President Donald Trump’s latest round of Europe-bashing has the U.S.’s allies across the Atlantic revisiting a perennial question: Why does Trump hate Europe so much? Trump’s disdain for America’s one-time partners has been on prominent display in the past week — first in Trump’s newly released national security strategy, which suggested that Europe was suffering from civilizational decline, and then in Trump’s exclusive interview with POLITICO, where he chided the “decaying” continent’s leaders as “weak.” In Europe, Trump’s criticisms were met with more familiar consternation — and calls to speed up plans for a future where the continent cannot rely on American security support. But where does Trump’s animosity for Europe actually come from? To find out, I reached out to a scholar who’d been recommended to me by sources in MAGA world as someone who actually understands their foreign policy thinking (even if he doesn’t agree with it). “He does seem to divide the world into strength and weakness, and he pays attention to strength, and he kind of ignores weakness,” said Jeremy Shapiro, the research director at the European Council on Foreign Relations and an expert on Trump’s strained relations with the continent. “And he has long characterized the Europeans as weak.” Shapiro explained that Trump has long blamed Europe’s weakness on its low levels of military spending and its dependence on American security might. But his critique seems to have taken on a new vehemence during his second term thanks to input from new advisers like Vice President JD Vance, who have successfully cast Europe as a liberal bulwark in a global culture war between MAGA-style “nationalists” and so-called globalists. Like many young conservatives, Shapiro explained, Vance has come to believe that “it was these bastions of liberal power in the culture and in the government that stymied the first Trump term, so you needed to attack the universities, the think tanks, the foundations, the finance industry, and, of course, the deep state.” In the eyes of MAGA, he said, “Europe is one of these liberal bastions.” This conversation was edited for length and clarity. Trump’s recent posture toward Europe brings to mind the old adage that the opposite of love isn’t hate, it’s indifference. Do you think Trump hates Europe, or does he just think it’s irrelevant? My main impression is that he’s pretty indifferent toward it. There are moments when specific European countries or the EU really pisses him off and he expresses something that seems close to hatred, but mostly he doesn’t seem very focused on it. Why do you think that is? He does seem to divide the world into strength and weakness, and he pays attention to strength, and he kind of ignores weakness. And he has long characterized the Europeans as weak for a bunch of different reasons having to do with what seems to him to be a decadence in their society, their immigration, their social welfare states, their lack of apparent military vigor. All of those things seem to put them in the weak category, and in Trump’s world, if you’re in the weak category, he doesn’t pay much attention to you. What about more prosaic things like the trade imbalance and NATO spending? Do those contribute to his disdain, or does it originate from a more guttural place? I get the impression that it is more at a guttural level. It always seemed to me that the NATO spending debate was just a stick with which to beat the NATO allies. He has long understood that that’s something that they felt a little bit guilty about, and that’s something that American presidents had beat them about for a while, so he just sort of took it to an 11. The trade deficit is something that’s more serious for him. He’s paid quite a bit of attention to that in every country, so it’s in the trade area where he takes Europeans most seriously. But because they’re so weak and so dependent on the United States for security, he hasn’t had to deal with their trade problems in the same way. He’s able to threaten them on security, and they have folded pretty quickly. Does some of his animosity originate from his pre-presidency when he did business in Europe? He likes to blame Europeans for nixing some of his business transactions, like a golf course in Ireland. How serious do you think that is? I think that’s been important in forming his opinion of the EU rather than of Europe as a whole. He never seems to refer to the EU without referring to the fact that they blocked his golf course in Ireland. It wasn’t even the EU that blocked it, actually — it was an Irish local government authority — but it conforms to the general MAGA view of the EU as overly bureaucratic, anti-development and basically as an extension of the American liberal approach to development and regulation, which Trump certainly does hate. That’s part of what led Trump and his movement more generally to put the EU in the category of supporters of liberal America. In that sense, the fight against the EU in particular — but also against the other liberal regimes in Europe — became an extension of their domestic political battle with liberals in America. That effort to pull Europe as a whole into the American culture war by positioning it as a repository of all the liberal pieties that MAGA has come to hate — that seems kind of new. That is new for the second term, yeah. Where do you think that’s coming from? It definitely seems to be coming from [Vice President] JD Vance and the sort of philosophers who support him — the Patrick Deneens and Yoram Hazonys. Those types of people see liberal Europe as quite decadent and as part of the overall liberal problem in the world. You can also trace some of it back to Steve Bannon, who has definitely been talking about this stuff for a while. There does seem to be a real preoccupation with the idea that Europe is suffering from some sort of civilizational decline or civilization collapse. For instance, in both the new national security strategy and in his remarks to POLITICO this week, Trump has suggested that Europe is “decaying.” What do you make of that? This is a bit of a projection, right? If you look at the numbers in terms of immigration and diversity, the United States is further ahead in that decay — if you want to call it that — than Europe. There was this view that emerged among MAGA elites in the interregnum that it wasn’t enough to win the presidency in order to successfully change America. You had to attack all of the bastions of liberal power. It was these bastions of liberal power in the culture and in the government that stymied the first Trump term, so you needed to attack the universities, the think tanks, the foundations, the finance industry and, of course, the deep state, which is the first target. It was only through attacking these liberal bastions and conquering them to your cause that you could have a truly transformative effect. One of the things that they seem to have picked up while contemplating this theory is that Europe is one of these liberal bastions. Europe is a support for liberals in the United States, in part because Europe is the place where Americans get their sense of how the world views them. It’s ironic that that image of a decadent Europe coexists with the rise of far-right parties across the continent. Obviously, the Trump administration has supported those parties and allied with them, but at least in France and Germany, the momentum seems to be behind these parties at the moment. That presents them with an avenue to destroy liberal Europe’s support for liberal America by essentially transforming Europe into an illiberal regime. That is the vector of attack on liberal Europe. There has been this idea that’s developed amongst the populist parties in Europe since Brexit that they’re not really trying to leave the EU or destroy the EU; they’re trying to remake the EU in their nationalist and sovereigntist image. That’s perfect for what the Trump people are trying to do, which is not destroy the EU fully, but destroy the EU as a support for liberal ideas in the world and the United States. You mentioned the vice president, who has become a very prominent mouthpiece for this adversarial approach to Europe — most obviously in his speech at Munich earlier this year. Do you think he’s just following Trump’s guttural dislike of Europe or is he advancing his own independent anti-European agenda? A little of both. I think that Vance, like any good vice president, is very careful not to get crosswise with his boss and not contradict him in any way. So the fact that Trump isn’t opposed to this and that he can support it to a degree is very, very important. But I think that a lot of these ideas come from Vance independently, at least in detail. What he’s doing is nudging Trump along this road. He’s thinking about what will appeal to Trump, and he’s mostly been getting it right. But I think that especially when it comes to this sort of culture war stuff with Europe, he’s more of a source than a follower. During this latest round of Trump’s Euro-bashing, did anything stand out to you as new or novel? Or was it all of a piece with what you had heard before? It was novel relative to a year ago, but not relative to February and since then. But it’s a new mechanism of describing it — through a national security strategy document and through interviews with the president. The same arguments have achieved a sort of higher status, I would say, in the last week or so. You could sit around in Europe — as I did — and argue about the degree to which this really was what the Trump administration was doing, or whether this was just a faction — and you can still have that argument, because the Trump administration is generally quite inconsistent and incoherent when it comes to this kind of thing — but I think it’s undoubtedly achieved a greater status in the last week or two. How do you think Europe should deal with Trump’s recurring animosity towards the continent? It seems they’ve settled on a strategy of flattery, but do you think that’s effective in the long run? No, I think that’s the exact opposite of effective. If you recall what I said at the beginning, Trump abhors weakness, and flattery is the sort of ultimate manifestation of weakness. Every time the Europeans show up and flatter Trump, it enables them to have a good meeting with him, but it conveys the impression to him that they are weak, and so it increases his policy demands against them. We’ve seen that over and over again. The Europeans showed up and thought they had changed his Ukraine position, they had a great meeting, he said good things about them, they went home and a few weeks later, he had a totally different Ukraine position that they’re now having to deal with. The flattery has achieved the sense in the Trump administration that they can do anything they want to the Europeans, and they’ll basically swallow it. They haven’t done what some other countries have done, like the Chinese or the Brazilians, or even the Canadians to some degree, which is to stand up to Trump and show him that he has to deal with them as strong actors. And that’s a shame, because the Europeans — while they obviously have an asymmetric dependence on the United States, and they have some weaknesses — are a lot stronger than a lot of other countries, especially if they were working together. I think they have some capacity to do that, but they haven’t really managed it as of yet. Maybe this will be a wake-up call to do that.

BRUXELLES — La commissaire européenne chargée de la Concurrence, Teresa Ribera, n’a pas mâché ses mots contre l’administration Trump, l’accusant d’utiliser le “chantage” pour contraindre l’UE à assouplir sa réglementation du numérique. Le secrétaire américain au Commerce, Howard Lutnick, a suggéré lundi à Bruxelles que les Etats-Unis pourraient modifier leur approche en matière de droits de douane sur l’acier et l’aluminium si l’UE revoyait ses règles en matière de numérique. Les responsables européens ont interprété ses remarques comme visant les réglementations phares de l’UE, notamment celle sur les marchés numériques (DMA). “C’est du chantage”, a considéré la commissaire espagnole dans un entretien à POLITICO mercredi. “Le fait que ce soit leur intention ne signifie pas que nous acceptons ce genre de chantage.” Teresa Ribera — qui, en tant que première vice-présidente exécutive de la Commission, est la numéro 2 de l’exécutif européen derrière la présidente Ursula von der Leyen — a souligné que la réglementation européenne du numérique ne devrait pas avoir de lien avec les négociations commerciales. L’équipe de Donald Trump cherche à réviser l’accord conclu par le président américain avec Ursula von der Leyen dans son golf écossais en juillet. Ces déclarations interviennent à un moment sensible des négociations commerciales en cours. Washington considère le DMA comme discriminatoire, parce que les grandes plateformes technologiques qu’il réglemente — comme Microsoft, Google ou Amazon — sont presque toutes américaines. Il s’insurge également contre le règlement sur les services numériques (DSA), qui vise à limiter les discours haineux illégaux et la désinformation en ligne, car il est conçu pour encadrer les réseaux sociaux comme X d’Elon Musk. Teresa Ribera a rappelé que ces règles étaient une question de souveraineté, et qu’elles ne devraient pas entrer dans le champ d’une négociation commerciale. “Nous respectons les règles, quelles qu’elles soient, qu’ils ont établies pour leurs marchés : le marché numérique, le secteur de la santé, l’acier, tout ce que vous voulez […] les voitures, les normes”, a-t-elle posé en parlant des Etats-Unis. “C’est leur problème, leur réglementation et leur souveraineté. Il en va de même ici.” Teresa Ribera, avec la commissaire aux Technologies numériques Henna Virkkunen, supervise le DMA, qui veille au bon comportement des grandes plateformes numériques et à une concurrence équitable. Elle a vivement réagi aux propos tenus par Howard Lutnick lors de sa rencontre avec des responsables et des ministres européens lundi, martelant que “les règles européennes en matière de numérique ne sont pas à négocier”. Henna Virkkunen tenait la même ligne mardi. Lundi, elle a présenté à ses homologues américains le paquet de mesures de simplification de l’UE, comprenant la proposition d’omnibus numérique. Ce paquet a été présenté comme une initiative européenne visant à réduire les formalités administratives, mais certains l’ont interprété comme une tentative de répondre aux préoccupations des Big Tech américaines en matière de régulation. Le secrétaire américain au Commerce, Howard Lutnick, a suggéré lundi à Bruxelles que les Etats-Unis pourraient modifier leur approche en matière de droits de douane sur l’acier et l’aluminium si l’UE revoyait ses règles en matière de numérique. | Nicolas Tucat/Getty Images Interrogée sur les raisons qui l’ont poussée à faire une déclaration aussi forte, Teresa Ribera a répondu que les remarques d’Howard Lutnick constituaient “une attaque directe contre le DMA”, avant d’ajouter : “Il est de ma responsabilité de défendre le bon fonctionnement du marché numérique en Europe.” DES FISSURES APPARAISSENT Malgré la réplique intransigeante de Teresa Ribera, la solidarité des Etats membres envers le DMA commence doucement à se fissurer. Après la réunion de lundi, Howard Lutnick a pointé que certains ministres européens du Commerce n’étaient pas aussi réticents que la Commission à l’idée de revoir les règles numériques de l’UE : “Je vois beaucoup de ministres […] certains sont plus ouverts d’esprit que d’autres”, a-t-il observé sur Bloomberg TV, affirmant que si l’Europe veut des investissements américains, elle doit changer son modèle de régulation. Parmi les participants, au moins une Européenne semble d’accord. L’Allemande Katherina Reiche, qui s’est exprimée en marge de la réunion, a déclaré à la presse qu’elle était favorable à un nouvel assouplissement des règles de l’UE en matière de numérique. “L’Allemagne a clairement fait savoir qu’elle voulait avoir la possibilité de jouer un rôle dans le monde numérique”, a exposé Katherina Reiche, citant en particulier le DMA et le DSA. Les efforts de lobbying déployés par Washington contre les règles européennes sur le numérique s’inscrivent dans le cadre d’une bataille plus large menée par les Etats-Unis au niveau mondial pour affaiblir les lois sur le numérique dans les pays étrangers. Ce mois-ci, la Corée du Sud a cédé au lobbying de l’administration Trump en revenant en arrière sur son propre projet d’encadrement de la concurrence dans le secteur numérique. Le représentant américain au commerce prépare son rapport 2026 et lance une nouvelle série de consultations dans les semaines à venir. Entre-temps, la Commission poursuit son évaluation des règles dans le cadre de son Digital Fairness Fitness Check et de la révision en cours du DMA. Mais entre le lobbying de Washington et les Etats membres qui se désolidarisent, la question n’est pas seulement de savoir ce à quoi va aboutir la révision du DMA, mais s’il peut survivre à la guerre commerciale. Cet article a d’abord été publié par POLITICO en anglais, puis a été édité en français par Jean-Christophe Catalon.

PARIS — L’Agence pour la transition écologique (Ademe) a annulé l’appel d’offres qu’elle avait lancé à la fin de l’été pour sa communication, a appris POLITICO. Ce marché, jusque-là détenu par Havas, concernait la gestion de ses relations médias (presse et réseaux sociaux). D’une valeur maximale de 3 millions d’euros sur une durée maximale de quatre ans, ce marché était convoité par 14 agences de communication et de relations publiques parisiennes, parmi lesquelles Taddeo, Vae Solis, Publicis, Forward Global ou encore CommStrat, comme POLITICO l’avait révélé début septembre. Ces agences en ont été informées vendredi 7 novembre par le président de l’Ademe, Sylvain Waserman, via un courriel laconique. Celui-ci cite explicitement la circulaire, signée par Sébastien Lecornu, instaurant un moratoire sur les dépenses de communication de l’Etat et ses opérateurs cette année — ouvrant aussi la voie à une une baisse de 20% en 2026. Sylvain Waserman anticipe également une diminution des moyens alloués à l’Ademe dans le cadre du projet de loi de finances, toujours en cours de discussion au Parlement. “Ces évolutions conduisent à remettre en cause le besoin sur lequel reposait la procédure de consultation. Dans ces conditions, je renonce à la passation du marché”, précise-t-il. La circulaire du Premier ministre n’étant juridiquement pas contraignante pour les opérateurs tels que les établissements publics à caractère industriel et commercial, plusieurs acteurs du dossier jugent le choix du président de l’Ademe guidé par des considérations politiques. Selon une communicante d’une grande agence, “en théorie, ils auraient pu maintenir le marché, mais politiquement c’était compliqué, ils devront se débrouiller seuls désormais”. Un message manifestement déjà intégré par Waserman, qui a publié mercredi sur LinkedIn une lettre ouverte adressée à ceux qui réclament la suppression de l’Ademe.

C’est l’un des scrutins les plus attendus des municipales du mois de mars prochain. Le maire de Marseille, l’ex-socialiste Benoît Payan, à la tête d’une coalition de gauche hors LFI, parviendra-t-il à se maintenir en poste, alors que le RN a rassemblé 30% des voix aux européennes en 2024 (contre 19,45% aux dernières municipales) ? Les Insoumis, en nette progression eux aussi dans la cité phocéenne par rapport à 2020, menacent en outre de maintenir au second tour leur candidat — qui sera très probablement Sébastien Delogu. Ce sera l’une des clés de l’élection, le changement de mode de scrutin à Marseille, Paris et Lyon rendant la question des alliances “encore plus décisives” qu’auparavant, comme le souligne Jean-Yves Dormagen, président de l’institut Cluster17, qui a réalisé notre sondage. PAYAN ET ALLISIO EN TÊTE À ÉGALITÉ AU PREMIER TOUR Cette enquête exclusive*, réalisée entre le 4 et le 7 novembre 2025 pour POLITICO, montre que le maire sortant a en effet de quoi s’inquiéter : si 29% des Marseillais envisagent de voter pour sa liste au premier tour (il bénéficie désormais du soutien des Ecologistes en plus de celui du PCF), ils sont tout autant à avoir l’intention de voter pour le candidat désigné par le RN, Franck Allisio. La candidate officielle des Républicains et Horizons et actuelle présidente de la métropole, Martine Vassal, à la tête d’une liste d’une liste “d’union de la droite et du centre” — elle avait soutenu Emmanuel Macron à la présidentielle de 2022 et mène actuellement des discussions avancées avec Renaissance pour obtenir l’investiture —, rassemble à ce stade 23% des intentions de vote. Très puissant chez les jeunes — 37% des 18-34 ans envisagent de voter pour lui, selon Cluster17 —, l’Insoumis Sébastien Delogu pourrait recueillir quant à lui 16% des voix sur l’ensemble des votants et serait donc largement en position de se maintenir (le seuil de qualification pour les élections municipales est de 10% des suffrages exprimés). LE CHOIX DES INSOUMIS, DÉTERMINANT POUR PAYAN ? Pour le second tour, nous avons testé deux hypothèses. Dans le premier cas, la gauche se rassemble (“Printemps marseillais” + Insoumis), dans le second, la liste LFI se maintient. Et cela fait toute la différence. Dans le cas où la gauche partirait unie, Benoît Payan pourrait être réélu avec 45% des voix, contre 25% pour Martine Vassal et 30% pour Franck Allisio, qui reste donc quasiment stable entre les deux tours. Dans le cas où le candidat Insoumis se maintient, Benoît Payan ne l’emporterait à ce jour, selon notre enquête, que d’une très courte tête, avec 30,5% des voix, contre 29% pour le RN. Et ce, malgré ce qui fait sa force : “Son électorat est assez représentatif de la ville, assez fort dans toutes les catégories, il a le privilège du sortant, en quelque sorte, puisqu’il arrive à mordre sur l’électorat macroniste.” Il n’empêche : “Dans une quadrangulaire, à l’instant T, le RN peut disputer la victoire au Printemps marseillais”, analyse Jean-Yves Dormagen. Selon le président de Cluster17, Marseille illustre une tendance dans de nombreuses villes françaises à la “fragmentation de l’espace politique” au niveau local : “Dans beaucoup de villes, LFI et le PS sont au-dessus de 10%, et les Ecologistes parfois aussi, ce qui fait que vous avez trois listes de gauche en position de se maintenir. A droite, LR et le RN, et parfois les macronistes, pourront aussi. Vous avez souvent un potentiel de six listes pour le second tour”, explique-t-il. Par conséquent : “Les espaces qui sont divisés perdront contre le camp qui sera unifié”, anticipe-t-il. Au-delà des alliances entre partis, une question se pose à Marseille, souligne enfin Jean-Yves Dormagen : des logiques de “vote utile” se mettront-elles en place, au gré des sondages, avec une partie des électeurs Insoumis qui préfèreraient voter pour Benoît Payan, ou des électeurs de Martine Vassal qui préfèreraient voter RN ? (*) Sondage réalisé par Cluster17 pour POLITICO sur un échantillon de 910 individus, dont 816 inscrits sur les listes électorales, représentatifs de la population de Marseille. L’échantillon a été constitué selon la méthode des quotas en fonction des critères de genre, âge, CSP, secteur de résidence (Insee). L’échantillon a fait l’objet d’un redressement en fonction des critères sociodémographiques et des votes au premier tour des élections municipales de 2020, de la présidentielle en 2022 et des européennes de 2024. Pour un échantillon de 816 individus, la marge d’erreur est comprise entre 1,5 et 3,5 points.

Volodymyr Zelenskyy is under mounting pressure from critics to keep the lights and heating on while Vladimir Putin ramps up his military assault on Ukraine’s energy supply. The Ukrainian president is fearful of a public backlash over likely prolonged blackouts this winter and is trying to shift the blame, said the former head of Ukraine’s state-owned national power company. Thirty-nine-year-old Volodymyr Kudrytskyi, who led Ukrenergo until he was forced to resign last year amid infighting over political control of the energy sector, said he’s one of those whom the President’s Office is looking to scapegoat. During an exclusive interview with POLITICO, he predicted Ukraine will face a “very difficult winter” under relentless Russian bombardment — and argued Kyiv’s government has made that worse through a series of missteps. Adding fuel to his clash with Zelenskyy’s team, Kudrytskyi was charged last week with embezzlement, prompting an outcry from Ukraine’s civil society and opposition lawmakers.  They say Kudrytskyi’s arraignment involving a contract — one of hundreds — he authorized seven years ago, when he was a deputy director at Ukrenergo, is a glaring example of the aggressive use of lawfare by the Ukrainian leadership to intimidate opponents, silence critics and obscure their own mistakes. Kudrytskyi added he has no doubt that the charges against him would have to be approved by the President’s Office and “could only have been orchestrated on the orders of Zelenskyy.” Zelenskyy’s office declined to respond to repeated requests from POLITICO for comment. Before his arrest, Kudrytskyi said he was the subject of criticism “by anonymous Telegram channels that support the presidential office with false claims I had embezzled funds.” He took that as the first sign that he would likely be targeted for harsher treatment. Kudrytskyi, who was released Friday on bail, said the criminal charges against him are “nonsense,” but they’ve been leveled so it will be “easier for the President’s Office to sell the idea that I am responsible for the failure to prepare the energy system for the upcoming winter, despite the fact that I have not been at Ukrenergo for more than a year now.” “They’re scared to death” about a public outcry this winter, he added. COMPETING PLANS That public backlash against leadership in Kyiv will be partly justified, Kudrytskyi said, because the struggle to keep the lights on will have been exacerbated by tardiness in rolling out more decentralized power generation. Kudrytskyi said Ukraine’s energy challenge as the days turn colder will be compounded by the government’s failure to promptly act on a plan he presented to Zelenskyy three years ago. The proposal would have decentralized energy generation and shifted away, as quickly as possible, from a system based on huge Soviet-era centralized power plants, more inviting targets for Russian attacks.   Thirty-nine-year-old Volodymyr Kudrytskyi said he’s one of those whom the President’s Office is looking to scapegoat. | Kirill Chubotin/Getty Images The plan was centered on the idea that decentralizing power generation would be the best way to withstand Russian missile and drone attacks. Those have redoubled to an alarming scale in recent weeks with, some days, Russia targeting Ukraine’s energy infrastructure with 500 Iranian-designed drones and 20 to 30 missiles in each attack. Instead of quickly endorsing the decentralization plan, Zelenskyy instead approved — according to Kudrytskyi — a rival scheme backed by his powerful Chief of Staff Andriy Yermak to “create a huge fund to attract hundreds of millions of foreign investment for hydrogen and solar energy.” Last year the government shifted its focus to decentralization, eventually taking up Kudrytskyi’s plan. “But we lost a year,” he said.  He also said the slow pace in hardening the country’s energy facilities to better withstand the impact of direct hits or blasts — including building concrete shelters to protect transformers at power plants — was a “sensational failure of the government.” Ukrenergo, Kudrytskyi said, started to harden facilities and construct concrete shelters for transformers in 2023 — but little work was done by other power generation companies. DEMOCRATIC BACKSLIDING Kudrytskyi was abruptly forced to resign last year in what several Ukrainian energy executives say was a maneuver engineered by presidential insiders determined to monopolize political power. His departure prompted alarm in Brussels and Washington, D.C. — Western diplomats and global lenders even issued a rare public rebuke, breaking their normal public silence on domestic Ukrainian politics. They exhorted Kyiv to change tack. So far, international partners have made no public comments on Kudrytskyi’s arrest and arraignment. But a group of four prominent Ukrainian think tanks issued a joint statement on Oct. 30, the day after Kudrytskyi’s arraignment, urging authorities to conduct investigations with “the utmost impartiality, objectivity, and political neutrality.”  The think tanks also cautioned against conducting political persecutions. In their statement they said: “The practice of politically motivated actions against professionals in power in any country, especially in a country experiencing the extremely difficult times of war, is a blow to statehood, not a manifestation of justice.” The embezzlement case against Kudrytskyi has been described by one of the country’s most prominent anti-corruption activists, Daria Kaleniuk, head of the Anti-Corruption Action Center, as not making any legal sense. She argued that the prosecutor has failed to offer evidence that the former energy boss enriched himself in any way and, along with other civil society leaders, said the case is another episode in democratic backsliding. Overnight Sunday, Russia launched more attacks targeting Ukraine’s energy infrastructure, striking at regions across the country. According to Zelenskyy, “nearly 1,500 attack drones, 1,170 guided aerial bombs, and more than 70 missiles of different types were used by the Russians to attack life in Ukraine just this week alone.” Unlike previous wartime winters, Russian forces this time have also been attacking the country’s natural gas infrastructure in a sustained campaign.  Since being forced to resign from Ukrenergo, Kudrytskyi hasn’t been shy about highlighting what he says is mismanagement of Ukraine’s energy sector. For that he has been attacked on social media for being unpatriotic, he said. But he sees it differently. “Most Ukrainians understand the government should be criticized even during wartime for mistakes because otherwise it would cause harm to the country,” he said.

LONDON — The U.K. government is not moving fast enough to slash planet-destroying emissions from aviation, former Prime Minister Tony Blair has warned.  Governments in Westminster and elsewhere must step up progress in developing cleaner alternatives to traditional jet fuel, according to a report today from Blair’s think tank, seen by POLITICO.  “Aviation is and will continue to be one of the world’s most hard-to-abate sectors. Sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) mandates in Europe and the U.K. are ramping up, but the new fuels needed are not developing fast enough to sufficiently reduce airline emissions,” the Tony Blair Institute (TBI) said, referring to policies designed to force faster production of cleaner fuel.  The U.K. has made the rollout of SAF central to hitting climate targets while expanding airport capacity.  It is the third intervention on U.K. net-zero policy from the former prime minister this year.  Earlier this month, the TBI urged Energy Secretary Ed Miliband to drop his pursuit of a clean power system by 2030 and focus instead on reducing domestic bills. This followed a report in April claiming the government’s approach to net zero was “doomed to fail” — something which caused annoyance at the top of the government and “pissed off” Labour campaigners then door-knocking ahead of local elections.  Aviation contributed seven percent of the U.K.’s annual greenhouse gas emissions in 2022, equivalent to around 29.6 million tons of CO2. The Climate Change Committee estimates that will rise to 11 percent by the end of the decade and 16 percent by 2035.  SAFs can be produced from oil and feedstocks and blended with traditional fuels to reduce emissions. The U.K. government’s SAF mandate targets its use in 40 percent of jet fuels by 2040 — up from two percent in 2025.  Chancellor Rachel Reeves said in January that U.K. investment in SAF production will help ensure planned airport expansion at Heathrow —  announced as the government desperately pursues economic growth — does not break legally-binding limits on emissions.  The TBI urged Energy Secretary Ed Miliband to drop his pursuit of a clean power system by 2030 and focus instead on reducing domestic bills. | Wiktor Szymanowicz/Getty Images The TBI said that, while it expects efficiency gains and initial SAF usage will have an impact on emissions, a “large share of flights, both in Europe and globally, will continue to run on conventional kerosene.” A spokesperson for the Department for Transport said the government was “seeing encouraging early signs towards meeting the SAF mandate.” They added: “Not backing SAF is not an option. It is a core part of the global drive to decarbonise aviation. SAF is already being produced and supplied at scale in the U.K., and we recently allocated a further £63 million of funding to further grow domestic production.” The TBI said carbon dioxide removal plans should be integrated into both jet fuel sales and sustainable aviation fuel mandates, placing “the financial responsibility of removals at the feet of those most able to pay it.” 

HORSENS, Denmark — The European Union’s deregulation drive isn’t just about pleasing Washington, Danish Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen said Tuesday, arguing Brussels must loosen up its own rules while defending its independence from U.S. pressure. “It’s like a Kinder egg. It serves more than one purpose,” Rasmussen told POLITICO in an exclusive interview.  “We should go down that track in our own self best interest. But at the same time, it also serves others’ interest as well.” Rasmussen’s comments come ahead of a crucial meeting of EU leaders next week, where the EU’s deregulation drive will take center stage. Leaders are expected to urge the bloc’s executive to speed up efforts to slash red tape — a push the Danish minister said is vital to keeping Europe globally competitive. “If our investors are met with the red carpet in the U.S. and by red tape in Europe, they will, at the end of the day, choose the U.S.,” he stressed.  For over a year, Brussels has been torching swaths of environmental red tape in a bid to restore the competitiveness of Europe’s beleaguered industries against their U.S. and Chinese rivals. Brussels now has nine simplification packages in the works, spanning the defense, environmental and digital sectors.  The EU’s rulebooks have drawn the ire of President Donald Trump, who has threatened to hike tariffs over rules he says discriminate against, and even censor, U.S. companies.  France and Germany, the EU’s two largest economies, are pushing Brussels for a similar environmental deregulation drive.  In a bid to keep Washington onside, the European Commission is preparing plans to address Trump’s grievances — while presenting the effort as part of a self-driven policy overhaul. Politically, the move allows the bloc to reconcile its own domestic agenda without appearing to bow to Trump’s pressure. Washington imposed a baseline 15 percent tariff on all goods from the European Union, while the EU committed to cut its tariffs on U.S. imports of cars and industrial goods to zero. | Focke Strangmann/Getty Images Rasmussen made the comments on the margins of a meeting of EU trade ministers in Denmark, which currently holds the presidency of the Council, the bloc’s intergovernmental arm. The get-together was overshadowed by China’s move to drastically restrict exports of rare earths — further squeezing the EU amid a rift between the U.S. and China.  Brussels called for the G7 group of industrialized nations to coordinate their response to China’s export restrictions. PRESSURE FROM WITHIN Rasmussen poured cold water on the idea of a so-called sunset clause, under which the EU could revisit the terms of its trade deal with the U.S. once Trump leaves office. Under the pact, struck in July by Commission President Ursula von der Leyen at Trump’s Turnberry golf resort in Scotland, Washington imposed a baseline 15 percent tariff on all goods from the European Union, while the EU committed to cut its tariffs on U.S. imports of cars and industrial goods to zero.   “Defining a sunset clause will not change the reality,” Rasmussen said. “I’m living in the real world, and we have to deal with the current U.S. administration.” That view was echoed at the trade ministerial by Thomas Byrne, Ireland’s minister for European affairs.  “If we start rooting through it or making changes or putting in review clauses, I think that that is not something that would be in the interest of European citizens,” Byrne said on his way into Tuesday’s meeting. The European Parliament in particular has called to consider a possible review of the terms the EU conceded to the Trump administration, amid criticism that the transatlantic trade deal was severely skewed in favor of the United States. Rasmussen didn’t rule out renegotiating those terms one day — but only once the political and economic costs of Trump’s trade protectionism begin to bite in the U.S. “I am pretty sure that in a midterm perspective, you will see implications of this strategy within American society. And then we must stand ready to renegotiate things,” the former Danish prime minister said.  Marianne Gros contributed to this report. 

PARIS — A la veille de la présentation du projet de loi de finances 2026 par le nouveau gouvernement de Sébastien Lecornu, POLITICO publie la première partie du texte, relative aux recettes de l’Etat. Dans ces trente articles, on retrouve plusieurs annonces formulées par le Premier ministre, dont la reconduction de la contribution sur les hauts revenus (article 2), le prolongement pour un an du prélèvement exceptionnel sur les bénéfices des grandes entreprises avec un taux divisé par deux (article 4), et la baisse du taux de la cotisation sur la valeur ajoutée des entreprises (article 11). Parmi les autres mesures qui se comptent en milliards d’euros : la réforme — promise par François Bayrou et reprise par son successeur — de l’abattement des pensions de retraites, qui passe d’un taux de 10% à un montant déductible de 2000 euros (article 6). L’exécutif dégaine aussi une mesure censée faire contribuer les plus riches (article 3), qui devrait être assurément l’objet des plus gros débats au Parlement, si le gouvernement tient jusque-là. Il instaure une nouvelle taxe “sur les actifs non affectés à une activité opérationnelle des holdings patrimoniales”. Loin de la taxe Zucman, cette disposition visant l’instrument préféré des plus fortunés pour se mettre à l’abri du fisc ne devrait toutefois pas rapporter plus de 1,5 milliard d’euros, selon nos confrères des Echos. Les parlementaires chasseurs de niches trouveront une accroche dans le texte (article 5) avec un nettoyage en règle de 23 des 474 niches inscrites dans le code des impôts. On note notamment la disparition de deux niches brunes identifiées par la Cour des comptes, sur les carburants B100 et E85. En matière énergétique, le texte prévoit une surprise, avec le quasi-doublement de la taxe sur les panneaux solaires (Ifer), pour les centrales solaires mises en service avant 2021 (article 19). On trouve aussi une planification des dispositifs fiscaux pour verdir les flottes automobiles (article 13) ou le décalage d’un an de la réforme de la taxe encourageant l’utilisation des énergies renouvelables dans les transports (article 16). Comme prévu, une taxe sur “les articles de faible valeur destinés à des particuliers” (article 22), prévue pour limiter le déferlement des colis de vente à distance venu d’Asie est instituée. Le gouvernement a fixé la ponction à 2 euros par article (avant application de la TVA au taux dont relève l’article). Une somme qui vise à couvrir les coûts de contrôles douaniers. La taxe sera temporaire, “dans l’attente d’une solution européenne durable” prévue dans le cade de la réforme de l’Union douanière, souligne l’exposé des motifs et devra s’éteindre “au plus tard le 31 décembre 2026”. Le gouvernement prévoit également une fiscalisation de “l’ensemble des produits à fumer” (article 23) pour répondre à la diversité des usages (vapotage, cigarette électronique, etc.), notamment en fonction de la teneur en nicotine des produits. Tiphaine Saliou, Aude Le Gentil et Alexandre Léchenet ont contribué à cet article.

A jailed Bulgarian mayor whose detention is increasingly seen as a litmus test of the rule of law in the Balkan country says the EU should ramp up its pressure on Sofia to halt its descent toward authoritarianism. Mayor Blagomir Kotsev of Varna, Bulgaria’s third-largest city, was arrested July 8 on graft charges, which he has denied. His liberal anti-corruption We Continue the Change party insists the high-profile case is politically motivated and shows the country’s judiciary has been weaponized. The arrest has sparked nationwide protests and triggered a renewed outcry over the influence of organized crime in the country of 6.7 million people. Former Prime Minister Nikolai Denkov, from Kotsev’s pro-EU party, said Bulgaria was in a “state of dictatorship.” Kotsev’s plea for Brussels to take action comes as liberals in the European Parliament call for Bulgaria’s EU funds to be cut over the arrest. Valérie Hayer, chair of the Renew group, said Kotsev’s detention revealed the country’s “institutional perversion.” Bulgarian President Rumen Radev has argued it is “increasingly difficult for Europe to be lied to about what is happening in Bulgaria,” accusing the judiciary of “mercilessly” pursuing the opposition while turning a blind eye to those in power. Speaking to POLITICO during his daily 10-minute slot for telephone calls from jail, Kotsev said the EU should exert “more political pressure” on the Bulgarian government. Before his arrest, he said, he had been warned he was under political attack. The blitz was due to his party, which runs on an anti-mafia platform in a Black Sea city notorious for politically-connected mob crime and Russian influence. Kotsev said he was threatened that he could end up like jailed Turkish mayors opposed to the rule of President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. “Some people were saying to me: ‘I heard that you should [quit] this party because it’s going to be dangerous for you.’ I received a signal that ‘if you don’t do it, this will happen; look what happened in Turkey; look at what happened in other places.’ And actually, the scenario is very similar to what I see in other places outside of Bulgaria, but they’re not in the EU,” he said. “I’m very much concerned that we’re an EU member country and these things are happening here.” Prime Minister Rosen Zhelyazkov from GERB said in July that the country’s independent judiciary should be left to do its job. CAPTURED STATE Rule of law has long been a concern in Bulgaria. Reformist politicians and investigative journalists say they live in a “captured state” where the judiciary and Bulgaria’s sprawling security apparatus are linked to organized crime. The European Commission has noted the perception of judicial independence in Bulgaria is “very low.” The reformist opposition, including Kotsev’s We Continue the Change, argues it is being targeted for its success in winning regional elections in large cities such as Sofia and Varna — infuriating the old political order, which has lost lucrative public contracts as a result. Bulgarian President Rumen Radev has argued it is “increasingly difficult for Europe to be lied to about what is happening in Bulgaria,” accusing the judiciary of “mercilessly” pursuing the opposition while turning a blind eye to those in power. | Hristo Rusev/Getty Images Indeed, public contracts play a key role in the case against Kotsev. Plamenka Dimitrova, a catering manager who received lucrative contracts from the previous Varna administration, has accused Kotsev of trying to extort money from her for new contracts. The embattled mayor has been charged with seeking a 15 percent cut from school and kindergarten meals. “If I, as the mayor of the country’s third-largest city, can be targeted, it could happen to any ordinary citizen,” Kotlev said. “Anyone can be jailed while under investigation. It can take months or even years, and even if you’re innocent, you can remain in custody until someone decides to release you.” “I’m very worried, and it’s not just me — many people in Bulgaria are asking where we stand in terms of our judicial system,” he added. “This concerns me deeply because instead of improving as a member of the European Union, things are getting worse.” STRATEGIC PORT Varna, Bulgaria’s largest port, is strategically important for NATO and European security. It is also a hub of Russian cultural and economic influence and is home to several thousand Russian citizens. For decades it was run by the GERB party of PM Zhelyazkov and former premier Boyko Borissov, who is still one of the country’s main powerbrokers. Former PM Kiril Petkov, now a lawmaker with We Continue the Change, described the case against Kotsev as part of a broader campaign against opposition parties. The drive, he said, had been orchestrated by the country’s chief prosecutor, Borislav Sarafov, to protect the interests of Borissov and sanctioned oligarch Delyan Peevski, head of the DPS-New Beginnings election coalition that de facto supports the current government. President Radev has also focused attention on Borissov and Peevski in discussions of the rule of law, saying: “Everyone sees that democracy in our country is a façade, the government is a decoration for the Peevski-Borisov duo, and justice is selective.”  Petkov said it was important that the EU wakes up to the fact that this is not “just a Bulgarian issue” but could also affect Black Sea security. “A city without a mayor benefits Putin’s regime,” Petkov told POLITICO. POLITICO contacted both GERB and DPS-New Beginnings but received no response. The latter has dismissed We Continue the Change as a party of “corrupt and compromised politicians” in its statements. In July, Zhelyazkov from GERB said: “In a democratic state governed by the rule of law, there are two basic principles. The first principle is the presumption of innocence. The second basic principle is the independence of the judiciary. If we want to be a state governed by rule of law, we must respect both principles.”  In the meantime, the political drama has led to theatrics. Seeking to confound his critics, who accuse him of seeking revenge against We Continue the Change for his own arrest in 2022, Borissov said he’d happily lobby for Kotsev’s release. “If they give me a Blago Kotsev T-shirt, I’ll wear it!” he said earlier this month. In typically pugnacious form, Peevski last week ended up in a vulgar dispute on a street in front of the parliament with Assen Vassilev, chairman of We Continue the Change. “Go off and get screwed at home!” Peevski barked at him. From jail, Kotsev said people were scared by Bulgaria’s descent from the rule of law. “I’m really afraid of the fear I see outside,” Kotsev said. “People are afraid to speak up against what is happening.”

LONDON — Britain’s former ambassador to China is set to lead London’s mission to the EU after a changing of the guard next year. Caroline Wilson is expected to take over the top job at the U.K. Mission to the European Union in Brussels from fall 2026, according to three people familiar with the arrangements. She is expected to succeed Lindsay Croisdale-Appleby, who has been in post in the EU capital since 2021. Wilson has already worked extensively on EU issues, having been the Foreign Office’s Europe director from 2016 to 2019 during the first phase of Brexit talks. Her new role leading the U.K.’s embassy to the EU will be a return to the Belgian capital, where she worked from 2000 until 2004 at the body’s predecessor, the U.K. Representation to the EU. Wilson also spent time in the city while studying at the francophone Université libre de Bruxelles, where she obtained a masters degree in European community law. She was later seconded to the Cabinet Office’s Europe secretariat from 2006 to 2008. Caroline Wilson is expected to take over the top job at the U.K. Mission to the European Union in Brussels from fall 2026, according to three people familiar with the arrangements. | VCG/VCG via Getty Images The career mandarin had been ambassador to China since 2020, departing last month with an announcement that she “will be transferring to another Diplomatic Service appointment.” She is fluent in Mandarin and also speaks Russian, French and German. The Foreign Office declined to comment on the moves and officials said diplomatic appointments would be confirmed in the usual way. BREXIT VETERAN Outgoing head of mission Croisdale-Appleby was intimately involved in Brexit talks, working as U.K. chief negotiator David Frost’s deputy in Downing Street’s Europe taskforce throughout 2020. Prior to that he was a director general in the Foreign Office from 2017 to 2020, working on European Union and other issues. Before taking up that role he was the British foreign affairs department’s Europe director from 2015 to 2017. Four people familiar with the situation, including those cited above, said Croisdale-Appleby was due to depart late summer or early autumn 2026. Earlier this month he was tipped as a possible successor to Peter Mandelson as U.S. ambassador. Planning for the diplomat’s departure, however, pre-dates a vacancy in Washington and his next job is not yet clear. The UK Mission to the EU, known as UKMis, replaced the UK Permanent Representation to the EU when Britain left the European Union. Based in offices on Avenue d’Auderghem just off the Schuman roundabout in Brussels, the body no longer has a formal seat at the table in EU institutions — but does its best to explain and promote British interests to Brussels while feeding back diplomatic intelligence to London. The politically sensitive nature of discussions around Britain’s relationship with the EU has led successive British prime ministers to bring much work on the topic in house to Downing Street and its government department, the Cabinet Office. This means that despite being part of the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office, UKMis works closely with the Cabinet Office, where EU Relations Minister Nick Thomas-Symonds is based. It also works with FCDO Europe Minister Stephen Doughty.