Madame Disincanto, il 17 aprile arriva il terzo album della cantautrice italiana, ora in preorder. Cambiare: qual è il prezzo? è la domanda che accompagna le immagini promozionali, con un significato profondo

The first meeting of Donald Trump’s Board of Peace on Thursday was heavy on the president but light on other details, as a small group of member countries offered major financial commitments and said they would defer to the White House on rebuilding Gaza. Some two dozen member countries that have signed on to Trump’s new venture announced more than $6.5 billion in financial pledges after a 47-minute stemwinder from the president, who lavished praise on the all-male group of world leaders in the room and insisted the nascent effort will work with, and not against, the United Nations. Declaring it to be “the most prestigious board ever put together,” Trump announced a $10 billion financial commitment from the U.S. and promised that the board’s work would “strengthen up the United Nations.” But in the same remarks, he said that the board would “almost be looking over the United Nations and making sure it runs properly.” That the U.N.’s charter does not authorize any sort of oversight organization appeared to be of little consequence for the president, whose desire to personally oversee and control a new multilateral humanitarian organization appears to be taking shape. And what seemed like a long shot when Trump first pitched the idea in September is now a reality. Despite skepticism from Democrats, Europeans, the United Nations and Palestinians, the president’s new venture won considerable momentum this week — even as it forces America’s traditional allies to take a backseat. “The Kingdom of Bahrain recognizes and endorses the tremendous potential of this body, the extraordinary drive of its chairman and his sincere effort to unify nations and our common objective of fostering an enduring peace for the Middle East,” said Bahrain’s King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa. For as much as the board’s first meeting appeared to have the trappings of another Trump vanity project, the commitments by several members to the rebuilding of Gaza were concrete. The financial commitments include $1.2 billion from the United Arab Emirates and $1 million from Saudi Arabia. The World Bank will manage the donations and disburse them under the Board of Peace’s direction, said Ajay Banga, the bank’s president. An administration official later clarified that the $10 billion U.S. commitment was part of a 10-year rebuilding plan, “which we will work on in conjunction with Congress.” The initial investment of roughly $1.25 billion would go toward ordnance removal, temporary housing, security, medical provisions and other needs, the official said. Likewise, at least five countries committed troops to a new stabilization force for Gaza, said U.S. Maj. Gen. Jasper Jeffers. And 2,000 people applied to join a new Palestinian police force in Gaza, said Bulgarian diplomat Nickolay Mladenov, the Board of Peace High Representative for Gaza. The scale of pledges is fitting after Israel shattered the Palestinian enclave following the 2023 Hamas attack. Recovery will cost some $53 billion, according to a report out Wednesday by the World Bank, UN and European Union. But it’s not clear how Trump’s launching of a board to upend the usual diplomatic channels will work, either at home or abroad. Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) wrote to Secretary of State Marco Rubio today calling the board an “overt attempt to replace” the U.N. and asking how the administration intended to comply with statutory requirements to notify Congress of international commitments. Senate Foreign Relations Chair Jim Risch (R-Idaho) supports Trump’s efforts to bring peace, said a committee spokesperson, who, like some others in this story, was granted anonymity to discuss sensitive diplomatic issues. The U.S. is also some $4 billion in arrears on its UN dues. The State Department accused the U.N. of exorbitant expenses and told NatSec Daily, “The premise that the U.S. ‘owes’ the U.N. anything is categorically false.” Trump on Thursday promised to help the U.N, “money-wise,” adding “we’re going to make sure the United Nations is viable.” The role of Europe is similarly murky. Hungary and Bulgaria were the only two EU members to formally join, but the EU, Austria, Croatia, Finland, Germany, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Slovakia all sent observers, as did Switzerland. “So many of our friends in Europe are attending today, and we’re eager to have them become full members. They all want to become full members,” Trump said, while acknowledging that “some [countries] are trying to play cute.” Norway, France and the EU have all said they’re not joining. Trump, who has three years remaining in his final term, has appointed himself the board’s lifelong chairman, giving himself the unilateral authority to veto decisions, approve the agenda, and select his own successor. That structure has given a number of countries pause. “Most countries that matter do not want an ill-defined, permanently Trump-led organization to compete with or supersede existing multilateral organizations,” said a European diplomatic official. “That’s why you saw that only smaller countries, with narrower individual reasons to benefit from saying yes, were the only ones [the White House] could get to sign on.” Trump did get buy-in from FIFA President Gianni Infantino who pledged some $75 million for soccer-related projects in Gaza. Two Israelis on the Board of Peace outlined their plans for reconstruction. Developer Yakir Gabay conjured “a new Mediterranean Riviera with 200 hotels and potential islands” and Liran Tancman promised a “secure digital backbone.” (Tancman was reportedly among the Israeli businessmen who helped set up the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation). The sole Palestinian speaker, Ali Shaath, gave a more sober assessment. He heads the technocratic committee handling day-to-day governance of Gaza and said he’d prioritize security, jobs, emergency relief and basic services. “We are operating in extremely difficult conditions,” he said. Hani Almadhoun, a Palestinian-American running a food aid organization in Gaza, said other than Shaath, he did not know of any Palestinians, including himself, who are involved in the Board of Peace conversations. “This is a farce,” he said. “It’s like trying to have a wedding without the bride.” Farce or not, the music has started. “Many in Europe say the Board of Peace is meant to substitute the U.N. It does not look to me like an attempt to replace the U.N. but if it helps shake that agonizing giant and inshallah wake it up, then God bless the Board of Peace,” said Albanian Prime Minister Edi Rama.

PARIS — France’s presidential election may still be more than 14 months away, but the campaign is already well under way. Traditionally, French campaigns don’t get going until after the August holidays of the year before, but the stakes for the 2027 contest are so high — given the potential victory of a far-right president skeptical of the European Union and NATO — that the race is now on. Almost every policy agenda in France, from the environment to business regulation, is now being viewed through the lens of the next presidential election, in which the centrist Emmanuel Macron will be unable to stand. Take last week’s World Impact Summit in Paris. Ostensibly a discussion about Europe’s green transition, it turned into a forum for far higher-level political maneuvers. Presidential hopefuls Marine Tondelier of the Greens, Jordan Bardella of the far-right National Rally, centrist Gabriel Attal and the center-left’s Raphaël Glucksmann all used the sustainability debate on stage to lay out rival visions for the nation and the Elysée. “We need to prepare the future,” former Prime Minister Attal said. “The country faces a crucial moment of truth in 2027, important for France and Europe.” The influential business lobby Medef is also moving early to make its voice heard in the campaign, and is arranging lunches for captains of industry with would-be candidates such as Bardella, Attal and Socialist leader Olivier Faure. Crucially, political parties are treating next month’s municipal elections as a dress rehearsal for the presidential contest. The far-right National Rally is hoping to cement its status as France’s predominant political force, while the left and center are gunning to prove they’re still relevant. “It is going to be a very long campaign,” said OpinionWay pollster Bruno Jeanbart. A NEW POLITICAL LANDSCAPE Being first out of the gate in French elections isn’t necessarily an advantage — as discovered by former Prime Minister Edouard Philippe, who confirmed his candidacy months ago and was initially seen as a front-runner. He’s now lagging in the polls. Liberal former Prime Minister François Bayrou, whose presidential aspirations are an open secret, has long said all that matters for candidates is that they’re in the discussion the Christmas before the election “at the earliest.” And France’s strict campaign finance laws mean there’s no need to fundraise early to accumulate a massive war chest. But the prospect of a far-right French president has sent the mainstream political establishment scrambling for a champion to take on Bardella or the National Rally’s preferred standard-bearer, Marine Le Pen, who is appealing an embezzlement conviction that has knocked her out of the contest. Parts of the political left and right are considering primaries even before the two-round race, but not all are buying into the idea. | Xavier Laine/Getty Images There isn’t an obvious mainstream candidate to lead the pack given how Macron’s 2017 election laid waste to France’s traditional left-right landscape. The political center has splintered, with a hodgepodge of candidates racing to fill Macron’s shoes. Justice Minister Gerald Darmanin warned against having too many candidates, particularly Philippe and Attal on the center right. “Competition is normal and legitimate,” he told the broadcaster RTL last week. “But if there’s more than one candidate, it’s possible that they won’t both reach the run-off. We urgently need to agree.” Lesser-known politicians such as Socialist lawmaker Jérôme Guedj, who joined the fray last week, are starting early in the hope of using the extra time to build a brand with voters. Guedj joins Philippe and Tondelier, the leader of the Greens, as already confirmed candidates. Others have been more coy about 2027 but appear to be gearing up for a run: They include former Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin, leader of the center-right Les Républicains Bruno Retailleau, and the conservative head of the Hauts-de-France region Xavier Bertrand. Medef, the business lobby, said it was bringing forward the launch of its candidate lunches to adjust to this new reality. “The earlier we engage with them, the greater chance we have of influencing their positions,” said a Medef board member who, like others quoted in this story, was granted anonymity to speak candidly. SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST Most political observers say the field of candidates is getting too large. Few agree on how to narrow it down. Parts of the political left and right are considering primaries even before the two-round race, but not all are buying into the idea — particularly those who have marginal leads and might lose their advantage to lesser-known candidates. Others argue for a Darwinian approach, letting the massive field duke it out on the campaign trail. “I’m convinced we need to agree on a candidate as late as possible,” said a former centrist minister. “It’s an extraordinary election, the campaign can’t be business as usual.” The week in between the two rounds of next month’s municipal election will offer vital clues going forward, as French political parties will be forced in certain contests to form alliances of convenience if they wish to block ideological opponents from victory. “Local elections are determined by local issues so we can’t project the result onto the national level,” said the pollster Jeanbart. “But it will tell us how the parties relate to each other.”

BRUSSELS ― European governments and corporations are racing to reduce their exposure to U.S. technology, military hardware and energy resources as transatlantic relations sour.  For decades, the EU relied on NATO guarantees to ensure security in the bloc, and on American technology to power its business. Donald Trump’s threats to take over Greenland, and aggressive comments about Europe by members of his administration, have given fresh impetus to European leaders’ call for “independence.” “If we want to be taken seriously again, we will have to learn the language of power politics,” German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said last week. From orders banning civil servants from using U.S.-based videoconferencing tools to trade deals with countries like India to a push to diversify Europe’s energy suppliers, efforts to minimize European dependence on the U.S. are gathering pace. EU leaders warn that transatlantic relations are unlikely to return to the pre-Trump status quo. EU officials stress that such measures amount to “de-risking” Europe’s relationship with the U.S., rather than “decoupling” — a term that implies a clean break in economic and strategic ties. Until recently, both expressions were mainly applied to European efforts to reduce dependence on China. Now, they are coming up in relation to the U.S., Europe’s main trade partner and security benefactor. The decoupling drive is in its infancy. The U.S. remains by far the largest trading partner for Europe, and it will take years for the bloc to wean itself off American tech and military support, according to Jean-Luc Demarty, who was in charge of the European Commission’s trade department under the body’s former president, Jean-Claude Juncker. Donald Trump’s threats to take over Greenland, and aggressive comments about Europe by members of his administration, have given fresh impetus to European leaders’ call for “independence.” | Kristian Tuxen Ladegaard Berg/NurPhoto via Getty Images “In terms of trade, they [the U.S.] represent a significant share of our exports,” said Demarty. “So it’s a lot, but it’s not a matter of life and death.” The push to diversify away from the U.S. has seen Brussels strike trade deals with the Mercosur bloc of Latin American countries, India and Indonesia in recent months. The Commission also revamped its deal with Mexico, and revived stalled negotiations with Australia. DEFENDING EUROPE: FROM NATO TO THE EU Since the continent emerged from the ashes of World War II, Europe has relied for its security on NATO — which the U.S. contributes the bulk of funding to. At a weekend retreat in Zagreb, Croatia, conservative European leaders including Merz said it was time for the bloc to beef up its homegrown mutual-defense clause, which binds EU countries to an agreement to defend any EU country that comes under attack. While it has existed since 2009, the EU’s Article 42.7 mutual defense clause was rarely seen as necessary because NATO’s Article 5 served a similar purpose. But Europe’s governments have started to doubt whether the U.S. really would come to Europe’s rescue. In Zagreb, the leaders embraced the EU’s new role as a security actor, tasking two leaders, as yet unnamed, with rapidly cooking up plans to turn the EU clause from words to an ironclad security guarantee. “For decades, some countries said ‘We have NATO, why should we have parallel structures?’” said a senior EU diplomat who was granted anonymity to talk about confidential summit preparations. After Trump’s Greenland saber-rattling, “we are faced with the necessity, we have to set up military command structures within the EU.” At a weekend retreat in Zagreb, Croatia, conservative European leaders including Merz said it was time for the bloc to beef up its homegrown mutual-defense clause, which binds EU countries to an agreement to defend any EU country that comes under attack. | Marko Perkov/AFP via Getty Images In comments to EU lawmakers last week, NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte said that anyone who believes Europe can defend itself without the U.S. should “keep on dreaming.” Europe remains heavily reliant on U.S. military capabilities, most notably in its support for Ukraine’s fight against Russia. But some Europeans are now openly talking about the price of reducing exposure to the U.S. — and saying it’s manageable. TECHNOLOGY: TEAMS OUT, VISIO IN The mood shift is clearest when it comes to technology, where European reliance on platforms such as X, Meta and Google has long troubled EU voters, as evidenced by broad support for the bloc’s tech legislation. French President Emmanuel Macron’s government is planning to ban officials from using U.S.-based videoconferencing tools. Other countries like Germany are contemplating similar moves. “It’s very clear that Europe is having our independence moment,” EU tech czar Henna Virkkunen told a POLITICO conference last week. “During the last year, everybody has really realized how important it is that we are not dependent on one country or one company when it comes to some very critical technologies.” France is moving to ban public officials from using American platforms including Google Meet, Zoom and Teams, a government spokesperson told POLITICO. Officials will soon make the switch to Visio, a videoconferencing tool that runs on infrastructure provided by French firm Outscale. In the European Parliament, lawmakers are urging its president, Roberta Metsola, to ditch U.S. software and hardware, as well as a U.S.-based travel booking tool. In Germany, politicians want a potential German or European substitute for software made by U.S. data analysis firm Palantir. “Such dependencies on key technologies are naturally a major problem,” Sebastian Fiedler, an SPD lawmaker and expert on policing, told POLITICO. Even in the Netherlands, among Europe’s more pro-American countries, there are growing calls from lawmakers and voters to ring-fence sensitive technologies from U.S. influence. Dutch lawmakers are reviewing a petition signed by 140,000 people calling on the state to block the acquisition of a state identity verification tool by a U.S. company. At the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, in late January, German entrepreneur Anna Zeiter announced the launch of a Europe-based social media platform called W that could rival Elon Musk’s X, which has faced fines for breaching the EU’s content moderation rules. W plans to host its data on “European servers owned by European companies” and limits its investors to Europeans, Zeiter told Euronews. So far, Brussels has yet to codify any such moves into law. But upcoming legislation on cloud and AI services are expected to send signals about the need to Europeanize the bloc’s tech offerings. ENERGY: TIME TO DIVERSIFY On energy, the same trend is apparent. The United States provides more than a quarter of the EU’s gas, a share set to rise further as a full ban on Russian imports takes effect. But EU officials warn about the risk of increasing Europe’s dependency on the U.S. in yet another area. Trump’s claims on Greenland were a “clear wake-up call” for the EU, showing that energy can no longer be seen in isolation from geopolitical trends, EU Energy Commissioner Dan Jørgensen said last Wednesday. The Greenland crisis reinforced concerns that the bloc risks “replacing one dependency with another,” said Jørgensen, adding that as a result, Brussels is stepping up efforts to diversify, deepening talks with alternative suppliers including Canada, Qatar and North African countries such as Algeria. FINANCE: MOVING TO EUROPEAN PAYMENTS Payment systems are also drawing scrutiny, with lawmakers warning about over-reliance on U.S. payment systems such as Mastercard and Visa. The digital euro, a digital version of cash that the European Central Bank is preparing to issue in 2029, aims to cut these dependencies and provide a pan-European sovereign means of payment. “With the digital euro, Europeans would remain in control of their money, their choices and their future,” ECB President Christine Lagarde said last year. In Germany, some politicians are sounding the alarm about 1,236 tons of gold reserves that Germany keeps in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. “In a time of growing global uncertainty and under President Trump’s unpredictable U.S. policy, it’s no longer acceptable” to have that much in gold reserves in the U.S., Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, the German politician from the liberal Free Democratic Party, who chairs the Parliament’s defense committee, told Der Spiegel. Several European countries are pushing the EU to privilege European manufacturers when it comes to spending EU public money via “Buy European” clauses. Until a few years ago, countries like Poland, the Netherlands or the Baltic states would never have agreed on such “Buy European” clauses. But even those countries are now backing calls to prioritize purchases from EU-based companies. MILITARY INVESTMENT: BOOSTING OWN CAPACITY A €150 billion EU program to help countries boost their defense investments, finalized in May of last year, states that no more than 35 percent of the components in a given purchase, by cost, should originate from outside the EU and partner states like Norway and Ukraine. The U.S. is not considered a partner country under the scheme. For now, European countries rely heavily on the U.S. for military enablers including surveillance and reconnaissance, intelligence, strategic lift, missile defense and space-based assets. But the powerful conservative umbrella group, the European People Party, says these are precisely the areas where Europe needs to ramp up its own capacities. When EU leaders from the EPP agreed on their 2026 roadmap in Zagreb, they stated that the “Buy European” principle should apply to an upcoming Commission proposal on joint procurement. The title of the EPP’s 2026 roadmap? “Time for independence.” Camille Gijs, Jacopo Barigazzi, Mathieu Pollet, Giovanna Faggionato, Eliza Gkritsi, Elena Giordano, Ben Munster and Sam Clark contributed reporting from Brussels. James Angelos contributed reporting from Berlin.

KYIV — For Ukrainians, the shattered eastern city of Pokrovsk — where troops are locked in battle with the Russians this Christmas — conjures up associations with one of their country’s most enduring cultural legacies: the Carol of the Bells. Western audiences may know the haunting, repeated melody from the Hollywood film Home Alone and the TV series Ted Lasso, but there are more poignant and political resonances for Ukrainians this winter as Pokrovsk is so closely connected with the carol’s composer, Mykola Leontovych. Leontovych did not — as widely believed — compose the carol in Pokrovsk but the city played a crucial role in the development of both his music and the patriotic Ukrainian politics that led to his persecution by the Russians and ultimately his murder by Soviet agents in 1921. Leontovych was based in Pokrovsk in the first decade of the 20th century, teaching at a music school and running a railway workers’ choir. He drew inspiration there from distinctively Ukrainian folk traditions, and he would later base the Carol of the Bells on a seasonal chant called Shchedryk. (Pokrovsk is dubbed the hometown of Shchedryk.) “Leontovych came to Pokrovsk with only the bag on his back, but it was there that he developed as a composer, and caught the attention of gendarmes as he stood up for the rights of workers. He even sang the Marseillaise with the local choir that he ran,” said Larysa Semenko, author of the book “Our Silent Genius, Leontovych.” Semenko was also quick to point out that the Ukrainian political dimension to the Carol of the Bells was nothing new. “It was never just a Christmas song, but a Ukrainian cultural message to the world, a greeting card of the nation’s deep-rooted spirituality and resilience in the face of threat. The same threat our nation is fighting today,” she said. SONG OF AN INDEPENDENT UKRAINE Leontovych is widely seen as a hero who took on Russia with his music a century ago, just as Ukrainians today are turning to guns, shells and drones to preserve their national identity from devastation by Moscow. As soon as Leontovych’s version of Shchedryk premiered in Kyiv in 1916, it was spotted as a potential hit by the leaders of the Ukrainian National Republic, the country’s short-lived attempt to break free from Moscow after World War I. The new government decided to send a national choir on tour across Europe with Leontovych’s choral songs in 1919 to promote recognition of the Ukrainian National Republic. The world did not recognize the new nation, but Shchedryk won it a place in global culture. “Even before the translation, it was a hit. In Paris, in Prague, all around Europe, princes and kings were fascinated to find out such a rich and old culture existed on their continent,” Semenko said. Before the European tour, the singers from the Ukrainian choir had to evacuate to the West of Ukraine as Bolsheviks overran Kyiv. After their European success, they went to Canada and the United States, already as the Ukrainian National Chorus, bringing Shchedryk to the North America in 1922. As soon as Leontovych’s version of Shchedryk premiered in Kyiv in 1916, it was spotted as a potential hit by the leaders of the Ukrainian National Republic. | Kostiantyn Liberov/Libkos/Getty Images “Shchedryk, which was a hit and always played as an encore, enchanted Europe and America, and helped Ukrainians to declare their nation and state to the world, said Anatoliy Paladiychuk, researcher and author of the project “Kamianets Notes and Wings of Shchedryk.” In 1936, the American composer Peter J. Wilhousky wrote English lyrics, adapting Shchedryk into the version familiar in West as the Carol of the Bells for an NBC radio performance. Leontovych did not live to see this worldwide success. Under the pretext that they were fighting bandits, the Soviet secret service killed him in January 1921 in his parents’ house in the western region of Vinnytsia. Ukrainians only learned the truth about his death after the opening of Soviet archives in the 1990s. “Just like they do in occupied territories of Ukraine now, Russian authorities saw a threat in Ukrainian culture. That was the start of great terror against Ukrainian freedom fighters, politicians, and educators. Leontovych was one of many who were killed,” Semenko said. HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF Almost 105 years after Leontovych’s death, Russia is once again trying to snuff out Ukrainian nationhood. While fighting has raged over Pokrovsk for more than 18 months, Moscow now claims it has occupied it. The Ukrainian army insists its forces are back in parts of Pokrovsk after withdrawal in November. Kyiv also says small groups of Russian soldiers are infiltrating to pose for pictures with flags for propaganda purposes, but don’t fully control the ruins. The Ukrainian army insists its forces are back in parts of Pokrovsk after withdrawal in November. | Ukrinform/NurPhoto via Getty Images “Our active operations in the Pokrovsko-Myrnoрrad agglomeration area continue. In Pokrovsk itself, in the past few weeks, we were able to regain control of about 16 square kilometers in the northern part of the city,” Ukrainian Army Commander Gen. Oleksandr Syrskyi said in a post on Telegram. Syrskyi vowed Ukraine would continue to fight for Pokrovsk and bolster its forces in the ruined city against hundreds of thousands of Kremlin soldiers. American historian Timothy Snyder — a leading expert on Ukraine — also drew on the Carol of the Bells to stress the continuity between Russian colonialism a century ago and President Vladimir Putin’s onslaught against the country. “Ukrainian culture is very significant in our world, but our awareness of it is minimal: the assassination of Leontovych and the transformation of Shchedryk is just one minor example of this colonial history, one that is continued during Russia’s present invasion of Ukraine,” Snyder said in a post on Substack on Dec 14.

The European Broadcasting Union cleared Israel to take part in next year’s Eurovision Song Contest, brushing aside demands for its exclusion and sparking an unprecedented backlash. “A large majority of Members agreed that there was no need for a further vote on participation and that the Eurovision Song Contest 2026 should proceed as planned, with the additional safeguards in place,” the EBU said in a statement Thursday. Following the decision, broadcasters in Spain, Ireland, the Netherlands and Slovenia said they disagreed with the EBU and announced they would not participate in the 70th-anniversary Eurovision in Vienna because Israel was allowed to take part. The boycotting countries said their decision was based on Israel’s war in Gaza and the resulting humanitarian crisis, as they launched a historic boycott that plunges Eurovision into its deepest-ever crisis. “Culture unites, but not at any price,” Taco Zimmerman, general director of Dutch broadcaster AVROTROS, said Thursday. “Universal values such as humanity and press freedom have been seriously compromised, and for us, these values are non-negotiable.” On the other side of the debate, Germany had warned it could pull out of the contest if Israel was not allowed to take part. Before the voting took place, Golan Yochpaz, a senior Israeli TV executive, said the meeting was “the attempt to remove KAN [Israeli national broadcasters] from the contest,” which “can only be understood as a cultural boycott.” Ireland’s public broadcaster RTÉ said it “feels that Ireland’s participation remains unconscionable given the appalling loss of lives in Gaza and the humanitarian crisis there, which continues to put the lives of so many civilians at risk.” Spanish radio and television broadcaster RTVE said it had lost trust in Eurovision. RTVE President José Pablo López said that “what happened at the EBU Assembly confirms that Eurovision is not a song contest but a festival dominated by geopolitical interests and fractured.” The EBU in Geneva also agreed on measures to “curb disproportionate third-party influence, including government-backed campaigns,” and limited the number of public votes to 10 “per payment method.” RTVE called the change “insufficient.” Controversy earlier this year prompted the changes, when several European broadcasters alleged that the Israeli government had interfered in the voting — after Israel received the largest number of public votes during the final. The EBU has been in talks with its members about Israel’s participation since the issue was raised at a June meeting of national broadcasters in London. Eurovision is run by the EBU, an alliance of public service media with 113 members in 56 countries. The contest has long proclaimed that it is “non-political,” but in 2022, the EBU banned Russia from the competition following the Kremlin’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Palestinian militant group Hamas attacked Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, killing about 1,200 people in Israel, a large majority of whom were civilians, and taking 251 hostages. The attack prompted a major Israeli military offensive in Gaza, which has killed tens of thousands of Palestinians, many of them civilians, displaced 90 percent of Gaza’s population and destroyed wide areas. The ceasefire brokered by U.S. President Donald Trump in October 2025 led to the release of the remaining 20 Israeli hostages. Shawn Pogatchnik contributed to this report.

Global pop star Sabrina Carpenter may be “Man’s Best Friend” — but not Donald Trump’s, becoming the latest celebrity to condemn the president’s use of her music. In response to a video posted by the White House using one of her songs, the “Espresso” singer replied Tuesday that “this video is evil and disgusting. Do not ever involve me or my music to benefit your inhumane agenda.” The video of agents arresting individuals — an apparent part of Trump’s immigration crackdown — is overlaid with Carpenter’s song “Juno.” The White House’s caption reads, “Have you tried this one?” in reference to one of the lyrics. In a statement, the White House continued to reference Carpenter’s music. “Here’s a Short n’ Sweet message for Sabrina Carpenter: we won’t apologize for deporting dangerous criminal illegal murderers, rapists, and pedophiles from our country. Anyone who would defend these sick monsters must be stupid, or is it slow?” said White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson, referencing Carpenter’s “Short n’ Sweet” album and “Manchild” song. Carpenter is the latest in a long line of musicians condemning Trump and demanding that he stop using their songs, dating back to his 2016 campaign. In 2024, Beyoncé threatened a cease and desist order to the Trump campaign after it used her song “Freedom” in a video. That song later became former Vice President Kamala Harris’s campaign song. Swedish band ABBA, rock band Foo Fighters and singer-songwriter Kenny Loggins have also demanded the president stop using their music at rallies and in videos over the years.

Alcohol has been enjoyed in societies for thousands of years, playing a role in celebrations and gatherings across the world. While misuse continues to cause harm, it’s encouraging to see that, according to World Health Organization data, trends are moving in the right direction. Consumers are better informed and increasingly aware of the benefits of moderation.   While Diageo is only relatively young — founded in 1997 — our roots run deep. Many of our brands date back centuries, some as far back as the 1600s. From iconic names such as Guinness and Johnnie Walker to modern innovations like Tanqueray 0.0, we are proud to continue that legacy by building and sustaining exceptional brands that resonate across generations and geographies. We want to be one of the best performing, most trusted and respected consumer products companies in the world — grounded in a strong sense of responsibility.  That means being transparent about the challenges, proactive in promoting responsible drinking, and collaborative in shaping the future of alcohol policy. We are proud of the progress made, but we know there is more to do. Lasting change requires a whole-of-society approach, bringing together governments, health experts, civil society and the private sector.   We believe a more balanced, evidence-based dialogue is crucial; one that recognizes both the risks of harmful drinking and the opportunities to drive positive change. Our brands are woven into cultural and social traditions around the world, and the industry contributes significantly to employment, local economies and public revenues. Recognizing this broader context is essential to shaping effective, proportionate and collaborative alcohol policies. Public-private collaboration brings together the strengths of different sectors, and these partnerships help scale impactful programs.  > We believe a more balanced, evidence-based dialogue is crucial; one that > recognizes both the risks of harmful drinking and the opportunities to drive > positive change. Across markets, consumers are increasingly choosing to drink more mindfully. Moderation is a long-term trend — whether it’s choosing a non-alcoholic alternative, enjoying fewer drinks of higher quality, or exploring the choice ready-to-drink formats offer, people are drinking better, not more, something Diageo has long advocated. Moderation is not a limitation; it’s a mindset. One of the ways we’re leading in this space is through our expanding non-alcoholic portfolio, including the acquisition of Ritual Beverage Company in the US and our investment in Guinness 0.0. This growing diversity of options empowers individuals to choose what’s right for them, in the moment. Moderation is about choice, and spirits can also offer creative ways to moderate, such as mixing alcoholic and non-alcoholic ingredients to craft serves like the ‘lo-groni’, or opting for a smaller measure in your gin and tonic.  Governments are increasingly taking proportionate approaches to alcohol regulation, recognizing the value of collaboration and evidence-based policy. There’s growing interest in public-private partnerships and regulatory rationality, working together to achieve our shared goal to reduce the harmful use of alcohol. In the UK, underage drinking is at its lowest since records began, thanks in part to initiatives like Challenge 25, a successful public-private collaboration that demonstrates the impact of collective, targeted action.  > Moderation is not a limitation; it’s a mindset. Diageo has long championed responsible drinking through campaigns and programs that are measurable and scalable. Like our responsible drinking campaign, The Magic of Moderate Drinking, which is rolled out across Europe, and our programs such as Sober vs Drink Driving, and Wrong Side of the Road, which are designed to shift behaviors, not just raise awareness. In Ireland, we brought this commitment to life at the All Together Now music, art, food and wellness festival with the launch of the TO.0UCAN pub in 2024, the country’s first-ever non-alcoholic bar at a music festival. Serving Guinness 0.0 on draught, it reimagined the traditional Irish pub experience, offering a fresh and inclusive way for festival-goers to enjoy the full energy and atmosphere of the event without alcohol.  Another example comes from our initiative Smashed. This theatre-based education program, developed by Collingwood Learning and delivered by a network of non-government organizations, educates young people and helps them understand the dangers of underage drinking, while equipping them with the knowledge and confidence to resist peer pressure. Diageo sponsors and enables Smashed to reach millions of young people, teachers and parents across the globe, while ensuring that no  alcohol brands of any kind are mentioned. In 2008, we launched DRINKiQ, a first-of-its-kind platform to help people understand and be informed about alcohol, its effects, and how to enjoy it responsibly. Today, DRINKiQ is a dynamic, mobile-first platform, localized in over 40 markets. It remains a cornerstone of our strategy.  > Diageo has long championed responsible drinking through campaigns and programs > that are measurable and scalable. In the UK, our partnership with the Men’s Sheds Association supports older men’s wellbeing through DRINKiQ. Most recently, this collaboration expanded with Mission: Shoulder to Shoulder, a nationwide initiative where Shedders are building 100 buddy benches to spark over 200,000 conversations annually. The campaign promotes moderation and connection among older men, a cohort most likely to drink at increasing or higher risk levels. Across all our partnerships, we focus on the right message, in the right place, at the right time. They also reflect our belief that reducing harmful drinking requires collective action.  Our message is simple: Diageo is ready to be a proactive partner. Let’s build on the progress made and stay focused on the shared goal: reducing harm. With evidence-based policies, strong partnerships and public engagement, we can foster a drinking culture that is balanced, responsible and sustainable. Together, we can make real progress — for individuals, communities and society as a whole. 

National broadcasters will hold a vote on Israel’s participation in Eurovision in “early November,” a spokesperson for the song contest confirmed to POLITICO. A growing band of countries (including Spain, Ireland, Slovenia and the Netherlands) have threatened to boycott the 2026 edition if Israel is allowed to take part, citing its war in Gaza and the worsening humanitarian crisis it has caused. Eurovision is run by the European Broadcasting Union (EBU), an alliance of public service media with 113 members in 56 countries. A letter has been sent from the EBU’s executive board to director generals of all member broadcasters, to inform them about the vote on Israel taking part in 2026. The EBU has been in talks with its members about Israel’s participation since the issue was raised at a meeting of national broadcasters in London in June. Last year’s competition was also overshadowed by controversy surrounding Israel’s participation. The contest has long proclaimed that it is “non-political,” but in 2022 the EBU banned Russia from the competition following the country’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Israel’s national broadcaster, KAN, confirmed earlier this month that it is still preparing to select Israel’s representative for the contest due to take place in Vienna in May, and that there is “no reason why Israel should not continue to play a meaningful role in this major cultural event, which must remain a celebration of music and creativity, and not become politicized.”

U.S. President Donald Trump has said he wants to “help” Britain get a better trade deal, as he prepares to fly to the U.K. for his second state visit. “Basically, I’m there also on trade,” the president told reporters outside the White House on Tuesday ahead of his flight to London. “They want to see if they can refine the trade deal a little bit. We’ve made a deal, and it’s a great deal. “I’m into helping them. Our country is doing very well … They’d like to see if they could get a little bit better deal, so we’ll talk to them.” Trump’s words will be music to the ears of trade negotiators who hope to use the state visit to charm the president into dropping 25 percent tariffs on steel and aluminum, in line with the deal agreed earlier in May. Negotiators are also pressing the U.S. for preferential treatment on future pharmaceutical tariffs, contingent on the outcome of a U.S. investigation. In addition, the Scottish government has been lobbying hard for reductions to duties on Scotch whisky, which is subject to the blanket 10 percent “reciprocal” tariff applied to most U.K. goods. But Trump, a vocal admirer of the royal family, made clear that his priority was to meet the king and queen. “Primarily it’s to do with Prince Charles and Camilla,” he said. “They’re friends of mine for a long time … It’s an honor to have him as King. I think he represents the country so well … He’s such an elegant gentleman.”