful operation” and thanked France for its assistance. “Belgium will uphold international maritime law and the security of its territorial waters,” De Wever added in a post on X. Belgian Foreign Minister Maxime Prévot said in a separate post that the operation “was carried out within the International Task Force on the Shadow Fleet, alongside our G7, Nordic and Baltic partners.” The EU has struggled to stop Russia from exporting oil with the shadow fleet. As of December, it had designated about 600 vessels as part of the fleet.