Ukraine’s latest peace plan proposes a demilitarized “free economic zone” in the Donbas region where American business interests could operate — an attempt to bring President Donald Trump on board, according to two people familiar with the matter. Trump, who sounded skeptical about the prospects for a breakthrough in Oval Office comments on Wednesday, “is aware of” the latest 20-point plan Ukraine sent to the White House Wednesday, spokesperson Karoline Leavitt said Thursday. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy also spoke to reporters about the proposal Thursday, suggesting that control of the buffer zone in eastern Ukraine still needs to be worked out but that, under the new proposal, troops from both Russia and Ukraine would be barred. That, Zelenskyy said, marked “a compromise” from the original 28-point peace plan authored by the U.S. with Russian input, under which Russian troops would control the region. But, he noted that Ukraine would only withdraw its forces after receiving meaningful security guarantees from allies against future aggression from Moscow. The two people familiar with the proposal, granted anonymity because they were not authorized to speak with the press, both expressed skepticism that Russia would back the plan, crafted this week with input from European leaders. Trump, they suggested, still views Ukraine as the weaker, more malleable party in the conflict, especially in the wake of a corruption scandal that forced Zelenskyy’s longtime chief of staff, Andriy Yermak, to step down. “The White House is using this latest corruption scandal to pressure Zelenskyy,” one of the people said. While European leaders have asked Trump to go to Berlin next week to continue talks, the person added that was highly unlikely unless there are substantial changes in the joint Ukrainian-European plan. Leavitt did not elaborate on what Trump thinks about the revised proposal, or if he would send aides to take part in additional conversations with European and Ukrainian officials scheduled for this weekend in Paris. “If there is a real chance of signing a peace agreement, if we feel like those meetings are worthy of someone on the United States’ time this weekend, then we will send a representative,” she said. “It’s still up in the air if we believe real peace can be accomplished … [but] he’s sick of meetings for the sake of meetings.” According to officials from two of the countries involved, Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff intends to take part in talks with national security officials this weekend. Trump has suggested that the security guarantees Ukraine is seeking, aimed at deterring Russia from attacking Ukraine again, would have to come primarily from Europe. Zelenskyy said Thursday that he and his team had “a constructive and in-depth conversation” about security guarantees with U.S. secretary of state Marco Rubio, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Witkoff and Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, along with military officials and NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte. One European defense official, granted anonymity to discuss internal discussions, said that allies on the continent have been planning to move troops and surveillance equipment to Ukraine. Coalition troops would fly drones inside Ukraine to monitor whatever peace plan is agreed to, and while there will be boots on the ground they “will not serve on the front line.” The official said that the Europeans are stressing to the Americans that they need deeper political coordination with Washington on the talks, reflecting frustration about not having a seat at the table up to this point. During a visit to Washington this week, U.K. Defence Secretary John Healey told reporters that the so-called Coalition of the Willing is “ready to do the heavy lifting in Europe, alongside the contribution to security guarantees that President Trump has talked about from the U.S. But we’re ready to step in, and we will help secure that peace long-term and protect the deal that President Trump is looking to negotiate.” He sketched an outline of some of the work being done, including some 200 military planners from more than 30 nations who have already participated in “reconnaissance visits to Ukraine, and we have the troops ready. “ Over the last several months, Trump has repeatedly ruled out Ukraine’s future membership in NATO, the longstanding transatlantic security alliance that deems an attack on any member nation an attack on all. The revised Ukraine peace plan, however, removed language from an initial version barring Ukraine from ever joining the alliance, according to the two people familiar with the proposal. It also calls for elections in Ukraine, something Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin have been pushing for, the two people said. But Zelenskyy’s new commitment to hold elections shortly after a peace is secured may not be enough to satisfy Moscow, which has demanded that Russia control all of the contested Donbas region and guarantees that Ukraine will be denied future accession to NATO.

BERLIN — Germany will launch a new federal counter-drone unit as concerns mount over a surge of suspicious drones overflying military sites and critical infrastructure, Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt said Tuesday. The formation will be part of the federal police’s national special operations arm, and will be trained and certified specifically for drone detection and neutralization, Dobrindt said at an event outside Berlin. The unit will eventually grow to 130 officers, deployed across Germany and moved quickly to hot spots when needed. Germany has over €100 million budgeted this year and next for counter-drone technology, the minister said. The systems include sensors and jammers designed to disrupt hostile drone signals, with the capability to intercept or shoot them down if necessary. “It is an important signal that we are confronting hybrid threats,” Dobrindt said. “We are creating a clear mission to detect, intercept and, yes, also shoot down drones when necessary. We cannot accept that hybrid threats, including drones, become a danger to our security.” Dobrindt said Germany will procure systems from both German and Israeli manufacturers, with further purchases expected in the coming months. This week, Germany’s state interior ministers are also due to decide whether to establish a joint federal-state counter-drone center, bringing together federal and state police forces and the military to coordinate detection and response. Berlin’s new unit marks its most significant move so far toward a standing national counter-drone capability. German security agencies have tracked hundreds of suspicious drone flyovers this year, including near barracks, naval facilities and critical infrastructure. Officials warn that small, commercially available drones are increasingly deployed in Europe for espionage, probing defenses and hybrid operations. Some European governments have pointed the finger of blame at Russia, but so far proof is lacking. Airports across Europe have also been forced to close thanks to overflying drones. Last month, the U.K., France and Germany sent staff and equipment to help Belgium counter drone incursions around sensitive facilities. Many countries are trying to figure out how to deal with the drones in a safe and legal way, as shooting them down could endanger people on the ground.

Europe’s security does not depend solely on our physical borders and their defense. It rests on something far less visible, and far more sensitive: the digital networks that keep our societies, economies and democracies functioning every second of the day. > Without resilient networks, the daily workings of Europe would grind to a > halt, and so too would any attempt to build meaningful defense readiness. A recent study by Copenhagen Economics confirms that telecom operators have become the first line of defense in Europe’s security architecture. Their networks power essential services ranging from emergency communications and cross-border healthcare to energy systems, financial markets, transport and, increasingly, Europe’s defense capabilities. Without resilient networks, the daily workings of Europe would grind to a halt, and so too would any attempt to build meaningful defense readiness. This reality forces us to confront an uncomfortable truth: Europe cannot build credible defense capabilities on top of an economically strained, structurally fragmented telecom sector. Yet this is precisely the risk today. A threat landscape outpacing Europe’s defenses The challenges facing Europe are evolving faster than our political and regulatory systems can respond. In 2023 alone, ENISA recorded 188 major incidents, causing 1.7 billion lost user-hours, the equivalent of taking entire cities offline. While operators have strengthened their systems and outage times fell by more than half in 2024 compared with the previous year, despite a growing number of incidents, the direction of travel remains clear: cyberattacks are more sophisticated, supply chains more vulnerable and climate-related physical disruptions more frequent. Hybrid threats increasingly target civilian digital infrastructure as a way to weaken states. Telecom networks, once considered as technical utilities, have become a strategic asset essential to Europe’s stability. > Europe cannot deploy cross-border defense capabilities without resilient, > pan-European digital infrastructure. Nor can it guarantee NATO > interoperability with 27 national markets, divergent rules and dozens of > sub-scale operators unable to invest at continental scale. Our allies recognize this. NATO recently encouraged members to spend up to 1.5 percent of their GDP on protecting critical infrastructure. Secretary General Mark Rutte also urged investment in cyber defense, AI, and cloud technologies, highlighting the military benefits of cloud scalability and edge computing – all of which rely on high-quality, resilient networks. This is a clear political signal that telecom security is not merely an operational matter but a geopolitical priority. The link between telecoms and defense is deeper than many realize. As also explained in the recent Arel report, Much More than a Network, modern defense capabilities rely largely on civilian telecom networks. Strong fiber backbones, advanced 5G and future 6G systems, resilient cloud and edge computing, satellite connectivity, and data centers form the nervous system of military logistics, intelligence and surveillance. Europe cannot deploy cross-border defense capabilities without resilient, pan-European digital infrastructure. Nor can it guarantee NATO interoperability with 27 national markets, divergent rules and dozens of sub-scale operators unable to invest at continental scale. Fragmentation has become one of Europe’s greatest strategic vulnerabilities. The reform Europe needs: An investment boost for digital networks At the same time, Europe expects networks to become more resilient, more redundant, less dependent on foreign technology and more capable of supporting defense-grade applications. Security and resilience are not side tasks for telecom operators, they are baked into everything they do. From procurement and infrastructure design to daily operations, operators treat these efforts as core principles shaping how networks are built, run and protected. Therefore, as the Copenhagen Economics study shows, the level of protection Europe now requires will demand substantial additional capital. > It is unrealistic to expect world-class, defense-ready infrastructure to > emerge from a model that has become structurally unsustainable. This is the right ambition, but the economic model underpinning the sector does not match these expectations. Due to fragmentation and over-regulation, Europe’s telecom market invests less per capita than global peers, generates roughly half the return on capital of operators in the United States and faces rising costs linked to expanding security obligations. It is unrealistic to expect world-class, defense-ready infrastructure to emerge from a model that has become structurally unsustainable. A shift in policy priorities is therefore essential. Europe must place investment in security and resilience at the center of its political agenda. Policy must allow this reality to be reflected in merger assessments, reduce overlapping security rules and provide public support where the public interest exceeds commercial considerations. This is not state aid; it is strategic social responsibility. Completing the single market for telecommunications is central to this agenda. A fragmented market cannot produce the secure, interoperable, large-scale solutions required for modern defense. The Digital Networks Act must simplify and harmonize rules across the EU, supported by a streamlined governance that distinguishes between domestic matters and cross-border strategic issues. Spectrum policy must also move beyond national silos, allowing Europe to avoid conflicts with NATO over key bands and enabling coherent next-generation deployments. Telecom policy nowadays is also defense policy. When we measure investment gaps in digital network deployment, we still tend to measure simple access to 5G and fiber. However, we should start considering that — if security, resilience and defense-readiness are to be taken into account — the investment gap is much higher that the €200 billion already estimated by the European Commission. Europe’s strategic choice The momentum for stronger European defense is real — but momentum fades if it is not seized. If Europe fails to modernize and secure its telecom infrastructure now, it risks entering the next decade with a weakened industrial base, chronic underinvestment, dependence on non-EU technologies and networks unable to support advanced defense applications. In that scenario, Europe’s democratic resilience would erode in parallel with its economic competitiveness, leaving the continent more exposed to geopolitical pressure and technological dependency. > If Europe fails to modernize and secure its telecom infrastructure now, it > risks entering the next decade with a weakened industrial base, chronic > underinvestment, dependence on non-EU technologies and networks unable to > support advanced defense applications. Europe still has time to change course and put telecoms at the center of its agenda — not as a technical afterthought, but as a core pillar of its defense strategy. The time for incremental steps has passed. Europe must choose to build the network foundations of its security now or accept that its strategic ambitions will remain permanently out of reach. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Disclaimer POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT * The sponsor is Connect Europe AISBL * The ultimate controlling entity is Connect Europe AISBL * The political advertisement is linked to advocacy on EU digital, telecom and industrial policy, including initiatives such as the Digital Networks Act, Digital Omnibus, and connectivity, cybersecurity, and defence frameworks aimed at strengthening Europe’s digital competitiveness. More information here.

Microsoft’s CEO said Monday that his company is increasingly looking to Europe as a key region for its artificial intelligence strategy, as the continent seeks to bolster digital independence from the United States and China. “We are investing in Germany, in the European Union with our capital, putting it at risk,” Satya Nadella said during an interview on the MD Meets podcast, hosted by Mathias Döpfner, the chair and CEO of Axel Springer, the German media group that owns POLITICO. “These are not AI factories or cloud factories that sit in the United States. They are in the continent and in the country,” he added. In the conversation, Nadella stressed that digital sovereignty is a critical consideration for any nation. “I think that every country, whether it’s at the European Union level or at the country level, like in Germany, I think sovereignty is an important consideration,” he said. “So every country would like to ensure that there is continuity of their supply, there is resilience in their supply. And there’s agency in which they operate. And that’s one of the reasons why we have made all these commitments.” Nadella said that true sovereignty goes beyond infrastructure. “The new chapter of sovereignty is … what is a German automaker or a German industrial company? How are they going to have their own AI factory and foundation model that is unique to them?” he said. “That is, to me, the true definition of sovereignty.” Nadella’s comments come as European leaders increasingly warn that the continent cannot afford to cede the “digital sphere” to the global superpowers of the U.S. and China without serious consequences. At the Digital Sovereignty Summit in Berlin on Nov. 18, Germany and France unveiled a series of initiatives aimed at strengthening European technological independence, spanning cloud services, AI and public procurement. Among the measures were commitments to favor European solutions in public contracts, safeguard European data from foreign surveillance and confront the market dominance of major U.S. cloud providers. “If we let the Americans and the Chinese have all of the champions, one thing is certain: we may have the best regulation in the world, but we won’t be regulating anything,” French President Emmanuel Macron warned. Nadella acknowledged China’s strength in human capital and open-source innovation but stressed the continued leadership of the U.S. “The United States still continues to lead, whether it’s on the AI systems or whether it is the frontier models or the AI products around the world,” he said. “It is not just the ingenuity of the American tech sector, but also the American tech stack being the most trusted tech stack in the world.” Nadella argued that Europe could emerge as a major winner in the global AI landscape if it focuses on actually implementing and spreading the technology across industries. “Quite frankly, the country that is going to really win is going to be the one that can scale up broadly on AI, use AI broadly in their economy, in their health sector, in their manufacturing sector, in the education sector, and grow their economy,” he said. “Germany or Europe could be the big winner as long as they do the hard work of actually getting the technology in, re-skilling, using that technology,” he added.

LONDON — Staff who protect the U.K.’s Houses of Parliament are locked in a dispute with their bosses about how they’re treated — and are considering downing tools in a fresh strike on New Year’s Eve. Members of the Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS) in the Parliamentary Security Department are considering the last day of the year as a strike day, two people involved in the dispute told POLITICO. That would present an awkward moment for many working in the Palace of Westminster. Passholders — who include members of the House of Commons and House of Lords as well as their staff — often bring guests in to watch the capital’s show-stopping New Year’s fireworks from the parliament’s riverside terrace. Since September, the union has carried out regular strikes after changes to staff work patterns. They have frequently targeted Wednesdays for industrial action, when Westminster has a high media presence thanks to Prime Minister’s Questions, in a bid to generate attention. More than 300 employees walked off the job during Chancellor Rachel Reeves’ budget this week. From Nov. 24 until the end of 2025, security staff are engaged in action short of a strike, in which they follow strictly contracted hours. As one of the world’s most high-profile landmarks, the U.K. parliament requires 24/7 surveillance. Hundreds of security officers leaving their checkpoints invariably makes that trickier and requires contingency planning with London’s Metropolitan Police.  The long-running saga between the PCS and house authorities shows no sign of a resolution, meaning further strikes are likely — and that it could become harder for the public to fully access the estate. ‘LIVES ON THE LINE’  Around 400 officers currently work in the Parliamentary Security Department, most of whom are employed by the Palace of Westminster. Those who guard the location where Britain’s laws are made say their job had become harder even before the latest dispute. “It’s gone downhill,” said security officer Gary Harvey, who was striking outside the parliament on budget day. Harvey has worked in Westminster for more than 20 years and has been a PCS union rep for just over three years. “I found one of my wage slips from 15 years ago. I’m now getting paid the same as I was then,” he said. “People are really starting to get frustrated and feeling the pinch.”  Staff say the situation worsened after Covid-19. During the pandemic, staff agreed to work 12-hour shift patterns, up from their usual eight, so there would be fewer people on site at any one time.  Around 400 officers currently work in the Parliamentary Security Department, most of whom are employed by the Palace of Westminster. | Henry Nicholls/AFP via Getty Images However, this temporary change became permanent after restrictions ended, with guards also losing six days of paid annual leave or rest days. Although members voted to reject the changes and support strike action, prospective strikes in 2023 were averted to avoid disrupting King Charles’ first state opening of parliament as monarch.  In July, an overwhelming 98 percent of members backed industrial action, giving them a six-month mandate to leave their workplace. “We put our lives on the line,” said Harvey. Security staff check all people, vehicles and items entering the estate, and patrol areas to ensure MPs, peers, staff and other visitors are kept safe. “We just want to be appreciated for it.”  Harvey raised the case of the late police officer Keith Palmer, who was fatally wounded by a terrorist outside the Palace of Westminster in 2017: “He got up, kissed his wife goodbye [and] never made it home.” BARRIERS TO ENTRY  When strikes take place, reinforcements are called in from the Met Police to ensure the parliamentary grounds are protected. But the temporary departure of hundreds of staff undoubtedly has an impact. During the budget day strikes, the entry of guests was severely restricted as school visits, tours and various commercial events were canceled.  A former senior parliamentary official, granted anonymity to speak candidly, said “the usual conundrum is at play” between balancing the security of parliament and its staff while also ensuring the public can access their legislature. Both, they said, are an “absolute imperative.” They add: “You want to give openness and access and, on the other hand, you want to have an absolutely watertight security system.”  The dispute between the PCS and house authorities has already been referred to the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service public body, which mediates on workplace disagreements. So far, no compromise is in sight. Harvey said more strike action would take place before the union’s mandate expires in January, and that a re-ballot of members is expected. A U.K. parliament spokesperson said “parliamentary security staff are valued colleagues” and that further strike action is “disappointing, particularly given the continued engagement undertaken to try to resolve outstanding concerns.” They added: “We remain committed to working closely with staff and unions to address the issues raised and to reach a resolution.”  

BRUSSELS — A fresh proposal by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen to reform digital laws on Wednesday was welcomed by lawmakers on the right but shunned on the left. It signals a possible repeat of a pivotal parliamentary clash last week in which von der Leyen’s center-right European People’s Party sided with the far right to pass her first omnibus proposal on green rules — sidelining the centrist coalition that voted the Commission president into office last year. The EU executive on Wednesday presented plans to overhaul everything from its flagship General Data Protection Regulation to data rules and its fledgling Artificial Intelligence Act. The reforms aim to help businesses using data and AI, in an effort to catch up with the United States, China and other regions in the global tech race. Drafts of the plans obtained by POLITICO caused an uproar in Brussels in the past two weeks, as everyone from liberal to left-leaning political groups and privacy-minded national governments rang the alarm. Von der Leyen sought to extend an olive branch with last-minute tweaks to her proposal, but she’s still a long way away from center-left groups. The Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats, Greens and The Left all slamming the plans in recent days. Tom Vandendriessche, a Belgian member of the far-right Patriots for Europe group, said the GDPR is not “untouchable,” and that there needs to be simplification “to ensure our European companies can compete again.” He added: “If EPP supports that course, we’re happy to collaborate on that.” Charlie Weimers a Swedish member of the right-wing European Conservatives and Reformists, welcomed the plan for “cleaning up overlapping data rules, cutting double reporting and finally tackling the cookie banner circus.” Weimers argued von der Leyen could go further, saying it falls short of being “the regulatory U-turn the EU actually needs” to catch up in the AI race. Those early rapprochements on the right are what Europe’s centrists and left fear most. The digital omnibus “should not be a repetition of omnibus one,” German Greens lawmaker Sergey Lagodinsky told reporters on Wednesday. Lagodinsky warned EPP leader Manfred Weber that “there should be no games with anti-democratic and anti-European parties.” BIG REFORMS, SMALL CONCESSIONS The Commission’s double-decker digital omnibus package includes one plan to simplify the EU’s data-related laws (including the GDPR as well as rules for nonpersonal data), and another specifically targeting the AI Act. A Commission official, briefing reporters without being authorized to speak on the record, said the omnibus’ impact on the GDPR was subject to “intense discussion” internally in the run up to Wednesday’s presentation, after its rough reception from some parliament groups and privacy organizations. Much in the EU executive’s final text remained unchanged. Among the proposals, the Commission wants to insert an affirmation into the GDPR that AI developers can rely on their “legitimate interest” to legally process Europeans’ data. That would give AI companies more confidence that they don’t always have to ask for consent. It also wants to change the definition of personal data in the GDPR to allow pseudonymized data — where a person’s details have been obscured so they can’t be identified — to be more easily processed. The omnibus proposals also aim to reduce the number of cookie banners that crop up across Europe’s internet. To assuage privacy concerns, Commission officials scrapped a hotly contested clause that would have redefined what is considered “special category” data, like a person’s religious or political beliefs, ethnicity or health data, which are afforded extra protections under the GDPR. The new cookie provision will also contain an explicit statement that website and app operators still need to get consent to access information on people’s devices. SEEKING POLITICAL SUPPORT The final texts will now be scrutinized by the Parliament and Council of the European Union. Von der Leyen’s center-right EPP welcomed the digital simplification plans as a “a critical boost for Europe’s industrial competitiveness.” Parliament’s group of center-left Socialists and Democrats came out critical of the reforms. Birgit Sippel, a prominent German member of the group, said in a statement the Commission “wants to undermine its own standards of protection in the area of data protection and privacy in order to facilitate data use, surveillance, and AI tools ‘made in the U.S.’” On the EPP’s immediate left, the liberal Renew group cited “important concerns” about the final texts but said it was “delighted” that the Commission backtracked on changing the definition of sensitive data, one idea in the leaked drafts that triggered a backlash. Renew said it would “support changes in the digital omnibus that will make life easier for our European companies.” If von der Leyen goes looking for votes for her digital omnibus among far-right groups, she will find support but it might not be a united front. German lawmaker Christine Anderson of the Alternative for Germany party, part of the far-right Europe of Sovereign Nations group, warned the digital omnibus could end up boosting “the ability to track and profile people.” Weaker privacy rules would “enable enhanced surveillance architecture,” she said, adding her party had “always opposed” such changes. “On these issues, we find ourselves much closer to the groups on the left in the Parliament,” she said. Pieter Haeck contributed reporting.

LONDON — A Russian spy ship fired lasers at British forces deployed to monitor the vessel after it entered U.K. waters, the defence secretary said Wednesday. John Healey confirmed the Russian spy ship Yantar was deployed to British waters for the second time this year after doing so in January and was currently on the edge of the U.K.’s territorial waters. However, it was the first time lasers had been directed at RAF pilots. The defense secretary said Britain deployed a Royal Navy frigate and Royal Air Force P8 planes to monitor and track the vessel, which he said was “designed for gathering intelligence and mapping our undersea cables.” “The Yantar directed lasers at our pilots,” Healey said. “That Russian action is deeply dangerous.” “My message to Russia and to [Russian President Vladimir] Putin is this: we see you. We know what you’re doing. And if the Yantar travels south this week, we are ready.” Healey said the vessel was designed to “put and hold our undersea infrastructure and those of our allies at risk” by having “capabilities which can undertake surveillance in peacetime and sabotage in conflict.” Asked about why lasers posed such a risk, the defense secretary said: “Anything that impedes, disrupts or puts at risk pilots in charge of British military planes is deeply dangerous.” The navy’s rules of engagement had been changed so Yantar could be followed more closely, and military options were ready if the vessel changed course. “I’m not going to reveal those, because that only makes President Putin wiser,” Healey said.

BERLIN — Dozens of politicians from the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party will travel to Washington in December at the invitation of a group of House Republicans, said U.S. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna. The invitation to AfD politicians comes at a time when German far-right figures are increasingly looking for support from MAGA Republicans in the U.S. for what they frame as a struggle against political persecution and censorship at home. “It’s 40 members that we’re hosting from the AfD,” Luna said in an interview with Welt, which is a sister publication of POLITICO in the Axel Springer Group. “And it’s not just going to be me, it’s going to be other members of Congress as well.” A spokesperson for the AfD said he could “neither confirm nor deny” whether that number of the party’s politicians is in fact set to travel to the U.S. next month. The spokesperson of the AfD’s parliamentary group in the Bundestag said the number of federal lawmakers traveling to the U.S. capital would not be that high. Luna has taken an active interest in German far-right figures’ claims that they are being persecuted in Germany for their views, recently telling POLITICO that “the German government’s recent actions against its own citizens resemble the authoritarianism of the Soviet Union prior to its fall more than Russia does today.” Some Trump administration officials have also spoken out in support of the AfD. When Germany’s federal domestic intelligence agency declared the AfD to be an extremist organization earlier this year, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio called the move “tyranny in disguise.” During the Munich Security Conference, U.S. Vice President JD Vance urged European mainstream politicians to knock down the “firewalls” that shut out far-right parties from government. Germany’s postwar constitution allows domestic intelligence agencies to surveil political parties, actors and organizations deemed extremist — and to make it theoretically possible to ban such parties. These restrictions were intended by the drafters of the West German constitution to prevent a repeat of the Nazi rise to power, when anti-democratic forces were able to subvert democracy from within. AfD leaders see the invitation to Washington as an opportunity to win more legitimacy domestically for their claims of persecution. Luna invited AfD co-leader Alice Weidel to Washington at the end of last month via a post on X. Weidel reacted postively and said she would reach out to discuss further arrangements. Luna also recently met with Naomi Seibt, a right-wing influencer and AfD ally, who recently said she had applied for asylum in the U.S., claiming to be the target of  “severe government and intelligence surveillance and harassment” for her political views and defense of free speech in Germany. “I think that she [Seibt] is a great young woman, and I do think that she has a promising future whatever she decides to do, and so we’ll be fully backing her,” Luna told Welt. “I’m actually not just going to be helping her, but I’m going to be helping others like her,” Luna said. “I do hope that maybe this at least provides some open dialogue on how the German government — specifically the politicians, law enforcement — treat their own citizens even if they don’t agree with them.” The trip to Washington by AfD members in December is to be followed by a larger-scale conference early next year, Luna said, something that “will counter Davos” and be more focused on “the sovereignty of nations.” Julius Brinkmann contributed to this report from Washington.

PARIS — The scene at Le Carillon before kickoff when football powerhouses Paris Saint-Germain and Bayern Munich faced off earlier this month probably looked a lot like it did 10 years ago — right before 15 people were gunned down at the bar while watching another Franco-German soccer match. Perhaps the only difference was that the crowd on the terrace of the Parisian bar in 2025 were themselves being watched by an armada of surveillance cameras installed in the aftermath of the Nov. 13, 2015 terror attacks. Though it’s been a decade since the tragedy that left more than 130 people dead across Paris and environs, silent traces of a national trauma — such as the omnipresence of cameras — still shape France. The attacks forever changed the country and its politics, tipping the balance of protecting civil liberties versus ensuring public safety in favor of the latter. Since 2015, France has passed a slew of laws meant to ensure such an event could never happen again. Members of parliament have expanded the state’s surveillance powers and its ability to impose restrictive measures without prior judicial approval. They’ve also reshaped France’s immigration policy and oversight of religious — particularly Muslim — organizations. “Successive governments — left-wing or right-wing — have reinforced the legal arsenal on anti-terror policy, and it’ll likely continue in the future to remain as close as possible to emerging challenges,” said Jean-Michel Fauvergue, who in 2015 was the head of the police RAID unit — France’s equivalent of SWAT. After going so many years without a major terror incident, it’s unlikely any politician will try to pare back this new reality of heightened alerts, increased surveillance and the omnipresence of armed soldiers. | Pierre Suu/Getty Images Proponents of what Fauvergue, who served as a lawmaker for President Emmanuel Macron’s party from 2017 to 2022, described as France’s “beautiful shield providing excellent protection” argue that it has helped prevent mass casualty incidents since the attack in Nice in 2016. Nicolas Lerner, the head of France’s foreign intelligence service, said in a radio interview Monday that while authorities remain extremely vigilant, the probability of another massive, complex attack organized by extremists abroad has “considerably diminished.” A former adviser to another interior minister, granted anonymity as they were not authorized to discuss the issue publicly, reiterated that sentiment to POLITICO. After going so many years without a major terror incident, it’s unlikely any politician will try to pare back this new reality of heightened alerts, increased surveillance and the omnipresence of armed soldiers. “History has shown that it never happens, that governments go back and scrap measures taken in the name of anti-terrorism or security,” said Julien Fragnon, a French political scientist who researches anti-terror policies. “There’s a ratchet effect: The law, on the scale of gradation, goes up a notch … and no politician wants to go back on it for fear that future attacks could be blamed on them.” WINDOW OF OPPORTUNITY Fragnon said it’s common for governments to pass stricter anti-terror policies, previously seen as unpopular, during a “window of opportunity” following a devastating attack, when worried populations are looking for security assurances. That appears to be what happened in France. A law passed in 2017 gave the government the ability to enact certain security measures that were only possible during a state of emergency, including setting up security perimeters around public events, as well as ordering movement restrictions for individuals and the closure of places of worship suspected of promoting extremism, both without prior judicial approval. The “separatism bill” proposed in 2020, which tightened rules on foreign funding of faith-based groups and introduced new offenses against incitement to hatred, was highly controversial and criticized as anti-Muslim. But even so, the legislation was approved the following year with support from across the political spectrum. Opinion polls at the time also showed widespread public support for measures combating “separatism.” French voters today remain concerned about the threat of terrorism, and are overwhelmingly supportive of the idea that public safety requires some sacrifice when it comes to personal freedoms, according to a survey from respected pollster Elabe conducted in July. “Even with an open question and no suggested answers on what are the biggest threats they face, French people will spontaneously mention terrorism,” said Frédéric Dabi, director general of the polling firm IFOP. Marine Le Pen’s National Rally, which has largely approved of measures directly strengthening the fight against the terror threat, wants to go a step further by “banning all expression of Islamist thought in France,” said a high-ranking official from the far-right party, who was granted anonymity to speak candidly. French voters today remain concerned about the threat of terrorism, and are overwhelmingly supportive of the idea that public safety requires some sacrifice when it comes to personal freedoms, according to a survey from respected pollster Elabe. | Hans Luca/Getty Images Critics of the status quo, like lawmaker Pouria Amirshahi, fear that an illiberal government could one day use tools aimed at security threats to target political opponents — especially in France, given the National Rally’s steady rise in recent decades. Amirshahi was among only six of 577 lawmakers to vote against extending the state of emergency six days after the Nov. 13 attack, due to concerns that France would be “weakening the rule of law” by handing the executive more ability to bypass the judiciary. He said France should have taken inspiration from Norway’s decision to respond to the 2011 attack there with “more democracy, more openness and more humanity.” “In all countries that have shifted toward illiberalism — both historically and today, in Hungary and Argentina — heavy security measures came first to prepare the ground,” Amirshahi said. “There are currently no bills to roll back the measures adopted after 2015, and little concern for rights and liberties among legislators.” “The headwinds against us are extremely strong,” he concluded.

China suspended a ban on exporting some dual-use materials to the U.S., the Chinese Ministry of Commerce announced on Sunday, following the easing of trade tensions between the two sides. The move covers exports of gallium, germanium and antimony, which are used in the production of advanced semiconductors used in smartphones and computing. The materials are also used in military technologies such as electronic warfare and surveillance systems, and, in the case of antimony, also missile systems and ammunition. Beijing suspended a measure introduced last year that restricted exports of those materials and imposed stricter checks on dual-use items that include graphite. The suspension will be in effect “from now until Nov. 27, 2026,” the ministry said in a statement. China’s President Xi Jinping and U.S. President Donald Trump recently agree to lower tariffs and ease other trade measures for one year, providing relief to global value chains after a trade war that threatened to escalate. Beijing has relaxed checks on exports of rare earths and lithium battery materials and agreed to resume shipping key chips for Europe’s manufacturers.