Hackers from the Kremlin have mounted a “large-scale global cyber campaign” targeting civil servants, military personnel and other notable figures via messaging applications WhatsApp and Signal, Dutch intelligence services warned on Monday. The Russian operation aims to trick victims into revealing PIN codes for secure messaging apps Signal and WhatsApp, the Netherlands’ military intelligence service and domestic intelligence agency said in a joint public advisory. The bulletin did not indicate when the deception campaign began. Hackers are posing as a fake Signal support chatbot to persuade users to share their codes, allowing them to take over an account to read incoming communications and group chats. The culprits were also found to have exploited the “linked devices” feature of the apps, which lets them connect another device to the victim’s account and quietly monitor messages. The campaign has targeted government personnel as well as individuals of interest to the Russian government, including journalists, the Dutch authorities said. They also emphasized that individual accounts have been compromised, not the messaging apps as a whole. Signal is used widely by public officials as a secure and independent communications channel, and has been the recommended application for EU officials to use for external comms since 2020. “Despite their end-to-end encryption option, messaging apps such as Signal and WhatsApp should not be used as channels for classified, confidential or sensitive information,” said the director of the Dutch military intelligence service, Peter Reesink. United States Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and other top U.S. officials came under fire last year for using the app to exchange classified information in an incident known as Signalgate. WhatsApp’s communication director, Joshua Breckman, said the company continues “to build ways to protect people from online threats ,” adding that users should never share their six-digit code with others. Signal did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The Russian government did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

DUBLIN — TikTok on Tuesday began a defense of how it handles Europeans’ privacy and data in a court case that will define how Chinese-owned companies in Europe deal with Beijing’s spying laws. The popular social media app is going head to head with the Irish Data Protection Commission — Europe’s most powerful privacy regulator, which oversees tech giants including Meta, X and Google. At stake in the Irish court battle is whether TikTok is allowed to transfer personal data of Europeans to China. The company, which is owned by Chinese giant ByteDance, is challenging a €530 million fine by the Irish regulator last year, when officials found it had allowed Chinese staff to access Europeans’ data — but failed “to verify, guarantee and demonstrate” that the data was properly protected. The Irish regulator wants TikTok to shut off data flows to China, unless it can prove its user information is safe from Beijing’s invasive surveillance and intelligence laws. The case is a major test for Europe’s privacy rulebook, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), and how it protects Europeans when their data is transferred to China. It comes as Europe is facing transatlantic pressure, forcing the bloc to revisit trade ties with Beijing, despite long-held security concerns over the Chinese government’s data snooping practices. Lawyers faced off Tuesday in Dublin’s top courts building, for the start of a grueling 10-day hearing, sparring over how to interpret the limits of Chinese laws and the merits of TikTok’s data practices. “The consequences of [the Irish regulator’s] decision are immense, even for a very large organization like TikTok,” the firm’s senior counsel Paul Gallagher told the court, estimating the cost of complying with the Irish order to run as high as €5 billion. If judges side with the Irish regulator, that could ultimately force TikTok to unplug from China entirely to continue serving European users — just months after it split off its U.S. operation into a new app, under the control of a group of investors led by Silicon Valley giant Oracle and investment firms Silver Lake and MGX, to alleviate long-standing American data security concerns. TikTok has estimated that it would cost billions for it to comply with the Irish regulator’s demand to cut off data flows, and would involve relocating thousands of its workers outside of China. DATA ACCESS WOES The Irish regulator slapped TikTok with the privacy fine last May after it found the platform couldn’t guarantee the data of its 159 million monthly users in Europe were safe from China’s “problematic” surveillance laws. “This is all about what TikTok have described as the relevant laws, and what the [Data Protection Commission, or DPC] have described as the problematic laws,” said TikTok’s senior counsel Gallagher, who is also a former attorney general for the Irish government. “We don’t think they are problematic, because we think they don’t apply. The DPC thinks they are problematic, because it thinks they do apply.” The fine was one of the highest the Irish regulator has handed out since it started enforcing the GDPR in 2018. It followed years of scrutiny from security and privacy authorities, as Western governments increasingly viewed TikTok as a threat. TikTok is owned by Beijing-based ByteDance, and staff in China have remote access to some European user data stored outside the country. In details shared with the Irish regulator during the investigation, TikTok said that the kind of data accessed by staff in China could include usernames and account holder details, interaction and activity data, and other personal data. It said the company didn’t intend to collect sensitive data about users, but it “may be collected incidentally or uploaded” by users, and staff needed to have “restricted and limited” access for research, security, analytics and other services. TikTok has said Chinese laws don’t apply to its data, which it stores outside of China, and has said it has never been asked to hand over data to Beijing’s authorities.  The firm already launched a massive campaign to alleviate European politicians’ security concerns in 2023, when it presented what it called “Project Clover,” a €12 billion plan designed to store data in Europe, overseen by a European security company. It mimicked a U.S. campaign called “Project Texas,” which promised similar controls to the U.S. in 2020. But the moves failed to persuade politicians. The EU already cracked down on TikTok for its own officials when it banned the app on their phones in 2023, a move that was followed by many governments across Europe. CHINA VS. US The TikTok case is also forcing Europe to deal with a blind spot: data flowing to China has, so far, been left largely unscrutinized. The EU has skirmished with American authorities for years over how to protect Europeans’ personal data from mass surveillance programs uncovered by whistleblower Edward Snowden in 2013. Data transfer agreements crafted by the EU and U.S. have been repeatedly wiped out by Europe’s top court over surveillance concerns. For data flowing to China, though, few cases have tested how companies protect Europeans’ data when it comes within reach of Beijing’s surveillance authorities. The Irish regulator’s decision to fine TikTok meant the “screw is turning” on data flows to China, Joe Jones, research director at the International Association of Privacy Professionals, said after the decision came out. “We’ve had over a decade of EU-U.K., EU-U.S. fights and sagas on [data flows]. This is the first time we’ve seen anything significant on any other country outside of that transatlantic triangle — and it’s China,” Jones said.

Chinese technology giant Huawei is participating in 16 projects funded by the European Commission’s Horizon Europe research and innovation program despite being dubbed a high-risk supplier. The Commission restricted Huawei from accessing Horizon projects in 2023 after saying that it (and another Chinese telecom supplier, ZTE) posed “materially higher risks than other 5G suppliers” in relation to cybersecurity and foreign influence. However, public data reviewed by POLITICO’s EU Influence newsletter shows that Huawei still takes part in several projects, many of which are in sensitive fields like cloud computing, 5G and 6G telecom technology and data centers. These projects mean Huawei has been working alongside universities and tech companies in Spain, France, Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands, Germany, Belgium, Finland and Italy. It also has access to the intellectual property generated by the projects, as the contracts require the sharing of information as well as joint ownership of the results between partners. A Commission spokesperson confirmed that of the 16 projects, 15 were signed before the restrictions took place. The remaining project “was signed in 2025 and was assessed as falling outside the scope of the existing restrictions.” Many of the projects started in January 2023, with the contracts running out at the end of this year, while others will last until 2027, 2028 and 2030. “Huawei participates in and implements projects funded under Horizon Europe in a lawful and compliant manner,” a company spokesperson said. One of the projects is to develop data privacy and protection tools in the fields of AI and big data, along with Italy’s National Research Council, the University of Malaga, the University of Toulouse, the University of Calabria, and a Bavarian high-tech research institute for software-intensive systems. Huawei received €207,000 to lead the work on “design, implementation, and evaluation of use cases,” according to the contract for that project, seen by POLITICO. COMMISSION CRACKDOWN Last month the Commission proposed a new Cybersecurity Act that would restrict Huawei from critical telecoms networks under EU law, after years of asking national capitals to do so voluntarily. “I’m not satisfied [with] how the member states … have been implementing our 5G Toolbox,” the Commission’s executive VP for tech and security policy, Henna Virkkunen, told POLITICO at the time, referring to EU guidelines to deal with high-risk vendors. “We know that we still have high-risk vendors in our 5G networks, in the critical parts … so now we will have stricter rules on this.” The Commission is also working on measures to cut Chinese companies out of lucrative public contracts. Bart Groothuis, a liberal MEP working on the Cybersecurity Act, told POLITICO that the Commission should “honor the promises and commitments” it made “and push them out.” “They should be barred from participating. Period.” Huawei was also involved in an influence scandal last year, with Belgian authorities investigating whether the tech giant exerted undue influence over EU lawmakers. The scandal led to Huawei’s being banned from lobbying on the premises of the European Commission and the European Parliament.

ATHENS — A Greek court on Thursday sentenced four people, including two Israelis, to prison over a major wiretapping scandal involving the illegal use of spyware to target politicians, business leaders and journalists. The Greek spying affair, known as “Predatorgate,” erupted in 2022 when Nikos Androulakis, leader of the main opposition PASOK party and then a member of the European Parliament, discovered that illegal spyware known as Predator had been installed on his phone. The scandal is one of Europe’s most significant political crises involving the use of commercial hacking software. Spain, Hungary and Poland have faced similar controversies, with spyware such as Pegasus and Candiru found on the phones of politicians and activists. The European Parliament launched a formal inquiry into the use of such tools in 2022. Greek political parties have clashed over the affair for years, as an expanding list of cases revealed the highly invasive surveillance tool on the phones of opposition politicians, government ministers, military officials, journalists and business executives. The Greek government has denied using the illegal spyware. On Thursday, the court found four defendants guilty of “breaching the confidentiality of telephone communications,” “tampering with a personal-data filing system … on a repeated basis,” and “illegal access to an information system or data.” Those convicted include Tal Dilian, a former Israeli military officer and founder of Intellexa; his business partner Sara Aleksandra Fayssal Hamou; Felix Bitzios, a former deputy administrator and shareholder of Intellexa; and Yiannis Lavranos, whose company Krikel purchased the spyware. The defendants received combined prison sentences totaling 126 years and eight months, with eight years to be served. All four denied wrongdoing during the trial. The scandal has cast a long shadow over Greek politics. In 2024, Greece’s Supreme Court cleared the state intelligence service and political officials of wrongdoing, a decision that angered spyware victims and opposition parties. Androulakis said Thursday that “the fight will continue until all those involved in this murky affair are brought to justice.” He has appealed the Supreme Court’s decision to the European Court of Human Rights. The opposition party Syriza said in a statement: “The government and Kyriakos Mitsotakis himself can no longer hide. The important thing is that the case is reopening. The investigation into criminal liability and the upgrading of the indictment are starting again.” The four defendants did not respond to requests for comment.

BRUSSELS — European Parliament members on Monday slammed the Spanish government for using Huawei to store judicial wiretaps, with one leading lawmaker warning Madrid is putting its “crown jewels” at risk. The Spanish government has drawn criticism since the summer after it awarded a multimillion euro contract to Huawei for the storage of judicial wiretaps — a move that led the United States to threaten to cease intelligence sharing with Madrid. The outcry over Spain’s use of the Chinese tech giant for sensitive services lays bare how Europe continues to grapple with how to secure its digital systems against security threats. The European Union considers Huawei to be a high-risk supplier and wants to crack down on countries that still afford it broad market access. The EU proposed new draft cybersecurity legislation last month that, if approved, would force EU member countries to kick Huawei out of their telecoms networks, after years of trying to get capitals to ban the Chinese vendor voluntarily.  Lawmakers from several political groups said Spain’s contract with the Chinese tech giant could endanger the EU as a whole.  “We cannot operate in a union where one of the states actively strips high-risk vendors from its networks while another entrusts them with the crown jewels of its law enforcement,” said Markéta Gregorová, a Czech Pirate Party lawmaker who is part of the Greens group. Gregorová leads negotiations on a cyber bill that would give the EU the power to force Huawei and other — often Chinese — suppliers out of critical infrastructure in Europe. “When you introduce a high-risk vendor … we do not just risk a localized data breach, we risk poisoning the well of European intelligence sharing,” she said on Monday. Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez, a member of Spain’s center-right opposition party, said the decision puts “the entirety of the EU at risk.” The Spanish government has defended the contract it struck for storing wiretaps. Spain’s Interior Ministry said in a statement that the government had awarded a contract to “European companies,” which then bought storage products. “There is no risk to security, technological and legal sovereignty, nor is there any foreign interference or threat to the custody of evidence,” the ministry said. Interior Minister Fernando Grande-Marlaska told the Spanish parliament last September that Telefónica, the country’s telecom champion, operated a state surveillance system called SITEL and that storage “cabinets” had been integrated into that system.   Bloomberg reported last July that Huawei equipment is not used for classified information, with one government official saying the storage “represents a minor part of a watertight, audited, isolated and certified system.” On Monday, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, a prominent member of the European Parliament for the Socialists and Democrats group and a member of Prime Minister Pedro Sanchéz’s party in Spain, defended Madrid’s contract and pushed back on EU moves to intervene on the issue. In terms of “security, espionage, or violation of technological sovereignty,” there is “no risk,” Aguilar said. Huawei did not respond to a request for comment.

MUNICH, Germany — U.S. officials have countered Europe’s push for technology sovereignty from America with a clear message: It’s China you should worry about, not us. The European Union is rolling out a strategy to reduce its reliance on foreign technology suppliers. Donald Trump’s return to office has put the focus on American cloud giants, companies like Elon Musk’s Starlink and X and others — with European officials increasingly concerned that Washington has too much control over Europe’s digital infrastructure. As political leaders and security and intelligence officials met in Germany for the Munich Security Conference, Washington sought to calm nerves. The idea that Trump can pull the plug on the internet is not “a credible argument,” the United States’ National Cyber Director Sean Cairncross told an audience Thursday. Europe and the U.S. “face the same sort of threat and the same threat actors,” said Cairncross, who advises Trump on cybersecurity policy. Rather than weaning off America, wean off China, he said: “There is a clean tech stack. It is primarily American. And then there is a Chinese tech stack.” Claiming that U.S. tech is as risky as Chinese tech is “a giant false equivalency,” according to Cairncross. “Personal data doesn’t get piped to the state in the United States,” he said, referencing concerns that the Beijing government has laws requiring firms to hand over data for Chinese surveillance and espionage purposes. The attempt to quell concerns is notable even if it may not change the direction of travel in Europe. The European Commission wants to boost homegrown technology with a “tech sovereignty” package this spring. It presented a cybersecurity proposal in January that, if approved, could be used to root out suppliers that pose security risks — including from America. “We want to ensure that we don’t have risky dependencies when it comes to critical sectors,” the Commission’s Executive Vice President Henna Virkkunen told POLITICO in an interview in Munich on Friday. “We see this in AI, quantum technologies and semiconductors — we must have a certain level of capacity ourselves.” Europe’s attempt to pivot away from U.S. dependencies, while not new, has gained support in past months as the transatlantic alliance creaked. The POLITICO Poll conducted in February showed far more people described the U.S. as an unreliable ally than a reliable one across four countries, including half the adults polled in Germany and 57 percent in Canada. “The leadership claim of the U.S. is being challenged, perhaps already lost,” German Chancellor Friedrich Merz told the conference Friday. REBALANCING ACT Europe is still working out what a forceful attempt to build technology sovereignty would look like, as it reforms everything from industrial policy programs to procurement rules and data and cybersecurity requirements on companies and governments. Top European cyber officials in Munich told POLITICO that technological sovereignty does not mean cutting ties with trusted partners. Vincent Strubel, director of France’s cybersecurity agency ANSSI, said sovereignty means avoiding being bound by rules set elsewhere. “It’s about identifying what leverage non-European countries may have based on the technology they provide,” Strubel said in an interview. “It’s not about being friendly or unfriendly with any country — it’s about recognizing that we [currently] have no say in how that leverage might be used.” Claudia Plattner, head of Germany’s cybersecurity agency BSI, said, “We need to become more independent. We need to strengthen our local and European industries … We need to become digitally successful — that is essential to economic strength and to security.” The BSI plans to test sovereign cloud offerings from several large tech companies, including AWS and Google. The testing will examine whether European services can operate independently from parent systems and will help inform Germany’s national cloud strategy. Critics of Europe’s efforts to turn away from the U.S. say it is bound to lead to worse security. Christopher Ahlberg, the CEO of threat intelligence firm Recorded Future, said he understood that things like military command and control must remain national, “but if you start choosing sub-par cyber products just to achieve sovereignty, you’re going to be target No. 1 because threat actors will discover the vulnerabilities.” COMMON GROUND ON CHINA While tensions persist over the U.S.’s dominant position, Washington and European capitals have common ground when it comes to caution over Chinese tech. The EU is drafting legal requirements to cut out Chinese tech from critical supply chains including telecom networks, energy grids, security systems and railways. That move drew the ire of the Chinese government, which called it “blatant protectionism.” Many of the measures mirror what U.S. authorities have done in the past decade. “The U.S. understands what national security is. They don’t want to hear: ‘The U.S. is a threat.’ But they understand resilience,” said Sébastien Garnault, a prominent French cyber policy consultant. Trump “is putting America first, and the same goes in cyberspace,” Cairncross said. But, he added, “we don’t want it to be America alone. We want that partnership.” Laurens Cerulus contributed reporting.

BRUSSELS — European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen is softening a push to take greater control of EU intelligence sharing after a standoff with her foreign affairs chief Kaja Kallas, four officials with knowledge of the discussion told POLITICO. The EU executive said in November it wanted to set up an internal cell to collect intelligence from across Europe, overseen by the president herself, as part of an effort to protect the bloc from Russian digital attacks and sabotage. But the plan triggered a backlash from European capitals and the EU’s diplomatic service, which has its own center for Europe-wide intel sharing. The Commission is now scaling back its ambitions for the intelligence cell, according to the officials, who include two EU officials and two EU diplomats. The cell will likely become a security unit and will leave much of the intelligence sharing to the INTCEN center of the European External Action Service (EEAS), two of the officials said. The move would see Kallas retain greater control over intelligence. The Estonian top diplomat, who heads the EEAS, repeatedly clashed with the EU executive president last year, including when she attempted to hire Martin Selmayr, the former head of cabinet of von der Leyen’s predecessor Jean-Claude Juncker, for a top job. The recruitment initiative stirred unease in the Commission under von der Leyen, who has tried to centralize power under the EU executive. Europe aims to boost information sharing among national spy agencies as relations with Washington over intelligence sharing deteriorate and Europe scrambles to strike back against hybrid attacks by Russia, from disinformation campaigns to hacks and sabotage. Intelligence and security officials gather in Germany later this week for the Munich Security Conference, where transatlantic ties and the war on Europe’s eastern border are expected to top the agenda. The European Union has been trying to scale up intelligence sharing in past years, but national governments have competence over national security and are wary to grant the EU much control over sensitive and classified information. The INTCEN directorate has built up credibility with some national capitals in the past year. Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz backed the division in January, when they said the “hybrid fusion cell” housed within INTCEN should be better supported to fight hybrid threats. The directorate, which is in charge of handling civilian intelligence and reports to Kallas, has briefed the weekly College meeting of commissioners and the Foreign Affairs Council of foreign ministers in past months. While von der Leyen never officially presented a plan for the “dedicated cell” or provided a staff count, the Commission said it would “play a key role in the preparation of the Security College.” “There is no point in having another cell,” said the first EU diplomat who, like the other officials and diplomats consulted for this story, asked to remain anonymous given the sensitivity of the matter. “Even at the level of INTCEN there is not much sharing yet. It is better, but there is no need for the creation of another cell.” In a response to POLITICO, a Commission official, granted anonymity because they were not allowed to speak on the record, said that in a “challenging geopolitical and geo-economic landscape” INTCEN was looking at how to strengthen its security and intelligence capabilities. The official added that the cell would complement the work of the Security Directorate within the Commission and would “closely cooperate with respective services of EEAS.” The second EU diplomat was supportive of the Commission’s plan to create the cell, arguing that the initiative would help improve decision making because it would allow a handful officials to interpret and use intel, a cumbersome process among 27 member countries. Kallas herself was critical of the idea of a Commission intelligence cell in November: “Having been a prime minister of a country, I know that all the member states are struggling with the budget, and asking that we should do something in addition to the things that we have already is not a wise idea,” she told the European Parliament. This article has been updated.

The Netherlands’ incoming government wants to push Europe toward a tighter intelligence-sharing club — including what it calls a potential “European equivalent” of the Five Eyes alliance — as part of a broader overhaul of its security services. The new coalition argues, in its governing plans published Friday, that rising threats require faster and more proactive intelligence agencies while preserving the country’s tradition of operating under strict rule-of-law safeguards. The proposals include boosting funding and digital infrastructure for the civilian intelligence agency (AIVD) and military intelligence service (MIVD), and strengthening the role of the national counterterrorism coordinator. At the European level, The Hague says it wants to intensify cooperation with a core group of like-minded countries, explicitly floating a continent-wide version of the “Five Eyes” intelligence partnership (which is made up of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the U.K., and the U.S.). In October, the heads of the two Dutch agencies announced they would stop sharing certain information with their U.S. counterparts, citing political interference and human rights concerns. Instead they would look at increasing cooperation with other European services, like the U.K., Poland, France, Germany and the Nordic countries. Domestically, the government plans to fast-track a revamped Intelligence and Security Services Act, rewriting the law to focus on threats rather than specific investigative tools and making it “technology-neutral” so agencies are not outpaced by innovation. Supervisory bodies would be merged to provide streamlined, but legally robust, oversight. The agenda also calls for expanding the operational research capacity of Dutch intelligence services to help build Europe’s “strategic autonomy,” while deepening ties with tech firms and recruiting top technical talent.

China’s foreign ministry on Wednesday said a new European Commission proposal to restrict high-risk tech vendors from critical supply chains amounted to “blatant protectionism,” warning European officials that Beijing will take “necessary measures” to protect Chinese firms. Beijing has “serious concerns” over the bill, Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun told reporters, according to state news agencies’ reports. “Using non-technical standards to forcibly restrict or even prohibit companies from participating in the market, without any factual evidence, seriously violates market principles and fair competition rules,” Guo said. The European Commission on Tuesday unveiled its proposal to revamp the bloc’s Cybersecurity Act. The bill seeks to crack down on risky technology vendors in critical supply chains ranging across energy, transport, health care and other sectors. Though the legislation itself does not name any specific countries or companies, it is widely seen as being targeted at China. 5G suppliers Huawei and ZTE are in the EU’s immediate crosshairs, while other Chinese vendors are expected to be hit at a later stage. European Commission spokesperson Thomas Regnier responded to the Chinese foreign ministry, saying Europe has allowed high-risk vendors from outside the EU in strategic sectors for “far too long.” “We are indeed radically changing this. Because we cannot be naive anymore,” Regnier said in a statement. The exclusion of high-risk suppliers will always be based on “strong risk assessments” and in coordination with EU member countries, he said. China “urges the EU to avoid going further down the wrong path of protectionism,” the Chinese foreign ministry’s Guo told reporters. He added the EU bill would “not only fail to achieve so-called security but will also incur huge costs,” saying some restrictions on using Huawei had already “caused enormous economic losses” in Europe in past years. European telecom operators warned Tuesday that the law would impose multi-billion euro costs on the industry if restrictions on using Huawei and ZTE were to become mandatory across Europe. A Huawei spokesperson said in a statement that laws to block suppliers based on their country of origin violate the EU’s “basic legal principles of fairness, non-discrimination, and proportionality,” as well as its World Trade Organization obligations. The company “reserve[s] all rights to safeguard our legitimate interests,” the spokesperson said. ZTE did not respond to requests for comment on the EU’s plans.

Listen on * Spotify * Apple Music * Amazon Music Kriege werden längst auch unsichtbar geführt: im Netz, über Desinformation, Sabotage und Angriffe auf kritische Infrastruktur. Cyberattacken auf Flughäfen, Stromnetze und Behörden zeigen, wie real die Bedrohung bereits ist. In diesem Berlin Playbook Spezial spricht Rixa Fürsen mit Thomas Daum, Vizeadmiral der Bundeswehr und Inspekteur für Cyber- und Informationsraum, über die neue Eskalationsstufe hybrider Angriffe. Daum erklärt, warum Cyberangriffe heute gezielt Unruhe stiften sollen, wie eng sie mit Desinformation verzahnt sind und weshalb Deutschland sich nicht erst auf das oft genannte Jahr 2029, sondern auf frühere Szenarien einstellen muss. Das Berlin Playbook als Podcast gibt es jeden Morgen ab 5 Uhr. Gordon Repinski und das POLITICO-Team liefern Politik zum Hören – kompakt, international, hintergründig. Für alle Hauptstadt-Profis: Der Berlin Playbook-Newsletter bietet jeden Morgen die wichtigsten Themen und Einordnungen. Jetzt kostenlos abonnieren. Mehr von Host und POLITICO Executive Editor Gordon Repinski: Instagram: @gordon.repinski | X: @GordonRepinski. POLITICO Deutschland – ein Angebot der Axel Springer Deutschland GmbH Axel-Springer-Straße 65, 10888 Berlin Tel: +49 (30) 2591 0 information@axelspringer.de Sitz: Amtsgericht Berlin-Charlottenburg, HRB 196159 B USt-IdNr: DE 214 852 390 Geschäftsführer: Carolin Hulshoff Pol, Mathias Sanchez Luna