LONDON — Scandal-hit Japanese tech firm Fujitsu has lost its grip on a lucrative contract to keep running Great Britain’s post-Brexit border with Northern Ireland, following mounting public pressure, two people with knowledge of the bidding process have told POLITICO. The firm at the center of the Post Office scandal — which saw faulty data from Fujitsu’s Horizon software lead to wrongful theft and fraud convictions of hundreds of innocent Post Office workers — had spearheaded a consortium bid for the £370 million contract to continue running the Trader Support Service (TSS), as reported earlier this year. The contract was awarded to another consortium late last month, according to the two people cited above. The 10-day cooling-off period after the contract was awarded ends on Tuesday. The Fujitsu-led consortium, which includes Liz Truss ally Shanker Singham’s firm Competere, has raked in more than £500 million since 2020 developing and operating the platform, which helps firms navigate the complicated post-Brexit customs arrangements between Great Britain and Northern Ireland under the Windsor Framework. While a new supplier will be taking control of TSS, Fujitsu retains the intellectual property rights to a core part of the existing platform, four people with knowledge of the process — including those cited above — confirmed. This means the new system will have to be built from scratch.  All of those cited in this story were granted anonymity to speak freely. There have been calls for Fujitsu to be stripped of its public contracts while sub postmasters affected by the scandal await full compensation. In August, more than 32 MPs and 44 peers wrote to U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer, urging him to block the firm from bidding for control of the TSS platform. In October, the government accepted all but one of the recommendations from Wyn Williams’ inquiry into the scandal, published in July, which concluded that at least 13 people may have taken their own lives after being accused of wrongdoing.  There has also been public scrutiny over the running of TSS. Cabinet Office Minister Nick Thomas-Symonds told lawmakers earlier this year he was investigating industry concerns about the service. “We are concerned to hear reports that the Trader Support Service is not providing a good quality of service,” cross-party peers on the Northern Ireland Scrutiny Committee wrote in an October report. Meanwhile, a report by the Federation of Small Businesses found current support relating to the Windsor Framework — including the TSS — was “falling short of expectations,” with 78 percent of Northern Irish businesses surveyed rating it as either “very poor” or “poor.” A spokesperson for HMRC, which awarded the contract, said: “We follow government procurement rules when awarding contracts, ensuring value for money for taxpayers. All bids underwent a robust evaluation and assurance process, and we will confirm the award in due course.” Fujitsu and Competere did not respond to requests for comment.

The Dutch government has quietly removed Google tracking tools from job listings for its intelligence services over concerns that the data would expose aspirant spies to U.S. surveillance. The intervention would put an end to Google’s processing of the data of job seekers interested in applying to spy service jobs, after members of parliament in The Hague raised security concerns. The move comes at a moment when trust between the Netherlands and the United States is fraying. It reflects wider European unease — heightened by Donald Trump’s return to the White House — about American tech giants having access to some of their most sensitive government data. The heads of the AIVD and MIVD, the Netherlands’ civilian and military intelligence services, said in October that they were reviewing how to share information with American counterparts over political interference and human rights concerns. In the Netherlands, government vacancies are listed on a central online portal, which subsequently redirects applicants to specific institutions’ or agencies’ websites, including those of the security services. The government has now quietly pulled the plug on Google Analytics for intelligence-service postings, according to security expert Bert Hubert, who first raised the alarm about the trackers earlier this year. Hubert told POLITICO the job postings for intelligence services jobs no longer contained the same Google tracking technologies at least since November. The move was first reported by Follow the Money. The military intelligence service MIVD declined to comment. The interior ministry, which oversees the general intelligence service AIVD, did not respond to a request for comment at the time of publication. In a statement, Communications Manager for Google Mathilde Méchin said: “Businesses, not Google Analytics, own and control the data they collect and Google Analytics only processes it at their direction. This data can be deleted at any time.” “Any data sent to Google Analytics for measurement does not identify individuals, and we have strict policies against advertising based on sensitive information,” Méchin said. ‘FUTURE EMPLOYEES AT RISK’ Derk Boswijk, a center-right Dutch lawmaker, raised the alarm about the tracking of job applicants in parliamentary questions to the government in January. He said that while China and Russia have traditionally been viewed as the biggest security risks, it is unacceptable for any foreign government — allied or not — to have a view into Dutch intelligence recruitment. “I still see the U.S. as our most important ally,” Boswijk told POLITICO. “But to be honest, we’re seeing that the policies of the Trump administration and the European countries no longer necessarily align, and I think we should adapt accordingly.” The government told Boswijk in February it had enabled privacy settings on data gathered by Google. The government has yet to comment on Boswijk’s latest questions submitted in November. Hubert, the cybersecurity expert, said the concerns over tracking were justified. Even highly technical data like IP addresses, device fingerprints and browsing patterns can help foreign governments, including adversaries such as China, narrow down who might be seeking a job inside an intelligence agency, he said. “By leaking job applications so broadly, the Dutch intelligence agencies put their future employees at risk, while also harming their own interests,” said Hubert, adding it could discourage sought-after cybersecurity talent that agencies are desperate to attract. Hubert previously served on a watchdog committee overseeing intelligence agencies’ requests to use hacking tools, surveillance and wiretapping.  One open question raised by Dutch parliamentarians is how to gain control over the data that Google gathered on aspiring spies in past years. “I don’t know what happens with the data Google Analytics already has, that’s still a black box to me,” said Sarah El Boujdaini, a lawmaker for the centrist-liberal Democrats 66 party who oversees digital affairs. The episode is likely to add fuel to efforts to wean off U.S. technologies — which are taking place across Europe, as part of the bloc’s “technological sovereignty” drive. European Parliament members last month urged the institution to move away from U.S. tech services, in a letter to the president obtained by POLITICO. In the Netherlands, parliament members have urged public institutions to move away from digital infrastructure run by U.S. firms like Microsoft, over security concerns. “If we can’t even safeguard applications to our secret services, how do you think the rest is going?” Hubert asked. The country also hosts the International Criminal Court, where Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan previously lost access to his Microsoft-hosted email account after he was targeted with American sanctions over issuing an arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The ICC in October confirmed to POLITICO it was moving away from using Microsoft Office applications to German-based openDesk.

A large part of Airbus’s global fleet was grounded after the European airplane maker discovered a technical malfunction linked to solar radiation in its A320 family of aircraft. The European Union Aviation Safety Agency announced on Friday evening that it was temporarily pausing flights on certain Airbus planes after a JetBlue flight from Florida to Mexico had to make an emergency landing after a sudden loss of altitude. Media reports indicate that some 15 people were hospitalized after the incident. Airbus said in a statement late Friday that it had identified an issue with its workhorse A320 planes. “Intense solar radiation may corrupt data critical to the functioning of flight controls,” it said, adding that it had “identified a significant number” of affected aircraft. A number of airlines around Europe announced that they were affected, including Lufthansa, Swiss and Austrian Airlines. Brussels Airlines said that none of its flights was impacted. Sara Ricci, communications chief for Airbus’s commercial aircraft division, said that some 6,000 aircraft were affected, but that for 85 percent of the impacted aircraft, it would be a “quick fix” to the planes’ software. “The vast majority will be back in the sky very soon,” Ricci said.

Le radiazioni solari intense potrebbero interferire con i computer di controllo di bordo degli Airbus 320. Il bug ha lasciato a terra, per cautela, circa 6.000 aerei di linea, la metà in forza all’azienda. I toni sono rassicuranti: basterà un aggiornamento al software e i voli potranno riprendere. In Italia le ripercussioni appaiono contenute, nel Regno Unito l’autorità ha avvisato che in giornata ci saranno “disagi e cancellazioni”. L’azienda aerospaziale ha fatto sapere di aver trovato la falla dopo aver svolto accertamenti su un incidente avvenuto tra gli Stati Uniti e il Messico: un volo di linea della JetBlue Airways dopo aver perso quota in modo improvviso era stato costretto a un atterraggio di emergenza in Florida, a Tampa, e almeno 15 persone erano rimaste ferite. La “cimice” avrebbe intaccato l’Elevator Aileron Computers (Elac), il sistema che controlla stabilizzatore e alettoni e interviene in caso di parametri di volo fuori norma. L’Agenzia europea per la sicurezza aerea (EASA) ha emanato una direttiva di emergenza, imponendo un intervento senza il cui gli aerei dovranno restare a terra. Insomma Airbus dovrà fare ricorso alla versione del software precedente e ammette che oltre al 320 – il modello più venduto – il bug deve essere rimosso dai modelli 318, 319 e 321. Cifre alla mano, l’azienda ritiene che circa 5.100 aerei potranno essere nuovamente operativo con un aggiornamento che non porterà via più di tre ore, ma sui modelli più vecchi – circa 900 – il lavoro sarà più lungo, dunque non potranno trasportare passeggeri sino a quando non saranno messi in sicurezza nella loro strumentazione. Per quel che riguarda il panorama delle compagnie: negli Stati Uniti American Airlines si aspetta “ritardi operativi” perchè 340 dei suoi aerei sono interessati all’aggiornamento. Delta Airlines parla di “impatto limitato”. In Europa, British Airways rassicura i suoi passeggeri, Air France invece è quella che soffre di più nella giornata odierna con 50 aerei rimasti a terra a Parigi. Wizz Air ha dichiarato che ha già fatto l’aggiornamento sui suoi mezzi. Lufthansa, IndiGo e easyJet, hanno fatto sapere che i loro aerei non saranno operativi sino a quando il software non sarà ripristinato. “Ci scusiamo per l’inconveniente causato e collaboreremo a stretto contatto con gli operatori, mantenendo la sicurezza come nostra priorità assoluta e fondamentale” dicono dall’azienda europea con sede a Bignac, in Francia. Di certo una “cimice” fastidiosa per Airbus, che dal 2019 aveva superato la rivale americana Boeing per mezzi consegnati alle compagnie di tutto il mondo. L'articolo Un bug nel sistema di controllo degli Airbus 320: ne restano a terra 6.000, disagi per i passeggeri in tutto il mondo proviene da Il Fatto Quotidiano.

A major five-year effort to build a technology base for Europe free of U.S. influence foundered amid conflicting national strategies and powerful corporate lobbying. As Europe’s leaders once again discuss tackling American tech dependence, those involved in the project to build a European cloud warn against repeating past mistakes. The Gaia-X initiative was “a crushing failure, a colossal waste of time, and just as many years gained for the hyperscalers — in other words, an industrial disaster,” said Yann Lechelle, a former CEO of French cloud champion Scaleway and one of the founding members of the initiative who quit in frustration in 2021, describing it as the “best decision ever.” The industry-led project was born in 2019 from a Franco-German drive to forge a “European industrial policy fit for the 21st Century” — a rallying cry that brought German and French companies together with top political backing to create a data infrastructure. The endgame goal of Gaia-X, named after the Greek goddess of Earth, was to “establish data sovereignty in Europe” and “counteract monopolistic tendencies.” As political momentum once again swings behind digital sovereignty, leaders will gather in Berlin on Tuesday to talk about how to become less dependent on foreign-owned technology. POLITICO spoke to both current and former Gaia-X officials, both on and off the record, about the lessons they learned that could prove valuable. Those conversations illuminated an initiative that failed to help Europe’s own digital ecosystem take root because it was weighed down by politics, bureaucracy and the interference of precisely the American and Chinese tech titans it was meant to challenge. Despite a fast-growing market for cloud computing services that underpin the internet, the global share of European cloud providers has continued to fall, dwarfed by the dominance of Amazon, Microsoft and Google. One of Gaia-X’s initial success stories, called Agdatahub, which was touted as a triumph for farming data, went bankrupt last year. “I joined Gaia-X because I believed in the original mission. I left Gaia-X because I didn’t believe it was going in the original direction,” said its former CEO, Francesco Bonfiglio. FRANCO-GERMAN DIVIDES Misalignment among the founding companies on the mission of Gaia-X became apparent early on, consistent with the traditional divergence in Paris and Berlin over tech sovereignty. In Paris, sovereignty was about backing local champions and breaking reliance on the U.S., while Berlin focused on protecting Europe without severing important trade ties. “The influence of political happenings inside the association was evident. Sometimes they were clashing,” said Bonfiglio, describing how it pitted a “historically more protectionist” France against a “fluctuating” Germany. American cloud giants Amazon, Microsoft and Google, as well as Chinese tech giants Huawei and Alibaba, are all members of Gaia-X. | Jonas Roosens/Getty Images Everybody “interpreted” Gaia-X as they wanted to, he said. The former CEO described how this divergence in expectations and a lack of a “clear or common” definition of sovereignty — let alone a shared understanding of what it would take to get there — made his task extremely difficult. “France turned it into a very political issue, whereas the Germans treated it more as a technical matter,” said another founding member of Gaia-X, who is still part of the initiative and was granted anonymity to speak candidly. The interests were at odds from day one, founding member Lechelle recalled, which was part of the reason the initiative would never deliver “the fantasy of a European cloud Airbus.” The Germans came on board with the idea to create data sovereignty, by shielding the data of their citizens and industries from foreign snooping and legal control, he said, adding: “Atlanticist as they may be, they were totally fine with the idea of depending on Microsoft.” Meanwhile, the French pushed a more self-serving vision, hoping to see Europe become self-reliant, from infrastructure all the way to software. That’s how the mission to create a “federated cloud infrastructure” came to life. But that “staggering complexity” would soon turn into an “unmanageable mess,” said Lechelle. Current CEO Ulrich Ahle, who joined in 2023, pushed back — saying Gaia-X is far from a “failure.” It has united the industry — both large and small players — around tangible deliverables, such as federated data spaces and compliance labels, he said. “At the beginning, some people thought that Gaia-X would be the European hyperscaler as the competition to Amazon, Google, Microsoft, Alibaba and so on,” he said, but in fact, “it is more about creating a way to handle data in a European way.” “The results we’re providing and the real business benefits these interoperable data spaces are creating are more and more visible,” he said, highlighting the example of a data space based on Gaia-X standards that French energy company EDF will use to securely coordinate the construction of new nuclear sites. BACK-DOOR LOBBYING As Gaia-X grew and set out to define Europe’s blueprint for secure data sharing, it opened its doors to industry participants from beyond Europe in a bid to push new standards on the global stage. While board seats remained reserved for EU companies and industry groups, alarm bells grew louder that the project was being hijacked by the very players it was meant to take on. Those firms “steered the entire roadmap,” Lechelle said, throwing money and people at it. “The committees were drowning. They [global players] had the capacity, the bandwidth, but we were already underwater … Americans have full-time lobbyists and massive budgets. Their job is basically to derail any initiative they don’t like.” American cloud giants Amazon, Microsoft and Google, as well as Chinese tech giants Huawei and Alibaba, are all members of Gaia-X. In 2021, the annual summit in Milan was sponsored by Huawei and Alibaba, prompting backlash. Some interviewees expressed criticism that the European industry associations and companies on the board were representing the interests of business partners abroad. “I was struggling against many, many forces that were trying to dilute the rules of verification, dilute the efforts,” said Bonfiglio, stressing he was “the CEO of a consensus-based organization where consensus couldn’t be achieved most of the time.” Bonfiglio said he didn’t regret opening up the initiative to foreign players. “The problem is not America vs. Europe,” he said, but “trust” or lack thereof. Letting non-EU providers in was supposed to force them to become more transparent, he argued. “You think you’re good, show us what you have,” was his mantra at the time, he said. He now acknowledges the unavoidable influence of corporate giants in the cloud space. “You don’t need Microsoft, Amazon and Google on the board, because they would be represented by people sitting on the board from European companies. It’s an indirect lobby,” he said. The current member of the association interviewed for this story said the bylaws of Gaia-X should be changed to kick out industry associations from the board, as they play into the hands of tech giants. In response, Gaia-X’s Ahle said that “the strategic directions are given and the strategic decisions are taken in the board of directors.” He touted the initiative’s top-tier certification label — which excludes non-EU companies — as proof that it took decisions that went against U.S. interests. This was something “members like Amazon, Google and Microsoft didn’t like at all,” yet it happened. WHERE NOW As leaders prepare to meet at the high-profile summit in Berlin to debate how far to go in pivoting away from Big Tech, several of the people interviewed for this piece cautioned against repeating past mistakes. While European countries have not yet aligned on a common definition of digital sovereignty — something many see as crucial for real progress — there are signs that Paris and Germany are closer on positioning than they were five years ago. “I admit, I struggled with the term [digital sovereignty] before. I didn’t think it was necessary, but the global situation has changed so dramatically that we Europeans now have to become more sovereign,” German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said Thursday. At the summit, Merz said, “We’ll explore all the possibilities, together with industry representatives, of what we can do not only to become more independent from China, but also, for example, less dependent on the U.S., less dependent on the Big Tech companies. We want to catch up, we want to improve.” Friedrich Merz said, “We’ll explore all the possibilities, together with industry representatives, of what we can do not only to become more independent from China, but also, for example, less dependent on the U.S.” | Harald Tittel/Getty Images And yet — with Germany this month celebrating Google’s decision to invest more than €5 billion in building data centers in the country, a move that Finance Minister Lars Klingbeil described as “exactly what we need right now” — the reality of corporate interests may be hard to address. For Bonfiglio, the lesson from Gaia-X is that ”it is obvious that everybody sitting in the boardroom of an association with such a big and impactful objective tries to protect the interests of their own company.” While Gaia-X may have missed its shot at delivering on its big, original ambitions, Lechelle insists the upcoming Franco-German summit is “a chance to put a finger on the sore spots.” In the meantime, “those who wanted to maintain the status quo have won.”

Today, as the world reaches a critical juncture in the fight against HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis (TB) and malaria, the EU must choose: match scientific breakthroughs with political will and investment or retreat, putting two decades of hard-won progress at risk. Having saved over 70 million lives, the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria (the Global Fund) has proven what smart, sustained investment can achieve.  But the impact of its work — the lives protected, the life expectancy prolonged, the systems strengthened, the innovations deployed — is now under threat due to declining international funding.  > The real question is no longer whether the EU can afford to invest in the > Global Fund, but whether it can afford to let these hard-won gains unravel. The real question is no longer whether the EU can afford to invest in the Global Fund, but whether it can afford to let these hard-won gains unravel. Declining international funding, climate change, conflict and drug resistance are reversing decades of progress. HIV prevention is hampered by rising criminalization and attacks on key populations, with 1.3 million new infections in 2024 — far above targets. TB remains the deadliest infectious disease, worsened by spreading multidrug resistance, even in Europe. Malaria faces growing resistance to insecticides and drugs, as well as the impacts of extreme weather. Without urgent action and sustained investment, these threats could result in a dangerous resurgence of all three diseases. The stakes could not be higher  The Global Fund’s latest results reveal extraordinary progress. In 2024 alone: * 25.6 million people received lifesaving antiretroviral therapy, yet 630,000 still died of AIDS-related causes; * 7.4 million people were treated for TB, with innovations like AI-powered diagnostics reaching frontline workers in Ukraine; and * malaria deaths, primarily among African children under five, have been halved over two decades, with 2.2 billion mosquito nets distributed and ten countries eliminating malaria since 2020. Yet one child still dies every minute from this treatable disease.  What makes this moment unprecedented is not just the scale of the challenge, but the scale of the opportunity. Thanks to extraordinary scientific breakthroughs, we now have the tools to turn the tide:  * lenacapavir, a long-acting antiretroviral, offers new hope for the possibility of HIV-free generations; * dual active ingredient mosquito nets combine physical protection with intelligent vector control, transforming malaria prevention; and  * AI-driven TB screening and diagnostics are revolutionizing early detection and treatment, even in the most fragile settings. Some of these breakthroughs reflect Europe’s continued research and development and the private sector’s leadership in global health. BASF’s dual-active-ingredient mosquito nets, recently distributed by the millions in Nigeria, are redefining malaria prevention by combining physical protection with intelligent vector control. Delft Imaging’s ultra-portable digital X-ray devices are enabling TB screening in remote and fragile settings, while Siemens Healthineers is helping deploy cutting-edge AI software to support TB triage and diagnosis.  But they must be deployed widely and equitably to reach those who need them most. That is precisely what the Global Fund enables: equitable access to cutting-edge solutions, delivered through community-led systems that reach those most often left behind. A defining moment for EU Leadership The EU has a unique chance to turn this crisis into an opportunity. The upcoming G20 summit and the Global Fund’s replenishment are pivotal moments.  President Ursula von der Leyen and Commissioner Síkela can send a clear, unequivocal signal: Europe will not stop at “almost”. It will lead until the world is free of AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria.  The Global Fund is a unique partnership that combines financial resources with technical expertise, community engagement and inclusive governance. It reaches those often left behind — those criminalized, marginalized or excluded from health systems.  > Even in Ukraine, amid the devastation of war, the Global Fund partnership has > ensured continuity of HIV and TB services — proof that smart investments > deliver impact, even in crisis. Its model of country ownership and transparency aligns with Africa’s agenda for health sovereignty and with the EU’s commitment to equity and human rights. Even in Ukraine, amid the devastation of war, the Global Fund partnership has ensured continuity of HIV and TB services — proof that smart investments deliver impact, even in crisis. The cost of inaction Some may point to constraints in the Multiannual Financial Framework. But history shows that the EU has consistently stepped up, even in difficult fiscal times. The instruments exist. What’s needed now is leadership to use them. Failure to act would unravel decades of progress. Resurgent epidemics would claim lives, destabilize economies and undermine global health security. The cost of inaction far exceeds the price of investment. For the EU, the risks are strategic as well as moral. Stepping back now would erode the EU’s credibility as champion of human rights and global responsibility. It would send the wrong message, at precisely the wrong time.  Ukraine demonstrates what is at stake: with Global Fund support, millions continue to receive HIV and TB services despite war. Cutting funding now would risk lives not only in Africa and Asia, but also in Europe’s own neighborhood. A call to action Ultimately, this isn’t a question of affordability, but one of foresight. Can the EU afford for the Global Fund not to be fully financed? The answer, for us, is a resounding no. We therefore urge the European Commission to announce a bold, multi-year financial commitment to the Global Fund at the G20.  This pledge would reaffirm the EU’s values and inspire other Team Europe partners to follow suit. It would also support ongoing reforms to further enhance the Global Fund’s efficiency, transparency and inclusivity. > Ultimately, this isn’t a question of affordability, but one of foresight. Can > the EU afford for the Global Fund not to be fully financed? The answer, for > us, is a resounding no. This is more than a funding decision. It is a moment to define the kind of world we choose to build: one where preventable diseases no longer claim lives, where health equity is a reality and where solidarity triumphs over short-termism. Now is the time to reaffirm Europe’s leadership. To prove that when it comes to global health, we will never stop until the fight is won.

BRUSSELS — Call it a digital love triangle. When EU leaders back a “sovereign digital transition” at a summit in Brussels this Thursday, their words will mask a rift between France and Germany over how to deal with America’s overwhelming dominance in technology. The bloc’s founding members have long taken differing approaches to how far the continent should seek to go in detoxing from U.S. giants. In Paris, sovereignty is about backing local champions and breaking reliance on U.S. Big Tech. In Berlin the focus is on staying open and protecting Europe without severing ties with a major German trading partner. The EU leaders’ statement is a typical fudge — it cites the need for Europe to “reinforce its sovereignty” while maintaining “close collaboration with trusted partner countries,” according to a near-final draft obtained by POLITICO ahead of the gathering.    That plays into the hands of incumbent U.S. interests, even as the bloc’s reliance on American tech was again brought into sharp focus Monday when an outage at Amazon cloud servers in Northern Virginia disrupted the morning routines of millions of Europeans.   As France and Germany prepare to host a high-profile summit on digital sovereignty in Berlin next month, the two countries are still seeking common ground — attendees say preparations for the summit have been disorganized and that there is little alignment so far on concrete outcomes. When asked about his expectations for the Nov. 18 gathering, German Digital Minister Karsten Wildberger told POLITICO he wanted “to have an open debate around what is digital sovereignty” and “hopefully … have some great announcements.”  In her first public appearance following her appointment this month, France’s new Digital Minister Anne Le Hénanff, by comparison, promised to keep pushing for solutions that are immune to U.S. interference in cloud computing — a key area of American dominance.   CONTRASTING PLAYBOOKS   “There are indeed different strategic perspectives,” said Martin Merz, the president of SAP Sovereign Cloud. He contrasted France’s “more state-driven approach focusing on national independence and self-sufficiency in key technologies” with Germany’s emphasis on “European cooperation and market-oriented solutions.”  A recent FGS Global survey laid bare the split in public opinion as well. Most French respondents said France “should compete globally on its own to become a tech leader,” while most Germans preferred to “prioritize deeper regional alliances” to “compete together.” The fact that technological sovereignty has even made it onto the agenda of EU leaders follows a recent softening in Berlin, with Chancellor Friedrich Merz becoming increasingly outspoken about the limits of the American partnership while warning against “false nostalgia.” The coalition agreement in Berlin also endorsed the need to build “an interoperable and European-connectable sovereign German stack,” referring to a domestically controlled digital infrastructure ecosystem.  The fact that technological sovereignty has even made it onto the agenda of EU leaders follows a recent softening in Berlin, with Chancellor Friedrich Merz becoming increasingly outspoken about the limits of the American partnership while warning against “false nostalgia.” | Ralf Hirschberger/AFP via Getty Images Yet Germany — which has a huge trade deficit with the U.S — is fundamentally cautious about alienating Washington.   “France has been willing to accept some damage to the transatlantic relationship in order to support French business interests,” said Zach Meyers, director of research at the CERRE think tank in Brussels.   For Germany, by contrast, the two are “very closely tied together, largely because of the importance of the U.S. as an export market,” he said.   Berlin has dragged its feet on phasing out Huawei from mobile networks over fears of Chinese retaliation, against its car industry in particular.   The European Commission itself is walking a similar tightrope — dealing with U.S. threats against EU flagship laws that allegedly target American firms, while fielding growing calls to unapologetically back homegrown tech. STUCK ON DEFINITION  “Sovereignty is not a clearly defined term as it relates to technology,” said Dave Michels, a cloud computing law researcher at Queen Mary University of London.   He categorized it into two broad interpretations: technical sovereignty, or keeping data safe from foreign snooping and control, and political sovereignty, which focuses on strategic autonomy and economic security, i.e safeguarding domestic industries and supply chains.  “Those things can align, and I do think they are converging around this idea that we need to support European alternatives, but they don’t necessarily overlap completely. That’s where you can see some tensions,” Michels said.  Leaders will say in their joint statement that “it is crucial to advance Europe’s digital transformation, reinforce its sovereignty and strengthen its own open digital ecosystem.” “We don’t really have a shared vocabulary to define what digital sovereignty is. But we do have a shared understanding of what it means not to have digital sovereignty,” said Yann Lechelle, CEO of French AI company Probabl. Berlin isn’t the only capital trying to convince Europe to ensure its digital sovereignty remains open to U.S. interests.   Austria, too, wants to take “a leading role” in nailing down that tone, State Secretary Alexandre Pröll previously told POLITICO. The country has been on a mission to agree a “common charter” emphasizing that sovereignty should “not be misinterpreted as protectionist independence,” according to a draft reported by POLITICO. That “will create a clear political roadmap for a digital Europe that acts independently while remaining open to trustworthy partners,” Pröll said.   Next month’s Berlin gathering will be crucial in setting a direction. French President Emmanuel Macron and Merz are both expected to attend. “The summit is intended to send a strong signal that Europe is aware of the challenges and is actively advancing digital sovereignty,” a spokesperson for the German digital ministry said in a statement, adding that “this is not about autarky but about strengthening its own capabilities and potential.” “One summit will not be enough,” said Johannes Schätzl, a Social Democrat member of the German Bundestag. “But if there will be an agreement saying that we want to take the path toward greater digital sovereignty together, that alone would already be a very important signal.” Mathieu Pollet reported from Brussels, Emile Marzolf reported from Paris and Laura Hülsemann and Frida Preuß reported from Berlin.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent on Monday said the United States is in talks with China about how to de-escalate a trade war that reignited last week after Beijing announced plans to impose export controls on rare earth magnets used in a variety of high-tech products. “There has been substantial communications over the weekend,” Bessent said in an interview on Fox Business, adding that more “staff level” talks are expected this week in Washington when Chinese officials are in town for the annual fall meetings of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. Bessent also said he expects President Donald Trump will still meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping in South Korea in late October, just before that country hosts the annual meeting of leaders from the 21 economies in the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation. Trump threatened last week to impose 100 percent tariffs on Chinese goods beginning Nov.1 and cancel the meeting with Xi after China announced the rare earth export restrictions. That caused financial markets to sell off Friday in the face of renewed concern about an escalating trade war between the world’s two largest economies. Bessent said he expected to hold talks in Asia with his Chinese counterpart, Vice Premier He Lifeng, before the Trump-Xi meeting in South Korea. While sending the message the overall U.S.-China relationship is in “good” shape and Trump’s “100 percent tariff does not have to happen,” Bessent insisted Beijing must back off its plan to restrict rare earth magnets. He also suggested a “lower level official” may have made the Chinese decision to restrict exports, rather than Xi himself. “This is China versus the world. They have pointed a bazooka at the supply chains and the industrial base of the entire free world, and we’re not going to have it,” Bessent said. “A group of bureaucrats in China cannot tell us and our allies how to run our supply system.” The U.S. also expects to get substantial support for its stance from Europe, India and democracies in Asia, Bessent said. “I believe that China is open to discussion on this. And if they’re not, we have substantial levers on our own … side that we can pull,” he added. In the midst of tensions earlier this year, the United States imposed 12 countermeasures on China that were “highly” effective, ranging from natural resources used in plastic production to jet engines and parts, Bessent said. The Treasury chief also hinted at the possible expulsion of the hundreds of thousands of Chinese students now in the United States and other possible actions in areas of software, minerals and financial services if China does not back down. “We have plenty of straight, brute-force countermeasures that we can pull,” Bessent said.

Kyiv and Washington are discussing new steps to help bolster Ukraine’s air defense systems, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said Saturday, in the aftermath of a massive Russian attack on the country’s energy system. “I had a call with U.S. President Donald Trump — a very positive and productive one,” Zelenskyy said on X Saturday afternoon. “We discussed opportunities to bolster our air defense, as well as concrete agreements that we are working on to ensure this.” The announcement come a day after Moscow launched a fresh assault on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure, unleashing more than 450 drones and 30 missiles in an attack that left at least 20 people injured and parts of the country without electricity. Power has since been restored to 800,000 people in Kyiv, Ukrainian authorities said. It marks the latest episode in a broader shift by the Trump administration on Ukraine, as the U.S. president grows increasingly impatient with Russian President Vladimir Putin and frustrated with stalling efforts to end Moscow’s all-out war on Ukraine. In the past month, Trump has approved the first military support package of his term to Kyiv under the NATO-funded Prioritized Ukraine Requirements List initiative. He has also teased the idea of supplying Kyiv with long-range Tomahawk missiles, and said Ukraine could “win all of [the country] back in its original form.” Tomahawk missiles, which Kyiv could use to strike targets up to 2,500 kilometers inside Russia, reportedly featured in the leaders’ latest conversation on Saturday. The discussion comes as Kyiv gears up for a challenging winter, as Moscow steps up its air attacks and deploys new software to dodge Ukraine’s air defense systems, while the country races to secure enough energy supplies in the months to come. Ukraine’s military chief Oleksandr Syrskyi on Saturday said the country’s air defenses were about 74 percent effective. But Russia has increased its air strikes by 1.3 times over the past month, he added, meaning Kyiv “must make further efforts to protect rear-area energy facilities, critical infrastructure, and logistics.” Recent Russian attacks have destroyed more than 50 percent of Ukraine’s natural gas production capacity. In response, Ukrainian Energy Minister Svitlana Hrynchuk last week said Kyiv would have to ramp up its gas imports by 30 percent this winter.

BRUSSELS — A website set up by an unknown Dane over the course of one weekend in August is giving a massive headache to those trying to pass a European bill aimed at stopping child sexual abuse material from spreading online. The website, called Fight Chat Control, was set up by Joachim, a 30-year-old software engineer living in Aalborg, Denmark. He made it after learning of a new attempt to approve a European Union proposal to fight child sexual abuse material (CSAM) — a bill seen by privacy activists as breaking encryption and leading to mass surveillance. The site lets visitors compile a mass email warning about the bill and send it to national government officials, members of the European Parliament and others with ease. Since launching, it has broken the inboxes of MEPs and caused a stir in Brussels’ corridors of power.  “We are getting hundreds per day about it,” said Evin Incir, a Swedish Socialists and Democrats MEP, of the email deluge. Three diplomats at national permanent representation offices said they too have received a large number of emails.  Joachim’s website has stoked up an already red-hot debate around the CSAM proposal, which would give police the power to force companies like WhatsApp and Signal to scan their services for the illegal content. Critics fear the bill would enable online state surveillance. Elon Musk’s X said Monday that the bill could enable “government instituted mass surveillance,” and encrypted chat app Signal said last weekend it would pull out of Europe if the bill passed. Meta’s WhatsApp also came out against Denmark’s proposal — backing Europe’s privacy groups, which have railed against the bill ever since its conception. EU countries are split into two camps. One side broadly backs the bill’s measures as a way to stop predators from sharing illegal content of children; the other says it would create a surveillance state and be ineffective. Denmark proposed a new version on its first day holding the presidency of the Council of the EU in July. Danish diplomats hope to get an agreement at a meeting of ministers in Luxembourg next week, and for that, the proposal needs to get past EU ambassadors on Wednesday. MILLIONS OF EMAILS Joachim himself declined to provide his last name or workplace because his employer does not want to be associated with the campaign. POLITICO has verified his identity. Joachim said his employer has no commercial interest in the legislation, and he alone paid the costs associated with running the website. Joachim’s mass email campaign is unconventional as a lobbying tool, differing from the more wonky approach usually taken in Brussels. But the website’s impact has been undeniable. The Polish government responded directly to the campaign in a statement last month, reassuring Poles it’s against mass scanning of messages. A Danish petition, pushed by the Fight Chat Control campaign, now has more than 50,000 signatures, meaning it can be discussed in parliament. Irish national lawmakers asked questions in parliament in September about “Chat Control,” the name for the legislation adopted by its critics and used by Joachim. As of early October, nearly 2.5 million people had visited his website, Joachim said, with most coming from within the EU. The emails are sent from visitors’ own email clients, meaning Joachim doesn’t know how many have been sent, but he estimated that it has triggered several million emails. The campaign has irked some recipients. “In terms of dialog within a democracy, this is not a dialog,” said Lena Düpont, a German member of the European People’s Party group and its home affairs spokesperson, of the mass emails. Joachim’s campaign is blocking more traditional lobbyists and campaigners, too, they said. Mieke Schuurman, director at child rights group Eurochild, said the group’s messages are no longer reaching policymakers, who “increasingly respond with automated replies.”  Joachim, who said he has not paid to promote the site, said it is “regrettable” that child rights campaigners’ emails have received automated responses. But the flood of emails sent by his website visitors is “a quite clear indication that people really care about this … I would actually argue this is as democratic as it gets,” he said. CAPITALS ON EDGE The European Commission presented its original proposal on CSAM in 2022 as an effort to stem the spread of the illegal content. Since then, police authorities have warned the problem has gotten worse, in part because platforms have increasingly enabled privacy technologies and encrypted messaging across some of the most popular services. The rise of artificial intelligence-generated content has added to the problem, authorities have warned. National governments are attempting — for the fifth time, at least — to hash out a compromise on the EU proposal. Countries first need to adopt their own position before negotiations with the European Parliament can take place.  One EU diplomat said some EU member countries are now more hesitant to support Denmark’s proposal, at least in part because of the campaign: “There is a clear link.” Ella Jakubowska, head of policy at digital rights group EDRi, said “This campaign seems to have raised the topic high up the agenda in member states where there was previously little to no public debate.” But Danish Justice Minister Peter Hummelgaard, one of the loudest proponents of tough measures to get child abuse material off online platforms, said in a statement that his proposal is far more balanced than the Commission’s original version and would mean that scanning would only happen as a last resort. “This has nothing to do with ‘chat control,’ as the sponsors of the citizens’ initiative claim,” he said.