BERLIN — German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier on Tuesday condemned U.S. President Donald Trump for going to war with Iran, calling the conflict a violation of international law and warning of a transatlantic rupture comparable to Germany’s break with Russia. Steinmeier’s role in German politics is largely ceremonial, but his sharp criticism of the war and the U.S. president is likely to put additional pressure on German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who has stopped short of other European leaders in calling the war illegal even as he has grown increasingly critical of what he sees as the lack of an exit strategy on the part of the U.S. and Israel. “This war violates international law,” said Steinmeier, who is a member of the center-left Social Democratic Party (SPD), which rules in a coalition with Merz’s conservatives and has been more critical of the ongoing attacks. “There is little doubt that, in any case, the justification of an imminent attack on the U.S. does not hold water,” he added. Steinmeier, speaking in front of an audience of German diplomats in Berlin, criticized Trump for withdrawing from the nuclear deal with Iran during his first term in office. The president, who served as Germany’s foreign minister from 2013 to 2017, had helped negotiate that deal. “This war is also — and please bear with me when I say this, as someone directly involved — a politically disastrous mistake,” said Steinmeier. “And that’s what frustrates me the most. A truly avoidable, unnecessary war, if its goal was to stop Iran from developing a nuclear weapon.” Despite the president’s largely symbolic role, his strident criticism is likely to fuel a growing domestic debate over Germany’s stance on the Iran war and its relationship with the U.S. Merz and his fellow conservatives were initially far more supportive of the U.S. and Israeli attacks on Iran than many other EU countries, arguing that Germany shares the goal of regime change in Tehran. But as the conflict has expanded and the economic and security effects on the EU’s biggest economy have become clearer, the chancellor has become far more openly critical, saying the war has raised “major questions” about Europe’s security. Steinmeier, who refrained from criticizing Israel directly, also compared the transatlantic rift during Trump’s second term to Germany’s divorce from Russia in the wake of Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. “Just as I believe there will be no going back to the way things were before February 24, 2022 in our relationship with Russia, so I believe there will be no going back to the way things were before January 20, 2025 in transatlantic relations,” Steinmeier said, referring to the day of Trump’s second inauguration. “The rupture is too deep.” Steinmeier then urged his country to become more independent of the U.S., both in terms of defense and technology, arguing that such autonomy is necessary to prevent Trump administration interference in his country’s domestic politics. The German military “must become the backbone of conventional defense in Europe,” he said. “In the technological sphere, our dependence on the U.S. is even greater. This makes it all the more important that we do not simply accept this situation.”

Listen on * Spotify * Apple Music * Amazon Music Nach 35 Jahren verliert die SPD ihre Bastion Rheinland-Pfalz. Gordon Schnieder führt die CDU zum Sieg, während Alexander Schweitzer trotz persönlicher Beliebtheit dem massiven Bundestrend unterliegt. Gemeinsam mit Rasmus Buchsteiner analysiert Gordon Repinski die Schockwellen für Berlin und die Bundespolitik. Im 200-Sekunden-Interview spricht der schleswig-holsteinische Ministerpräsident Daniel Günther (CDU) über den „Auftrag zur Beherztheit“. Günther ordnet ein, warum der Wahlsieg in Mainz kein Grund zum Ausruhen ist, sondern die Koalition in Berlin nun zwingt, die großen Sozial- und Rentenreformen durchzuziehen. Donald Trump verliert die Geduld: Angesichts der immer weiter steigenden Energiepreise in den USA hat der Präsident ein 48-Stunden-Ultimatum gestellt. Entweder das Regime gibt die Straße von Hormus frei, oder die USA bombardieren iranische Kraftwerke. Jonathan Martin berichtet aus Washington über die Frustration im Weißen Haus und warum dieses „Roulette“ für Trump zur Schicksalsfrage für die Midterm-Elections im November wird. Das Berlin Playbook als Podcast gibt es jeden Morgen ab 5 Uhr. Gordon Repinski und das POLITICO-Team liefern Politik zum Hören – kompakt, international, hintergründig. Für alle Hauptstadt-Profis: Der Berlin Playbook-Newsletter bietet jeden Morgen die wichtigsten Themen und Einordnungen. ⁠Jetzt kostenlos abonnieren.⁠ Mehr von Host und POLITICO Executive Editor Gordon Repinski: Instagram: ⁠@gordon.repinski⁠ | X: ⁠@GordonRepinski⁠. POLITICO Deutschland – ein Angebot der Axel Springer Deutschland GmbH Axel-Springer-Straße 65, 10888 Berlin Tel: +49 (30) 2591 0 ⁠information@axelspringer.de⁠ Sitz: Amtsgericht Berlin-Charlottenburg, HRB 196159 B USt-IdNr: DE 214 852 390 Geschäftsführer: Carolin Hulshoff Pol, Mathias Sanchez Luna **(Anzeige) Eine Nachricht der PKV: Hätten Sie’s gedacht? Vom jährlichen 15,5-Milliarden-Euro-Mehrumsatz der Privatversicherten profitiert das gesamte Gesundheitswesen. Denn neben den Haus- und Fachärzten kommen die höheren Honorare auch den zahnärztlichen Praxen zugute, dem Arzneimittelbereich oder Therapeutinnen. So stützt die PKV die medizinische Versorgung in Deutschland zugunsten aller – auch der gesetzlich Versicherten. Mehr auf pkv.de**

Ivo Daalder, a former U.S. ambassador to NATO, is a senior fellow at Harvard University’s Belfer Center and host of the weekly podcast “World Review with Ivo Daalder.” He writes POLITICO’s From Across the Pond column. Like many, I used to believe that former U.S. President George W. Bush’s decision to invade Iraq in 2003 was the biggest strategic mistake America had made, at least since the Vietnam War. That is, until now. U.S. President Donald Trump’s decision to join Israel in a war against Iran is a far bigger strategic error, and one with far bigger strategic consequences. The reasons for this are many, ranging from the immediate impact on the region and the global economy to the longer-term upshots for Russia and China, as well as the repercussions for U.S. alliances and America’s global standing. That much is already clear — and we’re only three weeks in. Let’s start with the similarities: Much like the Iraq War, the war against Iran began based on the presumption that the regime in power would swiftly fall and that a new, more moderate and less antagonistic one would take its place. In both instances, the idea was to remove the greatest destabilizing threat in the Middle East — Saddam Hussein’s regime in the initial case, the theocratic dictatorship in Tehran in the latter — through the swift and decisive use of military force. But while Bush understood that defeating a regime required ground forces, it seems Trump simply hoped that airpower alone would suffice. As a result, Hussein’s regime fell swiftly — though Bush did vastly underestimate what would be required to rebuild a stable, let alone a democratic, Iraq in its place. But the Iranian government, as U.S. intelligence officials themselves have testified, “appears to be intact” despite Israel killing many of its key political and security leaders through targeted strikes. Focusing on the region at large, Bush’s misjudgment eventually contributed to a large-scale insurgency, which strengthened Iran’s influence in Iraq and the wider Middle East. In contrast, Trump’s miscalculation has left in place a regime that, aside from assuring its own survival, is now singularly focused on inflicting as much damage on the U.S. and its allies as it possibly can. Iranian drones and missiles have already attacked Israel and the Gulf states, targeted critical energy production facilities and effectively closed the Strait of Hormuz, which hosts one-fifth of the world’s oil and gas export transits. The Salalah oil storage fire in Oman is pictured on March 13, 2026. | Gallo Images/Orbital Horizon/Copernicus Sentinel Data 2026 Less than a month in, the world is now witnessing the largest oil and gas disruption in history. And as the fighting escalates to include gas and oil production infrastructure, the global economic consequences will be felt by every single country for months, if not years, to come — even if the conflict were to end soon. The damage that has already been inflicted on the global economy is far greater than the economic consequences of the Iraq War in its entirety. But that’s not all. Geopolitically, the U.S.-Israel war with Iran will also have far greater reverberations than the war in Iraq ever did. For one, the Bush administration spent a lot of time and effort trying to get allies on board to participate in and support the war. It didn’t fully succeed in this, as key allies like Germany and France continued opposing the war. But it tried. Trump, by contrast, didn’t even try to get America’s most important allies on board. Not only that, he even failed to inform them of his decision. And yet, when Iran responded predictably by closing the Strait of Hormuz, the U.S. president then demanded allies send their navies to escort tankers — despite the U.S. Navy so far refusing to do so. And while it’s true that Iraq left many U.S. allies — even those that joined the war, like the U.K. — deeply scarred, Iran has convinced U.S. allies they can no longer rely on the U.S., and that Washington is now a real threat to their economic security. That, too, will have a lasting impact well beyond anything the war in Iraq did. Finally, the fact remains that when Bush decided to invade Iraq, Russia and China were still minor global powers. Russian President Vladimir Putin was only just starting his effort to stabilize the economy and rebuild Russia’s military power, while China had just joined the World Trade Organization and was still a decade or more away from becoming an economic superpower. In other words, America’s blunder in Iraq occurred at a time when the strategic consequences for the global balance of power were still manageable. Trump’s Iran debacle is occurring at a time when China is effectively competing with the U.S. for global power and influence, and Russia is engaged in the largest military action in Europe since the end of World War II. A woman sifts through the rubble in her house in Tehran, Iran on March 15, 2026 after it was damaged by missile attacks two days before. | Majid Saeedi/Getty Images Both stand to benefit greatly. Russia is the short-term winner here. Oil prices are rising, generating more than $150 million per day in extra income for Moscow to feed its war machine. The U.S. is relaxing its sanctions against Russia in a vain attempt to stall prices from ballooning at the pump. All the while, Ukraine is being left to contend with Russia’s missile and drone attacks without the advanced defensive weaponry that’s now being used to protect Israel and the Gulf instead. China, meanwhile, is watching as the U.S. diverts its military forces from the Indo-Pacific to the Middle East, where they will likely remain for months, if not years. These forces include a carrier strike group, a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense anti-missile system from Korea, and a Marine Expeditionary Force from Japan. And while a disruption in oil and gas supply will be a short-term problem for Beijing too, China’s rapid transition to renewables and close alignment with energy-rich Russia will leave it well placed to confidently confront the future. Bush and Trump both came to office determined to avoid the mistaken wars of their predecessors. Nevertheless, they both embarked on military adventures fed by a hubristic belief in American power. But while the U.S. was strong enough — and its adversaries still weak enough — to recoup much of the damage inflicted by Bush’s war, the war unfolding in Iran today will leave behind an America that will have lost much of its global power, standing and influence, destined to confront rising adversaries all on its own.

President Donald Trump lashed out at America’s NATO allies again on Friday, raging at their refusal to join the U.S.-Israeli war with Iran and help reopen the Strait of Hormuz. “Without the U.S.A., NATO IS A PAPER TIGER!” the U.S. leader wrote on his Truth Social site, accusing allies of first sitting out the fight against a “Nuclear Powered Iran,” and then “complain[ing] about the high oil prices they are forced to pay.” The solution would be to open the Strait of Hormuz, Trump wrote, “a simple military maneuver … with so little risk,” but allies “don’t want to help.” “COWARDS,” he concluded. “[W]e will REMEMBER!” The outburst came following Thursday’s European Council, where national leaders struck a cautious tone in emphasizing de-escalation and resisting involvement in a conflict with no apparent end in sight. Spain’s PM Pedro Sánchez even described the war as illegal — underscoring the size of the breach with Washington. Since the U.S. and Israel launched strikes on Tehran on Feb. 28, France, Germany, Italy and the U.K. have resisted sending warships to the Gulf. On Thursday they backed a joint statement with partners Japan and Canada supporting “appropriate efforts” to ensure safe passage through Hormuz — but only once the fighting stops, as German Chancellor Friedrich Merz stressed. French President Emmanuel Macron is sounding out allies on a potential U.N.-backed framework to secure shipping, while NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte said he remains “confident” that the allies will find a way to restore traffic through the chokepoint. Trump’s attack follows days of mounting pressure on Washington, both military and economic. Earlier this week he warned NATO allies that they face a “very bad future” if they fail to help open the Strait of Hormuz, and in January mocked allies for allegedly shying away from the toughest fighting over a decade ago in their joint mission in Afghanistan. “They’ll say they sent some troops to Afghanistan,” Trump told Fox news on Jan. 22. “And they did, they stayed a little back, a little off the front lines.” At the time, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer called the remarks “insulting and, frankly, appalling.”

Moscow proposed a quid pro quo to the U.S. under which the Kremlin would stop sharing intelligence information with Iran, such as the precise coordinates of U.S. military assets in the Middle East, if Washington ceased supplying Ukraine with intel about Russia. Two people familiar with the U.S.-Russia negotiations said that such a proposal was made by Russian envoy Kirill Dmitriev to Trump administration envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner during their meeting last week in Miami. The U.S. rejected the proposal, the people added. They, like all other officials cited in this article, were granted anonymity due to the sensitivity of the discussions. Nevertheless, the sheer existence of such a proposal has sparked concern among European diplomats, who worry Moscow is trying to drive a wedge between Europe and the U.S. at a critical moment for transatlantic relations. U.S. President Donald Trump has voiced anger over the refusal of allies to send warships in the Strait of Hormuz. On Friday, he lambasted his NATO allies as “COWARDS“ and said: “we will REMEMBER!” The White House declined to comment. The Russian Embassy in Washington did not respond to a request for comment. One EU diplomat called the Russian proposal “outrageous.” The suggested deal is likely to fuel growing suspicions in Europe that the Witkoff-Dmitriev meetings are not delivering concrete progress toward a peace agreement in Ukraine, but are instead seen by Moscow as a chance to lure Washington into a deal between the two powers that leaves Europe on the sidelines. On Thursday, the Kremlin said that the U.S.-mediated Ukraine peace talks were “on hold.” Russia has made various proposals about Iran to the U.S., which has rejected them all, another person familiar with the discussions said. This person said the U.S. also rejected a proposal to move Iran’s enriched uranium to Russia, which was first reported by Axios. Russia has expanded ‌intelligence-sharing and military cooperation with Iran since the war started, a person briefed on the intelligence said. The Wall Street Journal first reported the increase and wrote that Moscow is providing satellite ⁠imagery and drone technology to help Tehran target U.S. forces in the region. The Kremlin called that report  “fake news.” Trump hinted at a link between the intelligence-sharing with Iran and Ukraine during a recent interview with Fox News, saying that Russian President Vladimir Putin “might be helping them [Iran] a little bit, yeah, I guess, and he probably thinks we’re helping Ukraine, right?” The U.S. continues to share intelligence with Ukraine, even as it has reduced other support. Washington briefly paused the exchanges last year after a disastrous Oval Office meeting between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. That abrupt halt to U.S. intelligence sharing triggered a chaotic scramble among allies and exposed deep tensions in the partnership with Kyiv. One European diplomat sought to downplay the risk of the Russian proposal, noting that French President Emmanuel Macron had said in January that “two-thirds” of military intelligence for Ukraine is now provided by France. Still, intelligence-sharing remains a last crucial pillar of American support for Ukraine after the Trump administration stopped most of its financial and military aid for Kyiv last year. Washington is still delivering weapons to Ukraine but under a NATO-led program where allies pay the U.S. for arms. Deliveries of critical air defense munitions, however, are under strain amid the U.S.-Israel war with Iran.  Most recently, the Trump administration decided to ease sanctions on Russian oil to alleviate pressure on oil markets, causing strong concern and criticism from  European leaders like German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. Hans von der Burchard reported from Berlin, Felicia Schwartz and Diana Nerozzi from Washington and Jacopo Barigazzi from Brussels.

BRUSSELS — The European Parliament will hold a committee vote on the EU-U.S. trade deal this week, top lawmakers decided on Tuesday, in a step that will be met with relief in Washington.  Lawmakers from the Parliament’s trade committee will vote on Thursday on legislation to scrap tariffs on U.S. industrial goods — representing the backbone of the EU’s pledge in the trade deal reached at President Donald Trump’s Turnberry golf resort in Scotland last summer. Bernd Lange, chair of the trade committee, said Tuesday’s discussion had been “quite smooth” and had achieved a broad understanding. “Therefore we will go for the vote on Thursday,” he told POLITICO. The decision unblocks a weeks-long deadlock, as EU lawmakers balked at approving a deal that appeared at risk of unraveling. First, the U.S. Supreme Court in February struck down most of the tariffs on which the Turnberry accord was based. Then Trump’s threats to annex Greenland and slap an embargo on Spain further soured sentiment. Lawmakers from Socialists & Democrats, liberals and Greens have pushed for reassurances from Washington before moving to a vote, while the center-right European People’s Party (EPP) is adamant that the deal must be approved quickly to avoid retaliation by Trump and bring stability to businesses. “We have a big majority today,” said EPP negotiator Željana Zovko.  A date for a final plenary vote will be determined on Wednesday, said Lange, adding that this could take place in March or April. Only then would the European Parliament enter negotiations with EU capitals and the European Commission on a compromise that would finally implement the deal.  Lange, a veteran German Social Democrat who is also the lead lawmaker on the file, proposed new amendments to the legislation that won the backing of the EPP. He has said that his changes mainly included stronger language on the EU’s own protections in case Washington fails to keep its side of the deal. “Sunrise clause, and sunset, and suspension, and so on, some fine-tuning,” Lange had told POLITICO on Monday.  Lange will travel to Washington after the vote on Thursday, and is expected to meet Trade Representative Jamieson Greer on Friday, along with a delegation of EU lawmakers.

Listen on * Spotify * Apple Music * Amazon Music Die Bundesregierung lässt Donald Trump abblitzen: Mehrfach erteilte sie einer deutschen Beteiligung an einer Marine-Begleitung von Schiffen in der Straße von Hormus eine klare Absage. Doch die Geschichte mahnt zur Vorsicht: Gordon Repinski analysiert, warum Friedrich Merz Gefahr läuft, in eine „Schröder-Fischer-Falle“ wie im Jahr 2003 zu tappen. Damals wurde ein öffentliches „Nein“ zur Irak-Invasion hinter den Kulissen durch operative Unterstützung aufgeweicht. Droht nun erneut die Beteiligung durch die Hintertür? Und wie kann sich Merz aus dieser Falle befreien? Im 200-Sekunden-Interview spricht der außenpolitische Sprecher der SPD, Adis Ahmetovic, über Trumps strategielose und sinnlose Forderungen. Er erklärt, warum Deutschland trotz der bestehenden Mission im Roten Meer eine Ausweitung auf den Iran-Konflikt ablehnt und wie die Bundesrepublik dennoch ihre diplomatische Handlungsfähigkeit bewahren kann. Während Merz in Berlin auf Distanz zu Washington geht, brodelt es in der EVP: Berichte über eine geheime Zusammenarbeit von EVP-Mitarbeitern mit rechten Fraktionen im EU-Parlament bringen Merz und Markus Söder unter Zugzwang. Hans von der Burchard ordnet ein, wie dieser Skandal das Treffen mit EU-Parlamentspräsidentin Roberta Metsola überschattet und warum ein wackelnder EU-US-Handelsdeal das nächste große Risiko für den Kanzler darstellt. Das Berlin Playbook als Podcast gibt es jeden Morgen ab 5 Uhr. Gordon Repinski und das POLITICO-Team liefern Politik zum Hören – kompakt, international, hintergründig. Für alle Hauptstadt-Profis: Der Berlin Playbook-Newsletter bietet jeden Morgen die wichtigsten Themen und Einordnungen. ⁠Jetzt kostenlos abonnieren.⁠ Mehr von Host und POLITICO Executive Editor Gordon Repinski: Instagram: ⁠@gordon.repinski⁠ | X: ⁠@GordonRepinski⁠. POLITICO Deutschland – ein Angebot der Axel Springer Deutschland GmbH Axel-Springer-Straße 65, 10888 Berlin Tel: +49 (30) 2591 0 ⁠information@axelspringer.de⁠ Sitz: Amtsgericht Berlin-Charlottenburg, HRB 196159 B USt-IdNr: DE 214 852 390 Geschäftsführer: Carolin Hulshoff Pol, Mathias Sanchez Luna

The EU has failed to hold the U.S. accountable for breaches of international law, its former diplomacy chief has warned, accusing European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen of a power grab and calling for the trade pact she negotiated with Washington to be rejected. In comments to POLITICO’s Brussels Playbook, Josep Borrell — who served as von der Leyen’s vice president and high representative for foreign affairs from 2019-2024 — said the U.S. war against Iran “is illegal under international law [and] not justified by an imminent threat as some claimed.” According to Borrell, von der Leyen has “continued to overstep her functions” by conducting foreign policy, which he insists the EU’s foundational treaty “clearly states” is not within her competence. “She is systematically biased in favor of the U.S. and Israel,” he went on, despite Europe “suffering from the consequences in terms of energy prices, while [U.S. President Donald] Trump gloats that this is good for the U.S. because they are oil exporters.” Trump has given several different rationales for the start of the war with Iran, including removing the country’s repressive regime and preventing it from gaining offensive nuclear capabilities. Borrell, a Spanish socialist who since leaving office has served as the president of the Barcelona Center for International Affairs, praised the approach of Spain’s prime minister, Pedro Sánchez, who has been Europe’s fiercest critic of Trump’s strikes on Iran. Borrell argued that his successor as the EU’s chief diplomat, former Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas, should “be clearer on condemning breaches of international law, whether done by Russia, Israel or the U.S.” because “we lose credibility [when] we use selectively international norms.” Representatives for Kallas did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The former top diplomat, who has long been critical of Israel’s actions in Gaza and has increasingly turned fire on the Commission since finishing his mandate, said the EU should not move ahead with the ratification of the trade agreement von der Leyen and Trump struck in Scotland last summer. “The deal was unfair from the beginning,” Borrell said. “They imposed 15 percent tariffs on us and we reduce our tariffs on them.” The criticism comes as von der Leyen faces a growing rebellion from Spanish socialists from Sánchez’s party, who form an important part of her own dominant coalition in the European Parliament. Senior lawmakers last week condemned comments from the Commission president in which she declared “Europe can no longer be a custodian for the old-world order, for a world that has gone and will not return.” Representatives for von der Leyen declined to comment. Von der Leyen has measured her criticism of the U.S. and Israel, saying that the Iranian regime deserves to fall but urging diplomatic solutions to the conflict. The European Commission President used her State of the Union speech in September to say she would halt bilateral payments to Israel and sanction “extremist ministers.” Spain will hold parliamentary elections by August next year at the latest, and von der Leyen’s center-right European People’s Party is hoping to take control of the government — with its national affiliate, the Partido Popular, polling consistently ahead of Sánchez’s socialists. Borrell also weighed into the EU’s dilemma over how to unblock €90 billion in much-needed funds for Ukraine after Hungary and Slovakia vetoed the plan at the last moment, having called on Kyiv to repair a pipeline carrying Russian oil to their countries via Ukrainian territory. The two governments, he said, “openly breached the principle of sincere cooperation which is part of the Treaties” by reneging on their agreement. “The is an issue for the Court. The other 25 could provide a bridge loan until the EU loan is approved,” Borrell said, dismissing the charm offensive employed by the bloc’s current leadership. Representatives for von der Leyen declined to comment, while representatives for Kallas did not immediately respond.

Listen on * Spotify * Apple Music * Amazon Music Die Preise an den Zapfsäulen kennen nur eine Richtung: nach oben. Weil die tägliche Preisobergrenze allein kaum Entlastung verspricht, diskutiert die Koalition nun über eine Spritpreisbremse. Eine neue Taskforce aus Kartellamt, Mineralölkonzernen und Politik berät heute auch dazu. Rasmus Buchsteiner analysiert, warum Schwarz-Rot trotz ökonomischer Skepsis unter politischem Druck steht und wieso die Pläne in der Regierung auf weniger Gegenliebe stoßen als im Parlament und in den Ländern. Im 200-Sekunden-Interview fordert Thüringens Ministerpräsident Mario Voigt ein Aussetzen der CO2-Bepreisung. Voigt erklärt, wie er die daraus resultierenden Milliardenlöcher stopfen will und warum Pragmatismus jetzt vor Ideologie gehen muss, um den politischen Rändern den Wind aus den Segeln zu nehmen. Donald Trump fordert, dass andere Länder sich an der militärischen Absicherung der Straße von Hormus beteiligen. Hans von der Burchard ordnet ein, warum Außenminister Johann Wadephul auf Distanz zu dieser Forderung geht und ob ein Szenario mit US-Bodentruppen im Iran bevorsteht. Das Berlin Playbook als Podcast gibt es jeden Morgen ab 5 Uhr. Gordon Repinski und das POLITICO-Team liefern Politik zum Hören – kompakt, international, hintergründig. Für alle Hauptstadt-Profis: Der Berlin Playbook-Newsletter bietet jeden Morgen die wichtigsten Themen und Einordnungen. ⁠Jetzt kostenlos abonnieren.⁠ Mehr von Host und POLITICO Executive Editor Gordon Repinski: Instagram: ⁠@gordon.repinski⁠ | X: ⁠@GordonRepinski⁠. POLITICO Deutschland – ein Angebot der Axel Springer Deutschland GmbH Axel-Springer-Straße 65, 10888 Berlin Tel: +49 (30) 2591 0 ⁠information@axelspringer.de⁠ Sitz: Amtsgericht Berlin-Charlottenburg, HRB 196159 B USt-IdNr: DE 214 852 390 Geschäftsführer: Carolin Hulshoff Pol, Mathias Sanchez Luna

Listen on * Spotify * Apple Music * Amazon Music Zwei Wochen nach Beginn der US-Invasion im Iran treten die massiven globalen Nebenwirkungen zutage. Während Donald Trump durch die Lockerung der Sanktionen gegen russisches Öl die Ukraine-Front schwächt, entstehen im Nahen Osten völlig neue Zweckbündnisse. Gordon Repinski analysiert gemeinsam mit der Strategie-Expertin Florence Gaub (NATO Defense College), warum die USA derzeit eher operationell getrieben als strategisch klug handeln und welche langfristigen Dominoeffekte dieser Einsatz für die europäische Sicherheitsarchitektur hat. Das Berlin Playbook als Podcast gibt es jeden Morgen ab 5 Uhr. Gordon Repinski und das POLITICO-Team liefern Politik zum Hören – kompakt, international, hintergründig. Für alle Hauptstadt-Profis: Der Berlin Playbook-Newsletter bietet jeden Morgen die wichtigsten Themen und Einordnungen. ⁠Jetzt kostenlos abonnieren.⁠ Mehr von Host und POLITICO Executive Editor Gordon Repinski: Instagram: ⁠@gordon.repinski⁠ | X: ⁠@GordonRepinski⁠. POLITICO Deutschland – ein Angebot der Axel Springer Deutschland GmbH Axel-Springer-Straße 65, 10888 Berlin Tel: +49 (30) 2591 0 ⁠information@axelspringer.de⁠ Sitz: Amtsgericht Berlin-Charlottenburg, HRB 196159 B USt-IdNr: DE 214 852 390 Geschäftsführer: Carolin Hulshoff Pol, Mathias Sanchez Luna