Czech Prime Minister Andrej Babiš is facing new accusations that he never fully severed ties with his agricultural empire, after publicly promising to do so in order to avoid major conflicts of interest in both Prague and Brussels. On taking up the Czech premiership in December, Babiš pledged to cut all links with his company Agrofert, one of Central Europe’s largest agri-food and chemicals groups. President Petr Pavel required him to take that step before approving his government, and Babiš insisted his children would only take Agrofert stakes after his death. The commitment was meant to address long-standing conflict-of-interest concerns. During Babiš’s previous term, EU and national auditors found the company had improperly received at least €208 million in EU and national agricultural subsidies, triggering payment suspensions and repayment demands. At the EU level, the stakes are heightened by the fact that as prime minister, Babiš is now helping to negotiate the bloc’s next long-term budget, including farm spending from which Agrofert has previously benefited. Babiš’s pledges of a total rupture with Agrofert are now coming into question, even though the prime minister insists he has done much more than the law required. A leaked legal document that purports to map out his new relationship with the company describes a trust structure that removes him from day-to-day decision-making only while he remains in office, and that transfers decision-making powers to a family-run governance mechanism once his political career ends. The 18-page document, dated Dec. 17, was first reported by Czech outlet Seznam Zprávy. POLITICO has seen a copy. The document says the trust is meant to ensure “independent administration during the period in which the [establisher of the trust] holds the office of a member of the Government.” Once that period ends — whether through Babiš’s departure from office or, eventually, his death — the business would automatically transition to “family administration” Opposition lawmakers seized on the document as evidence that Babiš would still have strong personal and family interests tied to Agrofert during his lifetime, potentially motivating his decisions on both the domestic and EU levels. “The news about Andrej Babiš’s unresolved conflict of interest is really just the proverbial cherry on top,” Pirate party parliamentary leader Olga Richterová said in a legislative debate in Prague on Tuesday. “It is becoming clear that you can’t teach an old dog new tricks. The old practices used when Agrofert was previously parked in trust funds appear set to be applied again in a very similar way.” Danuše Nerudová, a European Parliament lawmaker from the Mayors and Independents party, told POLITICO the arrangement preserves a personal incentive to protect family business interests. “His companies benefited improperly from EU agricultural subsidies in the past,” she said. “That incentive does not disappear simply because the structure is renamed.” Given the implications for the EU budget, the European Commission said it was monitoring developments and underlined its rule that “anybody nominated in a member state to be involved in budget implementation … shall not take any action which may bring their own interests into conflict with those of the union.” POLITICO requested comment from Babiš’s office, but did not receive a response before publication. Danuše Nerudová told POLITICO the arrangement preserves a personal incentive to protect family business interests. | Martin Divisek/EPA Babiš responded to the Seznam Zprávy story in another newspaper. He did not deny the authenticity of the document and its reference to a continued family interest, but claimed he was doing nothing wrong. “What I said earlier clearly applies. I did much more than the law required of me. The shares of the company that I built for almost 30 years will never be returned to me,” he told the Deník N newspaper. POLITICAL DEBATE IN PRAGUE When Babiš made his pledge to keep out of Agrofert last year, his language was definitive. “I have decided to irrevocably give up the Agrofert company,” Babiš said in December. “I will never own it, I will not have any economic relations with it, and I will not be in any contact with it.” He added: “My children will only get Agrofert after my death.” Babiš reiterated his defense this week, telling Czech news agency ČTK that the Agrofert shares would never return to him and that he would not benefit from them for the rest of his life. He said the arrangement complied with both Czech and European law, and accused critics of trying to deprive him of his property. The prime minister has previously insisted any conflict would be resolved once the trust takes effect. He missed a self-imposed early-January deadline to complete the share transfer, saying he was still awaiting approval from financial authorities in two EU countries. David Kotora, executive director of Transparency International Czech Republic, said the trust “is currently an inactive shell” because the share transfer has not taken place. Once activated, he said, it would still fail EU standards. “This structure clearly cannot withstand European regulations concerning conflicts of interest in the redistribution of public funds,” Kotora said. During the parliamentary session on Tuesday, Babiš dismissed the renewed scrutiny as a “festival of hypocrisy.” “This is not a spontaneous defense of democracy. It’s political theater,” he said, stressing that Agrofert is not receiving any subsidies until the trust is in effect. “You invented the conflict of interest because you’re incapable of beating me.” Lawmakers from Babiš’s ANO party have rallied behind him, rejecting assessments of unresolved conflicts of interest. In a joint statement to POLITICO, MEPs Ondřej Knotek and Klára Dostálová said the prime minister had taken steps “well beyond what is required by Czech and European law.” He has relinquished ownership and control of Agrofert permanently, they said, and would not benefit from the company for the rest of his life. “If someone finds this insufficient,” they added, “it is no longer about the essence of the matter, but about an effort to constantly question it.” Economist Petr Bartoň, a regulatory and public policy expert, noted Czech conflict-of-interest rules were never designed for politicians with business empires on the scale of Agrofert. “The law does not aim to permanently separate politicians from their assets,” Bartoň said. “It aims to manage conflicts while they are in office.” Promises to go further, he added, may have political value but “no legal force.” Ketrin Jochecová contributed to this report.

Listen on * Spotify * Apple Music * Amazon Music Die Bundeswehr zieht Personal aus dem Nordirak ab. Wegen der drohenden Eskalation zwischen den USA und dem Iran wird die Präsenz in Erbil reduziert – nur Tage nach der Verlängerung des Mandats im Bundestag. Der Schritt zeigt, wie schnell sich Auslandseinsätze verändern können und wie stark die Truppe bereits heute belastet ist. Im Gespräch mit Henning Otte, dem Wehrbeauftragten des Deutschen Bundestags, geht es um die zentrale Frage: Kann Deutschland sich 17 Auslandseinsätze auf drei Kontinenten leisten, während zugleich die Aufgaben im NATO-Raum wachsen? Otte fordert eine klare Priorisierung auf Landes- und Bündnisverteidigung, warnt vor Überdehnung und spricht von einem notwendigen Umdenken bei Mandaten, Personal und Strukturen. Das Berlin Playbook als Podcast gibt es jeden Morgen ab 5 Uhr. Gordon Repinski und das POLITICO-Team liefern Politik zum Hören – kompakt, international, hintergründig. Für alle Hauptstadt-Profis: Der Berlin Playbook-Newsletter bietet jeden Morgen die wichtigsten Themen und Einordnungen. ⁠Jetzt kostenlos abonnieren.⁠ Mehr von Host und POLITICO Executive Editor Gordon Repinski: Instagram: ⁠@gordon.repinski⁠ | X: ⁠@GordonRepinski⁠. POLITICO Deutschland – ein Angebot der Axel Springer Deutschland GmbH Axel-Springer-Straße 65, 10888 Berlin Tel: +49 (30) 2591 0 ⁠information@axelspringer.de⁠ Sitz: Amtsgericht Berlin-Charlottenburg, HRB 196159 B USt-IdNr: DE 214 852 390 Geschäftsführer: Carolin Hulshoff Pol, Mathias Sanchez Luna

Mujtaba Rahman is the head of Eurasia Group’s Europe practice. He posts at @Mij_Europe. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer has only four months to save his premiership. After the U.K. parliament’s return from Christmas recess, Starmer marked his first 18 months in Downing Street with a speech touting his Labour party’s efforts to ease the cost-of-living crisis. But behind the scenes, anxiety is growing that voters won’t feel any meaningful relief before the decisive regional and local elections on May 7, which could seal the prime minister’s political fate. And the outlook is bleak: After placing third in the Welsh Parliament elections behind Plaid Cymru and far-right leader Nigel Farage’s Reform UK, failing to unseat the Scottish National Party in Scotland, and bleeding support to both the Greens and Reform UK in English council contests, Labour risks humiliation across the U.K. And national polling only underscores the danger, with Reform UK now averaging close to 30 percent, and Labour languishing in the teens alongside the Greens and the Conservatives. Still, Starmer’s advisers privately argue that “less bad than expected” results might be enough to save him. But many Labour MPs expect a leadership challenge regardless, as it would require only 81 out of 404 MPs to initiate one — and Starmer is hardly popular with the wider party. Then there’s the unfolding scandal over Labour stalwart and former U.K. ambassador to the U.S. Peter Mandelson. Mandelson was appointed by Starmer before being removed from his position in September once the extent of his friendship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein became clear. Under mounting pressure, Starmer has been strong in his criticism and push for transparency — but that may not be enough, as Mandelson’s now under investigation for misconduct while in public office. A challenge may not come immediately, or even right after polling day in May. But the sense that Starmer’s authority is waning is unmistakable. For one, the prime minister is already preparing his defense. A King’s speech designed to reset the agenda ,outlining proposals on special education needs and digital ID, is now penciled in for mid-May. A cabinet reshuffle may follow, and some in Labour believe Starmer might even sacrifice his chancellor if he thinks it would placate restive backbenchers. He’s also expected to recall former Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner to the cabinet, hoping her return could blunt any leadership ambitions. Labour’s traditions may offer Starmer only limited protection.While the party prides itself on avoiding the “regicide” that’s plagued the rival Conservatives, this instinct will weaken if electoral defeat looms. Labour MPs may dread a destabilizing leadership contest, but many have already concluded Starmer won’t lead them into the next general election. And privately, some ministers believe it’s no longer a question of if the prime minister falls, but when. Their concerns are understandable: Energized by new leadership, the Greens are siphoning some progressive voters, while Reform UK is eroding Labour’s traditional working-class base. Meanwhile, the Conservatives have stabilized enough under Kemi Badenoch’s leadership to reduce the likelihood of another revolt — a development that leaves Starmer more exposed. So, if a contest is triggered, he’s unlikely to survive it. Party members — roughly 250,000-strong — tend to favor the soft left. And that dynamic would advantage Rayner, should she stand. Last week’s events in Greater Manchester only further crystallized this perception of Starmer’s weakness. His decision to block Mayor Andy Burnham from contesting a parliamentary by-election was a lose-lose proposition: Either deny Burnham a Westminster platform and risk a party backlash, or enable a future leadership challenger. And Starmer chose the former, provoking fury while reinforcing the perception that he’s defensive and frail. Then came news of Mandelson. Starmer was elected on the promise of ending the chaos of government sleaze, and this saga will only foment questions about his judgement when appointing Mandelson ambassador. And the prime minister may well end up having to sacrifice his beloved advisor Morgan McSweeney, who lobbied for Mandelson to be picked for the plum Washington post. Labour MPs may dread a destabilizing leadership contest, but many have already concluded Starmer won’t lead them into the next general election. | Lukas Coch/EPA Meanwhile, foreign policy — the one area where Starmer’s performance has proven more assured — is offering Number 10 no relief either. U.S. President Donald Trump’s return to the White House has distracted him from and sometimes undermined his domestic agenda, particularly in the case of tariffs. And the latest crisis over Greenland was no exception. Managing relations with the U.S. under Trump has forced Starmer into awkward contortions, attempting to respond to provocations while trying to preserve his strategy of staying close to both Washington and Brussels, where his government is trying to reset relations. As it stands, the debate inside Labour over whether to pivot toward the EU is intensifying, and there’s now growing support within the party for a customs union with the bloc. But Starmer’s preference for incremental sector-by-sector alignment risks satisfying no one, viewed in Brussels as cherry-picking and at home as timid. Even loyalists concede a damaging story has taken hold: A prime minister unable to impose a vision or discipline, haunted by his early decisions, buffeted by U-turns and trapped by his own party. Starmer wanted to avoid a Tory-style drama. Instead, he’s now heading one of Labour’s own — slower, quieter but no less brutal. And four months isn’t long to change the narrative, especially when so many in his own party have already turned the page.

Disclaimer POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT * The sponsor is SAP SE * The advertisement is linked to advocacy on strengthening Europe’s digital sovereignty by promoting trusted cloud and AI adoption under EU law, harmonized regulation, accountable governance and openness to global innovation to enhance security, competitiveness and strategic autonomy. More information here.

Listen on * Spotify * Apple Music * Amazon Music Das Berlin Playbook als Podcast gibt es morgens um 5 Uhr. Gordon Repinski und das POLITICO-Team bringen euch jeden Morgen auf den neuesten Stand in Sachen Politik — kompakt, europäisch, hintergründig. Und für alle Hauptstadt-Profis: Unser Berlin Playbook-Newsletter liefert jeden Morgen die wichtigsten Themen und Einordnungen. Hier gibt es alle Informationen und das kostenlose Playbook-Abo. Mehr von Berlin Playbook-Host und Executive Editor von POLITICO in Deutschland, Gordon Repinski, gibt es auch hier:   Instagram: @gordon.repinski | X: @GordonRepinski. POLITICO Deutschland – ein Angebot der Axel Springer Deutschland GmbH Axel-Springer-Straße 65, 10888 Berlin Tel: +49 (30) 2591 0 information@axelspringer.de Sitz: Amtsgericht Berlin-Charlottenburg, HRB 196159 B USt-IdNr: DE 214 852 390 Geschäftsführer: Carolin Hulshoff Pol, Mathias Sanchez Luna

Listen on * Spotify * Apple Music * Amazon Music Die Bundesregierung legt ihren Jahreswirtschaftsbericht vor und der Ton ist ungewöhnlich ernüchternd. Erwartet wird nur ein Prozent Wachstum, getragen vor allem von staatlichen Sonderausgaben für Infrastruktur. Von Aufschwung oder Befreiungsschlag keine Spur. Rixa Fürsen spricht mit Rasmus Buchsteiner über einen Bericht, der vor allem Probleme beschreibt. Zugleich bleibt offen, welche konkreten Reformen daraus folgen sollen. Im Fokus stehen Infrastruktur, Arbeitskosten, Fachkräftemangel und Sozialreformen. Doch klar wird auch: Ohne weitere Entscheidungen im Koalitionsausschuss bleibt der wirtschaftspolitische Neustart Stückwerk. Für Kanzler Friedrich Merz wächst damit der Druck, das Versprechen vom Reformjahr 2026 einzulösen. Newsletter-Hinweis: POLITICO Pro – Energie & Klima POLITICO Pro – Industrie & Handel Das Berlin Playbook als Podcast gibt es jeden Morgen ab 5 Uhr. Gordon Repinski und das POLITICO-Team liefern Politik zum Hören – kompakt, international, hintergründig. Für alle Hauptstadt-Profis: Der Berlin Playbook-Newsletter bietet jeden Morgen die wichtigsten Themen und Einordnungen. Jetzt kostenlos abonnieren. Mehr von Host und POLITICO Executive Editor Gordon Repinski: Instagram: @gordon.repinski | X: @GordonRepinski. POLITICO Deutschland – ein Angebot der Axel Springer Deutschland GmbH Axel-Springer-Straße 65, 10888 Berlin Tel: +49 (30) 2591 0 information@axelspringer.de Sitz: Amtsgericht Berlin-Charlottenburg, HRB 196159 B USt-IdNr: DE 214 852 390 Geschäftsführer: Carolin Hulshoff Pol, Mathias Sanchez Luna

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni on Friday insisted they would have been ready to join U.S. President Donald Trump’s “Board of Peace” but were prevented by constitutional barriers. Their rejection of Trump’s controversial Board of Peace — an integral part of his plan for post-conflict governance in Gaza — appeared to be a strategic way of not offending the U.S. president. Meloni and Merz are considered two of Trump’s closest allies in the EU and are at the forefront of trying to defuse transatlantic tensions. Within the EU, only Hungary and Bulgaria signed up to Trump’s initiative, with many countries worried by the invitations issued to dictatorships such as Russia and Belarus. Seeking a diplomatic way out, Rome and Berlin both turned to their constitutions. “We are ready. But of course there are objective problems with the way the initiative is structured,” Meloni said in Rome on Friday during a joint press conference with Merz. “I have also spoken to the American president about this. Perhaps we can try to resolve these issues,” she added. Meloni argued that Trump’s peace board would contravene a provision of the Italian constitution that precludes the country from joining international bodies in which one entity — in this case the U.S. president — would have more power than its peers. Merz, who was in Rome for consultations aimed at strengthening German and Italian cooperation within the EU, backed up Meloni’s comments. “I would personally be willing to join a peace board,” Merz said. He then added, however, that: “We cannot accept the governance structures, also for constitutional reasons in Germany. But we are, of course, willing to try other forms, new forms of cooperation.” Germany had previously welcomed Trump’s invitation, while remaining on the fence. German officials said Berlin’s aim was to formulate a united response to Trump’s peace board plan, while stressing that the U.N. should remain the main multilateral forum to resolve conflicts. Merz and Meloni spoke a day after EU leaders met for an emergency summit in Brussels —organized earlier this week amid Trump’s threats to seize the Arctic territory of Greenland and to impose new tariffs on European countries. During the meeting, European leaders agreed the post-World War II order was slipping away, but diverged on the best strategy for dealing with Trump. Carlo Martuscelli and Giorgio Leali contributed to this report.

Listen on * Spotify * Apple Music * Amazon Music Lars Klingbeil spricht mit Gordon Repinski über den Moment, in dem das World Economic Forum endgültig geopolitisch wird. Die Rede von Donald Trump, der europäische Schulterschluss – und die Frage, warum sich Europa jetzt nicht zurücklehnen darf. Außerdem geht es beim Spaziergang am Rande des Weltwirtschaftsforums um Fragen der Krisenfestigkeit des deutschen Wirtschaftsmodells. Ist Wettbewerbsfähigkeit ein sozialdemokratisches Thema? Klingbeil erklärt, warum sichere Arbeitsplätze, Investitionen und Resilienz für ihn keine Gegensätze sind. Das Berlin Playbook als Podcast gibt es jeden Morgen ab 5 Uhr. Gordon Repinski und das POLITICO-Team liefern Politik zum Hören – kompakt, international, hintergründig. Für alle Hauptstadt-Profis: Der Berlin Playbook-Newsletter bietet jeden Morgen die wichtigsten Themen und Einordnungen. Jetzt kostenlos abonnieren. Mehr von Host und POLITICO Executive Editor Gordon Repinski: Instagram: @gordon.repinski | X: @GordonRepinski. POLITICO Deutschland – ein Angebot der Axel Springer Deutschland GmbH Axel-Springer-Straße 65, 10888 Berlin Tel: +49 (30) 2591 0 information@axelspringer.de Sitz: Amtsgericht Berlin-Charlottenburg, HRB 196159 B USt-IdNr: DE 214 852 390 Geschäftsführer: Carolin Hulshoff Pol, Mathias Sanchez Luna

President Donald Trump revoked Canada’s invitation to participate in his “Board of Peace” initiative, in the latest blow to the increasingly frosty relations between the North American neighbors. Trump said in a social media post on Thursday that Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney would no longer be welcome on the board, which his administration initially created to oversee the end of the war in Gaza but has since said would have a broader mission. The president did not specify why he was withdrawing the invitation to Carney, but his social media post came after the prime minister raised concerns about the board and pushed back sharply at Trump’s remark that “Canada lives because of the United States” in a speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland on Wednesday. “Canada doesn’t live because of the United States. Canada thrives because we are Canadian,” Carney said earlier Thursday. The Canadian prime minister’s office had no immediate comment on Trump’s announcement. The withdrawn invitation deepens the fracture in the relationship between Trump and Carney, who stood with other NATO allies in opposition to the president’s campaign to wrest control of Greenland from Denmark. The two leaders appear to be working towards opposing geopolitical goals: Carney travelled to China to negotiate a trade deal as part of a mission of ramping up trade with non-U.S. partners to decrease reliance on its neighbor. The tension sets the table for a potentially tense review of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade agreement later this year. In announcing the U.S. plan for governance of Gaza, Trump said he expects over 50 countries to sign on to the plan. Some Middle Eastern nations, including Israel and the United Arab Emirates, have agreed to join the board. But many Western allies have yet to sign on, and France and the United Kingdom have said they will not participate in the plan. Yvette Cooper, the U.K.’s top diplomat, cited Trump’s invitation to Russian President Vladimir Putin as part of the reason the U.K. won’t sign on.

LONDON — European leaders rushed to praise Donald Trump’s announcement of a peace deal in the Middle East. Now they’re not so sure they want anything to do with it.  Trump promoted his “Board of Peace” as an integral part of his plan for post-conflict governance in Gaza from the start, sparking jockeying for position on the panel.  Now that details of the board’s operation have come into focus, they have triggered alarm among some key European allies who were due to be part of it.  In particular, skeptics point out that the board’s charter makes no direct reference to Gaza and appears to hand it a broad mandate to resolve global conflicts which some fear could effectively create a shadow United Nations. The decision to invite Russian President Vladimir Putin to participate has in particular unnerved America’s traditional allies on the continent, and countries seeking a permanent seat on the peace board have been asked to contribute at least $1 billion to participate, creating another political obstacle. The decision to invite Russian President Vladimir Putin to participate has in particular unnerved America’s traditional allies on the continent. | Pool photo by Ramil Sitdikov/EPA These terms are proving too much for some European leaders to bear, with misgivings even among those seen as friendly with the White House such as Italy’s Georgia Meloni and Poland’s Karol Nawrocki — just as Trump’s effort to acquire Greenland has driven a wedge between him and his most fervent political supporters in Europe. Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk summed up the mood among Trump’s detractors when he posted on X: “We will not let anyone play us.” HOLD-OUTS ABOUND Proposals for the Board of Peace have been greeted with consternation in a number of countries, deepening the transatlantic rift opened by the U.S. administration’s designs on Greenland. Meloni is considering declining participation in the Gaza Board of Peace despite her close relationship with Trump, according to Italian media reports, and said Wednesday that she needs more time to review. The Italian prime minister is facing splits inside her government coalition, with senior figures from the center-right Forza Italia publicly urging Meloni to refuse the U.S. plan while the right-wing League is more favorable. In a further complication for Meloni, there are concerns that joining the new supranational body could violate the Italian constitution.  Britain’s Keir Starmer, who has until recently been extremely reluctant to directly criticize Trump, also appears to be cooling on the idea. Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk summed up the mood among Trump’s detractors when he posted on X: “We will not let anyone play us.” | Albert Zawada/EPA He gave his strongest rebuke to Trump yet as he said he “would not yield” over Greenland in remarks to the House of Commons — words which, while addressing a separate matter, hinted at a new robustness in the British posture. A spokesman for Starmer said the U.K. was “still looking at the terms” and expressed “concern” about Putin and Lukashenko’s inclusion. His foreign secretary, Yvette Cooper, is skeptical about Trump’s plan, according to U.K. officials, and has been at pains to discuss Palestinians’ role and “global cooperation” during meetings at Davos. French President Emmanuel Macron rejected the offer outright, with his office saying the board’s charter “goes beyond the framework of Gaza” and “raises serious questions” about undermining the U.N. The Dutch have also declined to take part, while a Danish diplomat, like others granted anonymity to discuss a sensitive topic, told POLITICO that Copenhagen was not even invited to join. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who is considering whether to take part, said Tuesday it was “very difficult to imagine how we and Russia would be together on a board.” Britain’s Keir Starmer, who has until recently been extremely reluctant to directly criticize Trump, also appears to be cooling on the idea. | Neil Hall/EPA Putin’s potential role has also provoked Poland, where President Karol Nawrocki, a Trump ally, said in an interview with Republika on Thursday, “If I were to sit in the same format with Vladimir Putin, I would have no difficulty telling him exactly what I think.” CLAMBERING ABOARD However, Nawrocki has not yet made an official decision. MPs from the rightwing PiS party with which he’s closely linked have argued that it is better for Poland to have a seat at the table than not, and that the U.N. is a spent force. Nawrocki said Wednesday after meeting with Trump that he had explained to the U.S. president that he would require government and parliamentary approval before he could commit. “Trump understands this perfectly,” he added. Germany has welcomed an invitation from Trump but is currently on the fence. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen is still considering her options, with the topic due to be discussed at a European Council summit Thursday. While London may not have accepted, Britain will have a voice on the executive committee of the Board of Peace in the form of Tony Blair, the former prime minister who will sit alongside U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff and Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner. The White House confirmed Trump would “highlight” the Board of Peace at Davos Thursday, noting that around 35 world leaders had accepted out of the 50 or so invitations that went out. Countries that have publicly accepted the offer of a seat on the board so far include Belarus, Hungary, Kazakhstan, and Vietnam. Jordan, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Indonesia announced Wednesday that they would join Egypt, Pakistan and the United Arab Emirates in accepting seats. The list also includes Albania, where the government voted Wednesday to join — just as Kushner met with Edi Rama about his huge multi-billion dollar luxury resort investment on the country’s only island. Trump’s postwar organization may be getting a mixed reception, but there’s no sign it has deterred the man himself. Anne McElvoy, Gregorio Sori, Gabriel Gavin, Nicholas Vinocur, Alice Taylor and Bartosz Brzeziński contributed to this report.