Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez announced Tuesday his government will ban
children under the age of 16 from accessing social media.
“Platforms will be required to implement effective age verification systems —
not just check boxes, but real barriers that work,” Sánchez said during an
address to the plenary session of the World Government Summit in Dubai. “Today
our children are exposed to a space they were never meant to navigate alone … We
will protect [minors] from the digital Wild West.”
The proposed ban, which is set to be approved by the country’s Council of
Ministers next week, will amend a draft bill currently being debated in the
Spanish parliament. Whereas the current version of the legislation seeks to
restrict access to social media to users aged 16 and older, the new amendment
would expressly prohibit minors from registering on platforms.
Spain joins a growing chorus of European countries hardening their approach to
restricting kids online. Denmark announced plans for a ban on under-15’s last
fall, and the French government is pushing to have a similar ban in place as
soon as September. In Portugal, the governing center-right Social Democratic
Party on Monday submitted draft legislation that would require under-16’s to
obtain parental consent to access social media.
Spain’s ban is included in a wider package of measures that Sánchez argued are
necessary to “regain control” of the digital space. “Governments must stop
turning a blind eye to the toxic content being shared,” he said.
That includes a legislative proposal to hold social media executives legally
accountable for the illegal content shared on their platforms, with a new tool
to track the spread of disinformation, hate speech or child pornography on
social networks. It also proposes criminalizing the manipulation of algorithms
and amplification of illegal content.
“We will investigate platforms whose algorithms amplify disinformation in
exchange for profit,” Sánchez said, adding that “spreading hate must come at a
cost — a legal cost, as well as an economic and ethical cost — that platforms
can no longer afford to ignore.”
The EU’s Digital Services Act requires platforms to mitigate risks from online
content. The European Commission works “hand in hand” with EU countries on
protections for kids online and the enforcement of these measures “towards the
very large platforms is the responsibility of the Commission,” Commission
spokesperson Thomas Regnier said Tuesday when asked about Sánchez’s
announcement.
The EU executive in December imposed a €120 million fine on Elon Musk’s X for
failing to comply with transparency obligations, and a probe into the platform’s
efforts to counter the spread of illegal content and disinformation is ongoing.
Tag - Algorithms
BRUSSELS — The European Commission opened a fresh investigation Monday into Elon
Musk’s X following an explosion of non-consensual sexualized deepfakes created
by the artificial intelligence chatbot Grok.
The Commission will decide whether X met EU requirements to protect users when
it integrated Grok into the social media platform and its underlying algorithm.
X is already under investigation on several fronts under the EU’s Digital
Services Act, which regulates social media platforms, and was in December fined
€120 million for lapses in transparency. Penalties can reach up to 6 percent of
X’s annual global revenue.
The new investigation will look into whether the company properly assessed and
mitigated the risks of integrating Grok, particularly those of “manipulated
sexually explicit images” including some that “may amount to child sexual abuse
material,” the Commission said.
But the investigation “is much broader” than these images, a senior Commission
official said during a briefing.
The chatbot may have generated as many as 3 million non-consensual sexual images
and 20,000 child sexual abuse images in the 11 days before it made changes to
stop the spread of such photos, an estimate by civil society found.
On top of the new investigation, the Commission will expand a 2023 probe to look
into the impact of X’s decision, announced last week, to switch the algorithm
for its social media platform to a Grok-based system.
The Commission said Monday it could take interim steps — for example, order X to
change its algorithms or shut down the chatbot — “in the absence of meaningful
adjustments to the X service,” something the EU has so far shied away from doing
for Musk’s platform.
The threshold for such measures is “really high,” a second senior Commission
official said.
The image-generating feature of Grok went viral just before the end of 2025, as
users instructed the chatbot to alter images of real people. This led to global
outcry and calls from EU lawmakers to ban nudification AI apps as well as crack
down on Grok.
The platform did restrict the chatbot’s image generation abilities in January,
initially by limiting them to paid subscribers of Grok. The Commission said at
the time it was assessing whether changes made to Grok were sufficient.
EU officials found initial changes insufficient and voiced their concerns to the
platform, after which the platform took further steps. “I dare say that without
our interaction, probably none of these kind of changes that they have done
would have appeared,” the second official said.
X did not immediately respond to POLITICO’s request for comment.
The deal creating a majority-American board for TikTok’s U.S. arm puts President
Donald Trump’s allies in charge of yet another driver of American culture.
The wildly popular short-form-video platform now joins CBS and the social media
giant X among the stable of key communication channels that have come under more
Trump-friendly management in recent years. The president has also taken more
modest swings at reshaping the zeitgeist, from placing his stamp on the Kennedy
Center to weighing in on television programming to appointing conservative
actors to be his “eyes” and “ears” in Hollywood.
But TikTok, which is used by over 200 million Americans according to the
company, stands out from the rest because of its huge appeal among teens and
pre-teens who form the next rising blocs of voters. For Trump’s critics, that
means years of worries about TikTok acting as a vector for Beijing’s
propaganda are giving way to fears that its algorithm could soon serve up a
flood of far-right, pro-MAGA content to impressionable users.
“We’ve seen the platform transfer from one set of owners, where there was one
set of concerns about propaganda and privacy, to a new set of owners, where now
there’s a new set of concerns about propaganda and privacy,” said Evan Greer,
director of the progressive tech group Fight for the Future.
Katie Harbath, a tech consultant and former longtime public policy director at
Meta, said Trump recognizes “the importance of trying to have friends in these
different places,” including TikTok. She said the president “understands the
influence it has on what people think — and then ultimately, how people vote.”
Trump himself expressed hope late Thursday that the deal could cement his place
in young voters’ hearts.
TikTok “will now be owned by a group of Great American Patriots and Investors,
the Biggest in the World, and will be an important Voice,” the president wrote
on his social media network Truth Social. “Along with other factors, it was
responsible for my doing so well with the Youth Vote in the 2024 Presidential
Election. I only hope that long into the future I will be remembered by those
who use and love TikTok.”
Spokespeople for TikTok and the White House did not respond to questions about
how the deal could impact TikTok’s algorithm or boost right-leaning content on
the platform.
The long-awaited deal, carefully brokered by the White House, is intended to
satisfy national security concerns with TikTok. A bipartisan law passed in 2024
required the platform’s China-based parent company to sell it to U.S. owners or
face a full-scale ban.
At the forefront of TikTok’s new ownership structure is Larry Ellison,
billionaire co-founder and executive chair of the tech giant Oracle and a close
Trump ally. Oracle first partnered with TikTok during Trump’s first term, when
the president helped broker a deal that tapped Ellison’s company to help run the
app’s U.S. operations. An Oracle spokesperson declined to comment.
Meanwhile, Skydance Media, a media conglomerate led by Ellison’s son David, made
a deal last year that gave it ownership of CBS News, then began making
programming and news decisions widely seen as steering the network in a more
pro-Trump direction. Those included installing new leadership at
CBS and delaying the airing of a report on “60 Minutes” that was critical of
Trump’s immigration policies. A spokesperson for Skydance Media did not respond
to a request for comment.
David Ellison is now vying to purchase the parent company of CNN — and,
according to The Wall Street Journal, offered assurances to Trump administration
officials that he would “make sweeping changes” to the news network.
After Elon Musk purchased Twitter in 2022, he rebranded the social media site as
X and ripped away safeguards meant to stop the spread of disinformation and
hateful content, while reinstating the accounts of far-right users whom the
company had previously banned. (Twitter’s old management had even kicked Trump
himself off its platform following the Jan. 6 Capitol Hill insurrection in
2021.) Several studies have since suggested that Musk’s changes prompted an
increase in hateful content, pro-Trump content and pro-GOP content across the
platform. A spokesperson for X did not respond to a request for comment.
Now, some observers on both sides of the political divide say the same
phenomenon could repeat under TikTok’s new owners.
“What I’m more interested in is just sort of the cultural vibe shift that the
change in ownership will bring,” said Harbath. She said TikTok’s fate could
mirror what happened when Musk took over Twitter — “before he even made changes,
there was kind of a mass exodus of people, particularly on the left, who left
Twitter and went to Bluesky.”
Only time will tell if TikTok goes the way of X under new management. Tilting
its algorithm toward far-right content could cause users to flee the platform,
potentially undermining its profitability — a fate some of TikTok’s new owners
may be keen to avoid.
“I haven’t heard anything to suggest that this is necessarily going to go in the
Elon Musk direction,” said Lindsay Gorman, managing director of the German
Marshall Fund’s technology program. “Many of these investors were previous
investors of TikTok originally.”
Alex Bruesewitz, a Trump political adviser and head of X Strategies — the firm
that manages the Team Trump TikTok account — said the president “has always been
popular on TikTok,” and that people shouldn’t worry that the new owners will
tweak its algorithm to boost Republicans.
“The Democrats are the party that likes to dictate what social media companies
do with their algorithms,” said Bruesewitz. “I don’t think that’s something that
the Trump White House is interested in doing. I don’t think that they want to
tell platforms how to run their businesses.”
Amanda Carey Elliott, a Republican digital consultant, expressed discomfort at
the notion of a “Republican billionaire pulling the levers of TikTok in our
favor,” fearing it could drive moderates and independents off the app.
“That said, you also have to understand where Republicans are coming from on
this,” said Elliott. “For years and years, we were subjected to online
censorship by platforms controlled by liberal Silicon Valley. Expecting to be
censored has literally been built into our DNA, so you’ll probably be
hard-pressed to find any Republican clutching their pearls at the thought of the
left suddenly waking up one day to find themselves on the wrong side of an
algorithm.”
John Hendel contributed to this report.
American investors have closed a $14 billion deal giving them control of the
U.S. version of TikTok, raising a host of questions about what’s next for the
social media app and its tens of millions of users.
Under the new ownership structure, a group of investors led by Silicon Valley
giant Oracle and the private equity firm Silver Lake will own more than 80
percent of the company, which draws 66 million daily users in the United States.
The deal is intended to insulate the social media company from influence by
China, avoiding a ban that Congress had mandated in 2024.
TikTok released some information about the deal in a Thursday night
announcement, but further details have yet to be made public, including whether
it complies with the 2024 law. It is also uncertain whether the agreement
sufficiently allays U.S. lawmakers’ concerns that the app endangers national
security.
Here are five crucial questions remaining about TikTok and its future:
WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE ALGORITHM?
TikTok’s algorithm has been key to the app’s success, as it’s
remarkably effective at curating a continuous feed of videos that keep users
scrolling. Lawmakers have expressed concern that the Chinese government could
use the algorithm to push propaganda or surveil users, a key reason Congress
passed legislation in 2024 requiring TikTok’s parent company, ByteDance, to spin
off an American version of the app.
In announcing the deal Thursday, TikTok said that the new owners “will retrain,
test, and update the content recommendation algorithm on U.S. user data.”
Those measures may allay some of the national security risks associated with the
algorithm, but it’s unclear if they go far enough to satisfy the 2024 law, which
prohibits “cooperation” between ByteDance and the U.S. version of TikTok on
operating the algorithm. Previous reports indicated that the U.S. version of
TikTok would license the algorithm from ByteDance, which could be another legal
stumbling block if the agreement involves continued coordination between the two
companies.
“The central issue is whether the TikTok U.S. entity actually owns and controls
the recommendation system, or whether it is merely licensing it,” said Chris
Krebs, former director of the federal Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security
Agency. “A license means ByteDance still retains leverage over what the U.S.
platform shows its 170 million users.”
WILL TIKTOK STILL BE BANNED ON GOVERNMENT DEVICES?
Former President Joe Biden signed the No TikTok on Government Devices Act in
2022 to prohibit the use of the app on federal phones, tablets and other
devices, and at least 39 states, including California and New York, passed
similar bans. The House and Senate also have their own rules banning TikTok on
federal devices. (President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance, the White
House and California Gov. Gavin Newsom all have active TikTok accounts,
however.)
Even with the deal in place, reversing the government device bans would require
new legislation from federal and state lawmakers, which could prove to be a tall
order. “The state bans presumably still can stay,” said Alan Rozenshtein, a
former attorney adviser in the Justice Department’s national security division
under President Barack Obama. “From a legal perspective, the president can’t
overturn [the federal law].”
COULD COMPANIES ENABLING TIKTOK STILL FACE CRIPPLING FINES UNDER A FUTURE
ADMINISTRATION?
TikTok temporarily went dark in the United States in January 2025 after the law
forcing a sale or ban took effect. The app came back online a short time later
after then President-elect Trump promised that no company, such as app stores or
internet service providers, would face the law’s daily fine of $5,000 per user
for flouting the ban, a penalty that could quickly add up to billions of
dollars.
But legal experts have consistently said an executive order or presidential
promise doesn’t trump a law, especially one already upheld by the U.S. Supreme
Court.
According to Rozenshtein, the 2024 law leaves open the possibility that a future
administration could declare the new arrangement illegal. There’s a five-year
statute of limitations for the government to challenge violations of federal
laws.
“Imagine a situation in which the new venture sells itself back to ByteDance —
obviously you’d want the next president to be able to say you’re clearly not
divested anymore,” Rozenshtein told POLITICO. “If a [future] president had those
powers, then presumably the president would also have the powers to say: ‘This
thing that my predecessor did was a lie to begin with, so obviously I’m yanking
it.’”
DOES THE DEAL ADDRESS THE NATIONAL SECURITY CONCERNS?
A White House official previously told POLITICO that the deal would resolve
Congress’ national security concerns because the Chinese government would not
have access to American users’ data, and because ByteDance would have less than
20 percent ownership of the U.S. app. Even so, congressional Republicans have
vowed to review the deal to ensure it follows the law.
“I don’t know what the framework says — but anything short of that, the
president would be violating congressional intent,” Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck
Grassley (R-Iowa) told POLITICO in September.
St. John’s University internet law professor Kate Klonick said the law has
enough wiggle room, and gives enough deference to the president, that the deal
could pass muster for the time being.
“The [deal] is probably sufficient for the law, because the law was sufficiently
vague — but for the letter of the law, not the spirit of the law,” she said.
“What people thought at the time were serious national security concerns [in
2024] now seems to kind of have been forgotten.”
HOW DOES THE DEAL ADDRESS CONCERNS ABOUT CHINA ACCESSING PEOPLE’S DATA?
Under the 2024 law, ByteDance and TikTok can’t enter into any data-sharing
agreements. Thursday’s announcement says the new American venture will store
user data in Oracle’s cloud, where it “will operate a comprehensive data privacy
and cybersecurity program that is audited and certified by third party
cybersecurity experts.”
That might be enough, according to Adam Conner, vice president for technology
policy at the Center for American Progress, a left-leaning think tank.
“The data sharing question operationally should be solved by this [deal],” he
told POLITICO. However, Conner noted that particulars around the operation of
the algorithm and advertising may lead to violations of the law.
TikTok has closed a $14 billion deal establishing a U.S. subsidiary of the
platform to avoid a ban, the company said Thursday.
The new owners will include the U.S. private equity firm Silver Lake, Abu
Dhabi-based artificial intelligence company MGX and Oracle, a tech giant
co-founded by Larry Ellison, an ally of President Donald Trump. They will each
hold a 15 percent stake in the U.S. joint venture. The deal allows TikTok’s
Beijing-based parent company, ByteDance, to maintain a nearly 20 percent stake.
The Dell Family Office, investment firm of Chair and CEO of Dell Technologies
Michael Dell, is also an investor.
Congress passed a law in April 2024 requiring the sale of TikTok to a U.S. buyer
before Jan. 19, 2025, or banning it, citing national security concerns about the
app’s ties to China. But Trump delayed the ban from taking effect five times
last year while a deal was negotiated to divest the app to American owners.
Trump signed an executive order in September approving the deal and giving the
parties until Friday to formalize the terms.
The deal matches an internal memo distributed by TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew last
month, who said the agreement would be finalized by Thursday.
The U.S. version will operate as an independent entity, governed by a
seven-member board including TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew, Oracle Executive Vice
President Kenneth Glueck, Timothy Dattels, senior adviser of TPG Global; Mark
Dooley, managing director at Susquehanna International Group; Silver Lake Co-CEO
Egon Durban, DXC Technology CEO Raul Fernandez; and David Scott, chief strategy
and safety officer at MGX.
Adam Presser, head of operations and trust and safety at TikTok, will now serve
as CEO of the joint venture.
Trump praised the deal in a Truth Social post Thursday evening.
“I am so happy to have helped in saving TikTok! It will now be owned by a group
of Great American Patriots and Investors, the Biggest in the World, and will be
an important Voice,” Trump wrote.
Trump said in September that Chinese President Xi Jinping had agreed to the
deal, but Chinese officials provided an ambiguous narrative, signaling that any
deal would be a drawn out process. China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said the
country “respects the wishes of enterprises” and welcomes them to reach
“solutions that comply with Chinese laws and regulations and balance interests.”
The president thanked Xi in his Truth Social post “for working with us and,
ultimately, approving the Deal.”
“He could have gone the other way, but didn’t, and is appreciated for his
decision,” Trump wrote.
Trump previously described the deal as a “qualified divestiture,” meaning the
sale would fully sever ByteDance’s control over the platform and therefore make
TikTok legal under the U.S. law.
China hawks on Capitol Hill have championed this issue over national security
concerns and fears that the Chinese-controlled app subjects users to government
surveillance and content manipulation. While they’ve vowed to scrutinize the
potential deal to ensure it adheres to the law, they seemed prepared to accept
Trump’s claim the deal would resolve concerns over national security and
control.
Vice President JD Vance confirmed that the U.S. owners would have control over
the app’s algorithm, which is at the heart of the platform’s success.
“The U.S. company will have control over how the algorithm pushes content to
users and that was a very important part of it,” Vance said during the September
executive order signing in the Oval Office. “We thought it was necessary for the
national security level element of the law.”
According to the company release, the U.S. version will retrain and update the
platform’s algorithm based on U.S. user data. Oracle will control the algorithm
within its U.S. cloud environment.
“President Trump got played by Xi Jinping. He got terrible advice from his staff
on these negotiations. This isn’t the Art of the Deal, it’s the art of the
steal. Xi Jinping can’t believe his luck,” Michael Sobolik, senior fellow at the
right-leaning Hudson Institute and an expert on U.S.-China policy, told
POLITICO.
A clash between Poland’s right-wing president and its centrist ruling coalition
over the European Union’s flagship social media law is putting the country
further at risk of multimillion euro fines from Brussels.
President Karol Nawrocki is holding up a bill that would implement the EU’s
Digital Services Act, a tech law that allows regulators to police how social
media firms moderate content. Nawrocki, an ally of U.S. President Donald Trump,
said in a statement that the law would “give control of content on the internet
to officials subordinate to the government, not to independent courts.”
The government coalition led by Prime Minister Donald Tusk, Nawrocki’s rival,
warned this further exposed them to the risk of EU fines as high as €9.5
million.
Deputy Digital Minister Dariusz Standerski said in a TV interview that, “since
the president decided to veto this law, I’m assuming he is also willing to have
these costs [of a potential fine] charged to the budget of the President’s
Office.”
Nawrocki’s refusal to sign the bill brings back bad memories of Warsaw’s
years-long clash with Brussels over the rule of law, a conflict that began when
Nawrocki’s Law and Justice party rose to power in 2015 and started reforming the
country’s courts and regulators. The EU imposed €320 million in penalties on
Poland from 2021-2023.
Warsaw was already in a fight with the Commission over its slow implementation
of the tech rulebook since 2024, when the EU executive put Poland on notice for
delaying the law’s implementation and for not designating a responsible
authority. In May last year Brussels took Warsaw to court over the issue.
If the EU imposes new fines over the rollout of digital rules, it would
“reignite debates reminiscent of the rule-of-law mechanism and frozen funds
disputes,” said Jakub Szymik, founder of Warsaw-based non-profit watchdog group
CEE Digital Democracy Watch.
Failure to implement the tech law could in the long run even lead to fines and
penalties accruing over time, as happened when Warsaw refused to reform its
courts during the earlier rule of law crisis.
The European Commission said in a statement that it “will not comment on
national legislative procedures.” It added that “implementing the [Digital
Services Act] into national law is essential to allow users in Poland to benefit
from the same DSA rights.”
“This is why we have an ongoing infringement procedure against Poland” for its
“failure to designate and empower” a responsible authority, the statement said.
Under the tech platforms law, countries were supposed to designate a national
authority to oversee the rules by February 2024. Poland is the only EU country
that hasn’t moved to at least formally agree on which regulator that should be.
The European Commission is the chief regulator for a group of very large online
platforms, including Elon Musk’s X, Meta’s Facebook and Instagram, Google’s
YouTube, Chinese-owned TikTok and Shein and others.
But national governments have the power to enforce the law on smaller platforms
and certify third parties for dispute resolution, among other things. National
laws allow users to exercise their rights to appeal to online platforms and
challenge decisions.
When blocking the bill last Friday, Nawrocki said a new version could be ready
within two months.
But that was “very unlikely … given that work on the current version has been
ongoing for nearly two years and no concrete alternative has been presented” by
the president, said Szymik, the NGO official.
The Digital Services Act has become a flashpoint in the political fight between
Brussels and Washington over how to police online platforms. The EU imposed its
first-ever fine under the law on X in December, prompting the U.S.
administration to sanction former EU Commissioner Thierry Breton and four other
Europeans.
Nawrocki last week likened the law to “the construction of the Ministry of Truth
from George Orwell’s novel 1984,” a criticism that echoed claims by Trump and
his top MAGA officials that the law censored conservatives and right-wingers.
Bartosz Brzeziński contributed reporting.
WARSAW — Poland’s nationalist President Karol Nawrocki on Friday sided with his
ally U.S. President Donald Trump to veto legislation on enforcing the EU’s
social media law, which is hated by the American administration.
Trump and his top MAGA officials condemn the EU’s Digital Services Act — which
seeks to force big platforms like Elon Musk’s X, Facebook, Instagram to moderate
content — as a form of “Orwellian” censorship against conservative and
right-wingers.
The presidential veto stops national regulators in Warsaw from implementing the
DSA and sets Nawrocki up for a a clash with centrist pro-EU Prime Minister
Donald Tusk. Tusk’s parliamentary majority passed the legislation introducing
the DSA in Poland.
Nawrocki argued that while the bill’s stated aim of protecting citizens —
particularly minors — was legitimate, the Polish bill would grant excessive
power to government officials over online content, resulting in “administrative
censorship.”
“I want this to be stated clearly: a situation in which what is allowed on the
internet is decided by an official subordinate to the government resembles the
construction of the Ministry of Truth from George Orwell’s novel 1984,” Nawrocki
said in a statement — echoing the U.S.’s stance on the law.
Nawrocki also warned that allowing authorities to decide what constitutes truth
or disinformation would erode freedom of expression “step by step.” He called
for a revised draft that would protect children while ensuring that disputes
over online speech are settled by independent courts.
Deputy Prime Minister and Digital Affairs Minister Krzysztof Gawkowski dismissed
Nawrocki’s position, accusing the president of undermining online safety and
siding with digital platforms.
“The president has vetoed online safety,” Gawkowski told a press briefing Friday
afternoon, arguing the law would have protected children from predators,
families from disinformation and users from opaque algorithms.
The minister also rejected Nawrocki’s Orwellian comparisons, saying the bill
explicitly relied on ordinary courts rather than officials to rule on online
content.
Gawkowski said Poland is now among the few EU countries without national
legislation enabling effective enforcement of the DSA and pledged that the
government would continue to pursue new rules.
The clash comes as enforcement of the social media law has become a flashpoint
in EU-U.S. relations.
Brussels has already fined Elon Musk’s X €120 million for breaching the law,
prompting a furious response from Washington, including travel bans imposed by
the Trump administration on former EU Commissioner Thierry Breton, an architect
of the tech law, and four disinformation experts.
The DSA allows fines of up to 6 percent of a company’s global revenue and, as a
measure of last resort, temporary bans on platforms.
Earlier this week, the European Commission expanded its investigation into X’s
AI service Grok after it started posting a wave of non-consensual sexualized
pictures of people in response to X users’ requests.
The European Commission’s digital spokesperson Thomas Regnier said the EU
executive would not comment on national legislative procedures. “Implementing
the DSA into national law is essential to allow users in Poland to benefit from
the same DSA rights, such as challenging platforms if their content is deleted
or their account suspended,” he said.
“This is why we have an ongoing infringement procedure against Poland. We have
referred Poland to the Court of Justice of the EU for failure to designate and
empower the Digital Services Coordinator,” in May 2025, Regnier added.
Gawkowski said that the government would make a quick decision on what to do
next with the vetoed bill but declined to offer specifics on what a new bill
would look like were it to be submitted to parliament again.
Tusk four-party coalition does not have enough votes in parliament to override
Nawrocki’s vetoes. That has created a political deadlock over key legislation
efforts by the government, which stands for reelection next year. Nawrocki,
meanwhile, is aiming to help the Law and Justice (PiS) political party he’s
aligned with to retake power after losing to Tusk in 2023.
Mathieu Pollet contributed reporting.
Flynn Coleman is an international human rights attorney. She is a visiting
scholar in the Women, Peace, and Leadership Program at Columbia University’s
Climate School and the author of “A Human Algorithm.”
Roman Oleksiv was 11 years old when he stood before the European Parliament and,
in a calm voice, described the last time he saw his mother. She was under the
rubble of a hospital in Vinnytsia, Ukraine, hit by a Russian missile in July
2022. He could see her hair beneath the stone. He touched it. He said goodbye.
That’s when Ievgeniia Razumkova, the interpreter translating his words, stopped
mid-sentence. Her eyes filled with tears, she shook her head. “Sorry,” she said.
“I’m a bit emotional as well.”
A colleague then stepped in to finish, as Ievgeniia, still crying, placed her
hand on the boy’s shoulder. He nodded and continued on.
That moment is what makes us human.
A translation algorithm would not have stopped. It would have rendered Roman’s
testimony with perfect fluency and zero hesitation. It would have delivered the
words “the last time I saw my mother” just as it would the sentence “hello, my
name is Roman.” Same tone. Same rhythm. No recognition.
Today, we are building a world that treats translation — and increasingly
everything else — as a problem to be solved. Translation apps now handle
billions of words a day. Real-time tools let tourists order coffee in any
language. Babel, we are told, is finally being fixed.
All of this has its place. But translation was never just a technical challenge.
It is an act of witnessing.
An interpreter does not merely convert words from one language to another. They
carry meaning across the chasm between us. They hear what silences say. They
make split-second ethical and semantic decisions over which synonym preserves
dignity, when a pause holds more truth than a sentence, whether to soften a
phrase that would shatter a survivor.
When Ievgeniia broke down in Strasbourg, she was not failing. She was doing her
job. Her face told a room full of diplomats what no algorithm could: “This
matters. This child’s suffering is real. Pay attention.”
I have spent years working in international human rights law, war crimes
tribunals, genocide prevention — all the imperfect architecture we try to
rebuild after atrocity. In these spaces, everything hinges on language. One word
can determine whether a survivor is believed. The difference between “I saw” and
“I was made to see,” or between “they did this” and “this happened.”
Roman Oleksiv has undergone 36 surgeries. Burns cover nearly half his body. He
was 7 years old when that missile hit. And when he described touching his dead
mother’s hair, he needed someone in that room who could hold the weight of what
he was saying — not just linguistically but humanly. Ievgeniia did that. And
when she could not continue, another person stepped forward.
There is a reason interpreters in trauma proceedings receive psychological
support. The best ones describe their work as a sacred burden. They absorb
something. They metabolize horror, so it can cross from one language to another
without losing its force.
Interpreters are not alone in this either. There are moments when trauma
surgeons pause before delivering devastating news, journalists choose to lower
their cameras, and judges listen longer than procedure requires. These are
professions where humanity is not a flaw — it is the point.
This is not inefficiency. It is care made visible.
Algorithms process language as pattern, not communion. They have no
understanding that another mind exists. They do not know that when Roman said
goodbye, he was not describing a social gesture — he was performing the final
ritual of love he would ever share with his mother, in the rubble of a hospital.
Translation apps do serve real purposes, and generative AI is becoming more
proficient every day. But we should be honest about the trade we are making.
When we treat human interpreters — and any human act of care — as inefficiencies
to be optimized away, we lose that pause before “the last time I saw my mother.”
We lose the hand on the shoulder. We lose the tears that say: “This child is not
a data point. What happened to him is an atrocity.”
My work studying crimes against humanity has taught me that some frictions
should not be smoothed. Some pauses are how we recognize one another as human.
They are echoes in the dark, asking: “I am still here. Are you?”
When an interpreter breaks, they are not breaking down. They are breaking open —
making room for unbearable truth to enter, and for all of us to see it.
Roman deserved someone who could help us stand in his deepest pain, so that we
might all lift it together.
A machine could not do that. A machine, by design, does not stop.
One trillion US dollars of gross domestic product (GDP) has been surpassed.
Poland has entered the ranks of the world’s 20 largest economies, symbolically
ending a phase of chasing the West that has lasted more than three decades. The
Polish Development Fund’s (PFR) new strategy seeks to address the challenge of
avoiding the medium-level development trap and transitioning from the role of
subcontractor to that of investor.
This year marks a turning point in Polish economic history. After years of
transformation, reforms and overcoming civilizational deficits, Poland has
reached a point that the generation of ‘89 could only dream of. GDP crossed the
symbolic barrier of US$1 trillion, and we proudly enter the exclusive club of
the world’s 20 largest economies. Diversified Polish exports are breaking
records, and innovative companies are conquering global markets. Sound like a
happy ending? Not necessarily.
Via PFR
Investing for future generations
Poland’s past success invites tougher challenges in a brutal world. The cheap
labor growth model is dead; demographics are relentless. PFR analyses highlight
declining employment as a core issue — without bold changes, stagnation looms.
Piotr Matczuk, PFR president, says Poland needs an impetus for resilience,
innovation and growth. PFR’s 2026-2030 strategy is that roadmap, urging a shift
to high gear. On Dec. 10, it unveiled investments for future generations.
Geopolitics enters the balance sheet
PFR’s strategy marks a paradigm shift: integrating economics with security.
Business now anchors state security, with “economic and defence resilience” as a
core pillar — viewing security spending as essential insurance, not cost.
> The PFR’s strategy is clear: the competitiveness of the Polish economy depends
> directly on access to cheap and clean energy.
PFR has invested in WB Electronics, Poland’s defense leader in command systems
and drones. It expands beyond arms via dual-use tech: algorithms, encrypted
communications and autonomous drones often from civilian startups. This spring’s
PFR Deep Tech program backs venture capital (VC) for scaling these firms; IDA
targets innovations for logistics, cybersecurity and future defense.
The focus is Poland’s technological sovereignty. Controlling key security links
— from ammo to artificial intelligence — ensures economic maturity resilient to
geopolitical shocks.
> Poland needs a boost to our resilience, innovation and growth rate. That is
> why the new strategy emphasizes investment in new technologies, infrastructure
> and the financial security of Poles. We want the PFR to be a catalyst for
> change and a partner of choice — an institution that invests for future
> generations, sets quality standards in development financing and supports
> Polish entrepreneurs in boosting their international presence.
>
> Piotr Matczuk, President, PFR
Piotr Matczuk, President, PFR / Via PFR
Energy: to be or not to be for the industry
If defense is the shield, then energy is the bloodstream. The PFR’s strategy is
clear: the competitiveness of the Polish economy depends directly on access to
cheap and clean energy. Without accelerating the transformation, Polish
companies, instead of increasing their share in foreign markets, may lose their
position. This is why the fund wants to enter the game as an investor where the
risks are high, but the stakes are even higher — into an investment gap that the
commercial market alone will not fill.
The concept of local content, in other words the participation of domestic
companies in the supply chain, is key to the new strategy.
This is where the circle closes. The Baltic Hub is not just a container
terminal. Investment in the T5 installation terminal is the foundation, as the
Polish offshore will not be built with the appropriate participation of a
domestic port. This is a classic example of how the PFR works: building ‘hard’
infrastructure that becomes a springboard for a whole new sector of the
economy.
The end of being a subcontractor: capital emancipation
Taking inspiration from, among others, France’s Tibi Initiative, in mid-November
2025 the Polish minister of finance and economy, Andrzej Domański, announced the
Innovate Poland program. The PFR plays a leading role in what will be the
largest initiative in the history of the Polish economy to invest in innovative
projects. Thanks to cooperation with Bank Gospodarstwa Krajowego (BGK), PZU and
the European Investment Fund, Innovate Poland is already worth 4 billion złoty,
and the program multiplier may reach as much as 3-4. The combined development
and private capital will be invested by experienced VC and private equity funds.
The aim is to further Poland’s economic development — driven by innovative
companies that make a profit. In the first phase, it is expected to finance up
to 250 companies at various stages of development.
Via PFR
The expansion of Polish companies abroad is also part of the effort for
advancement in the global hierarchy. Their support is one of the pillars of the
new PFR strategy. For three decades, Poland has played the role of the assembly
plant of Europe — solid, cheap and hard-working. However, the highest margins,
flowing from having a global brand and market control, went overseas. Polish
companies need to stop being anonymous subcontractors and become owners of
assets in foreign markets.
Here, the PFR acts as financial leverage. The support for the Trend Group is a
prime example of this maturing process. This is a transaction with a symbolic
dimension: it reverses the investment vector of the 1990s, when German capital
was consolidating Polish assets. Today, it is Polish entities that are
increasingly becoming leaders in offering industrial solutions in the European
Union.
> Polish companies need to stop being anonymous subcontractors and become owners
> of assets in foreign markets.
However, these ambitions extend beyond the Western direction. The strategy
strongly emphasizes Poland’s role in the future reconstruction of Ukraine and
the consolidation of the Central and Eastern European region. The involvement of
the PFR in the operations of the Euvic Group on the Ukrainian IT market is a
good example. In the digital world, big players have more power, and the PFR
strives to ensure that the decision-making centers of those growing giants
remain in Poland.
Most importantly, Polish businesses are no longer alone in this struggle. The
strategy institutionalizes the concept of ‘Team Poland’. In this initiative, the
PFR provides capital; BGK, a state development bank, offers debt solutions; the
KUKE, an insurance company, insures the risk; and the Polish Investment and
Trade Agency provides promotional support. Acting like a one-stop shop, all
these institutions enable Polish capital to compete as a partner in the global
league. This is part of the Polish government’s modern economic diplomacy
strategy, led by Domański.
Capital for generations. From an employee to a stakeholder in the economy
All grand plans need fuel. Mature economies like the Netherlands and the United
Kingdom harness citizens’ savings via capital markets. PFR’s strategy boldly
demands Poland’s success create generational wealth: turning the average
Kowalski from an employee into a stakeholder.
Diagnosis is brutal: Poles save little (6.38 percent compared with the EU’s
14.32 percent in Q1 2024) and inefficiently, favoring low-interest deposits.
Employee Capital Plans (PPK) drive cultural change. Hard data demonstrate this:
67 percent average returns over five years crush traditional savings. It’s a
virtuous cycle — PPK capital feeds stock markets, finances company growth and
loops profits back to future pensioners.
An architect, not a firefighter
The new PFR strategy for 2026-30 is a clear signal of a paradigm shift. The
company, which many Polish entrepreneurs still see as a firefighter
extinguishing the flames of the pandemic with billions from the Anti-Covid
Financial Shields, is definitively taking off its helmet and putting on an
engineer’s hard hat. It is shifting from interventionist to creator mode,
abandoning the role of ‘night watchman’ of the Polish economy to that of its
‘chief architect’.
This is an ambitious attempt to establish an institution in Poland that not only
provides capital, but also actively shapes the country’s economic landscape,
setting the direction for development for decades to come.
LONDON — On the face of it, the new MI6 chief’s first speech featured many of
the same villains and heroes as those of her predecessors.
But in her first public outing Monday, Blaise Metreweli, the first female head
of the U.K.’s foreign intelligence service, sent a strong signal that she
intends to put her own stamp on the role – as she highlighted a wave of
inter-connected threats to western democracies.
Speaking at MI6’s HQ in London, Metreweli, who took over from Richard Moore in
October, highlighted a confluence of geo-political and technological
disruptions, warning “the frontline is everywhere” and adding “we are now
operating in a space between peace and war.”
In a speech shot through with references to a shifting transatlantic order and
the growth of disinformation, Metreweli made noticeably scant reference to the
historically close relationship with the U.S. in intelligence gathering — the
mainstay of the U.K.’s intelligence compact for decades.
Instead, she highlighted that a “new bloc and identities are forming and
alliances reshaping.” That will be widely seen to reflect an official
acknowledgement that the second Donald Trump administration has necessitated a
shift in the security services towards cultivating more multilateral
relationships.
By comparison with a lengthy passage on the seriousness of the Russia threat to
Britain, China got away only with a light mention of its cyber attack tendencies
towards the U.K. — and was referred to more flatteringly as “a country where a
central transformation is taking place this century.”
Westminster hawks will note that Metreweli — who grew up in Hong Kong and so
knows the Chinese system close-up — walked gingerly around the risk of conflict
in the South China Sea and Beijing’s espionage activities targeting British
politicians – and even its royals. In a carefully-placed line, she reflected
that she was “going to break with tradition and won’t give you a global threat
tour.”
Moore, her predecessor, was known for that approach, which delighted those who
enjoyed a plain-speaking MI6 boss giving pithy analysis of global tensions and
their fallout, but frustrated some in the Foreign Office who believed the
affable Moore could be too unguarded in his comments on geo-politics.
The implicit suggestion from the new chief was that China needs to be handled
differently to the forthright engagement with “aggressive, expansionist and
revisionist” Russia.
The reasons may well lie in the aftermath of a bruising argument within
Whitehall about how to handle the recent case of two Britons who were arrested
for spying for China, and with a growth-boosting visit to Beijing by the prime
minister scheduled for 2026.
Sources in the service suggest the aim of the China strategy is to avoid
confrontation, the better to further intelligence-gathering and have a more
productive economic relationship with Beijing. More hardline interpreters of the
Secret Intelligence Service will raise eyebrows at her suggestion that the
“convening power” of the service would enable it to “ defuse tensions.”
But there was no doubt about Metreweli’s deep concern at the impacts of
social-media disinformation and distortion, in a framing which seemed just as
worried about U.S. tech titans as conventional state-run threats: “We are being
contested from battlefield to boardroom — and even our brains — as
disinformation manipulates our understanding of each other.”
Declaring that “some algorithms become as powerful as states,” seemed to tilt
at outfits like Elon Musk’s X and Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta-owned Facebook.
Metreweli warned that “hyper personalized tools could become a new vector for
conflict and control,” pushing their effects on societies and individuals in
“minutes not months – my service must operate in this new context too.”
The new boss used the possessive pronoun, talking about “my service” in her
speech several times – another sign that she intends to put a distinctive mark
of the job, now that she has, at the age of just 48, inherited the famous
green-ink pen in which the head of the service signs correspondence.
Metreweli is experienced operator in war zones including Iraq who spent a
secondment with MI5, the domestic intelligence service, and won the job in large
part because of her experience in the top job via MI6’s science and technology
“Q” Branch. She clearly wants to expedite changes in the service – saying
agents must be as fluent in computer coding as foreign languages. She is also
expected to try and address a tendency in the service to harvest information,
without a clear focus on the action that should follow – the product of a glut
of intelligence gathered via digital means and AI.
She was keen to stress that the human factor is at the heart of it all — an
attempt at reassurance for spies and analysts wondering if they might be
replaced by AI agents as the job of gathering intelligence in the era of facial
recognition and biometrics gets harder.
Armed with a steely gaze Metreweli speaks fluent human, occasionally with a
small smile. She is also the first incumbent of the job to wear a very large
costume jewelry beetle brooch on her sombre navy attire. No small amount of
attention in Moscow and Beijing could go into decoding that.