LONDON — The U.K. and Poland have agreed to cooperate more closely to shoot down air and missile threats, as they seek to strengthen the protection of their skies. The two NATO allies will step up joint training of helicopter pilots and work together on new capabilities to counter attacks from the air. British and Polish military personnel will train together in virtual environments to improve air defense techniques, while eight Polish military helicopter pilots will undertake training in the U.K. under NATO’s military aviation program. Two Polish helicopter instructors will be permanently stationed at RAF Shawbury in the West Midlands for a full rotational tour. The announcement came during a visit by Polish President Karol Nawrocki to Downing Street on Tuesday. U.K. Defense Secretary, John Healey, hailed Poland as “a crucial ally for the U.K. in this era of rising threats” and said together they were “stepping up to defend Europe and face down the threat from (Vladimir) Putin.” British fighter jets conducted an air defense mission over Poland as part of an allied response to Russian drone incursions into Polish airspace, with pilots from the two countries flying together as part of NATO’s Eastern Sentry mission. Healey announced last year that British armed forces would get fresh powers to bring down suspicious drones over military sites as part of the Armed Forces Bill, amid a spate of aerial incursions across Europe. Ministers have committed to improving the U.K.’s aerial defenses, following concerns that it is increasingly vulnerable given the changing nature of threats from the air. The U.K. and Poland have cooperated extensively on air defense in the past, including a £1.9 billion export agreement announced in April 2023 to equip 22 Polish air defense batteries, and a separate deal worth over £4 billion to continue the next phase of Poland’s future air defense programme, Narew. 

BRUSSELS — Donald Trump blew up global efforts to cut emissions from shipping, and now the EU is terrified the U.S. president will do the same to any plans to tax carbon emissions from long-haul flights. The European Commission is studying whether to expand its existing carbon pricing scheme that forces airlines to pay for emissions from short- and medium-haul flights within Europe into a more ambitious effort covering all flights departing the bloc. If that happens, all international airlines flying out of Europe — including U.S. ones — would face higher costs, something that’s likely to stick in the craw of the Trump administration. “God only knows what the Trump administration will do” if Brussels expands its own Emissions Trading System to include transatlantic flights, a senior EU official told POLITICO. A big issue is how to ensure that the new system doesn’t end up charging only European airlines, which often complain about the higher regulatory burden they face compared with their non-EU rivals. The EU official said Commission experts are now “scratching their heads how you can, on the one hand, talk about extending the ETS worldwide … [but] also make sure that you have a bit of a level playing field,” meaning a system that doesn’t only penalize European carriers. Any new costs will hit airlines by 2027, following a Commission assessment that will be completed by July 1. Brussels has reason to be worried.  “Trump has made it very clear that he does not want any policies that harm business … So he does not want any environmental regulation,” said Marina Efthymiou, aviation management professor at Dublin City University. “We do have an administration with a bullying behavior threatening countries and even entities like the European Commission.” The new U.S. National Security Strategy, released last week, closely hews to Trump’s thinking and is scathing on climate efforts. “We reject the disastrous ‘climate change’ and ‘Net Zero’ ideologies that have so greatly harmed Europe, threaten the United States, and subsidize our adversaries,” it says. In October, the U.S. led efforts to prevent the International Maritime Organization from setting up a global tax to encourage commercial fleets to go green. The no-holds-barred push was personally led by Trump and even threatened negotiators with personal consequences if they went along with the measure. In October, the U.S. led efforts to prevent the International Maritime Organization from setting up a global tax aimed at encouraging commercial fleets to go green. | Nicolas Tucat/AFP via Getty Images This “will be a parameter to consider seriously from the European Commission” when it thinks about aviation, Efthymiou said. The airline industry hopes the prospect of a furious Trump will scare off the Commission. “The EU is not going to extend ETS to transatlantic flights because that will lead to a war,” said Willie Walsh, director general of the International Air Transport Association, the global airline lobby, at a November conference in Brussels. “And that is not a war that the EU will win.” EUROPEAN ETS VS. GLOBAL CORSIA In 2012, the EU began taxing aviation emissions through its cap-and-trade ETS, which covers all outgoing flights from the European Economic Area — meaning EU countries plus Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway. Switzerland and the U.K. later introduced similar schemes. In parallel, the U.N.’s International Civil Aviation Organization was working on its own carbon reduction plan, the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation. Given that fact, Brussels delayed imposing the ETS on flights to non-European destinations. The EU will now be examining the ICAO’s CORSIA to see if it meets the mark. “CORSIA lets airlines pay pennies for pollution — about €2.50 per passenger on a Paris-New York flight,” said Marte van der Graaf, aviation policy officer at green NGO Transport & Environment. Applying the ETS on the same route would cost “€92.40 per passenger based on 2024 traffic.” There are two reasons for such a big difference: the fourfold higher price for ETS credits compared with CORSIA credits, and the fact that “under CORSIA, airlines don’t pay for total emissions, but only for the increase above a fixed 2019 baseline,” Van der Graaf explained. “Thus, for a Paris-New York flight that emits an average of 131 tons of CO2, only 14 percent of emissions are offset under CORSIA. This means that, instead of covering the full 131 tons, the airline only has to purchase credits for approximately 18 tons.” Efthymiou, the professor, warned the price difference is projected to increase due to the progressive withdrawal of free ETS allowances granted to aviation. The U.N. scheme will become mandatory for all U.N. member countries in 2027 but will not cover domestic flights, including those in large countries such as the U.S., Russia and China. KEY DECISIONS By July 1, the Commission must release a report assessing the geographical coverage and environmental integrity of CORSIA. Based on this evaluation, the EU executive will propose either extending the ETS to all departing flights from the EU starting in 2027 or maintaining it for intra-EU flights only. Opposition to the ETS in the U.S. dates back to the Barack Obama administration. | Pete Souza/White House via Getty Images According to T&E, CORSIA doesn’t meet the EU’s climate goals. “Extending the scope of the EU ETS to all departing flights from 2027 could raise an extra €147 billion by 2040,” said Van der Graaf, noting that this money could support the production of greener aviation fuels to replace fossil kerosene. But according to Efthymiou, the Commission might decide to continue the current exemption “considering the very fragile political environment we currently have with a lunatic being in power,” she said, referring to Trump. “CORSIA has received a lot of criticism for sure … but the importance of CORSIA is that for the first time ever we have an agreement,” she added. “Even though that agreement might not be very ambitious, ICAO is the only entity with power to put an international regulation [into effect].” Regardless of what is decided in Brussels, Washington is prepared to fight. Opposition to the ETS in the U.S. dates back to the Barack Obama administration, when then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton sent a letter to the Commission opposing its application to American airlines. During the same term, the U.S. passed the EU ETS Prohibition Act, which gives Washington the power to prohibit American carriers from paying for European carbon pricing. John Thune, the Republican politician who proposed the bill, is now the majority leader of the U.S. Senate.

With his lightning raid to snatch Venezuelan strongman Nicolás Maduro, U.S. President Donald Trump has shown that President Vladimir Putin’s self-proclaimed “multipolar” world of anti-Western dictatorial alliances from Caracas to Tehran is essentially toothless. Beyond the humiliation of the world seeing that Putin isn’t a dependable ally when the chips are down — something already witnessed in Nagorno-Karabakh, Syria and Iran — there’s now also the added insult that Trump appears more effective and bolder in pulling off the sort of maverick superpower interventions the Kremlin wishes it could achieve. In short, Putin has been upstaged at being a law unto himself. While the Russian leader would presumably have loved to remove Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in a blitz attack, he’s instead been locked in a brutal war for four years, suffering over 1 million Russian dead and wounded. “Putin must be unbearably jealous [of Trump],” political analyst and former Kremlin speechwriter Abbas Gallyamov told POLITICO. “What Putin promised to do in Ukraine, Trump did in half an hour [in Venezuela].” The sense that Moscow has lost face was one of the few things independent analysts and Russia’s ultranationalists seemed to agree on.    Discussing the Caracas raid on his Telegram account, the nationalist spy-turned-soldier and war blogger Igor Girkin, now jailed in a penal colony, wrote: “We’ve suffered another blow to our image. Another country that was counting on Russia’s help hasn’t received it.” UNRELIABLE ALLY For years, Russia has sought to project itself as the main force resisting American-led Western hegemony, pioneering an alliance loosely united by the idea of a common enemy in Washington. Under Putin, Russia presented itself as the chief proponent of this “multipolar” world, which like the Soviet Union would help defend those in its camp.  Invading Ukraine in 2022, Moscow called upon its allies to rally to its side.  They largely heeded the call. Iran sold Russia drones. China and India bought its oil. The leaders of those countries in Latin America and Africa, with less to offer economically and militarily, gave symbolic support that lent credence to Moscow’s claim it wasn’t an international pariah and in fact had plenty of friends.  Recent events, however, have shown those to be a one-way friendships to the benefit of Moscow. Russia, it appears, won’t be riding to the rescue. The first to realise that cozying up to Russia had been a waste of time were the Armenians. Distracted by the Ukraine war, Moscow didn’t lift a finger to stop Azerbaijan from seizing the ethnic-Armenian region of Nagorno-Karabakh in a lightning war in 2023. Russian peacekeepers just stood by.   A year later, the Kremlin was similarly helpless as it watched the collapse of the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad, which it had propped up for years. Russia even had to abandon Tartous, its vital port on the Mediterranean. Moscow didn’t lift a finger to stop Azerbaijan from seizing the ethnic-Armenian region of Nagorno-Karabakh in a lightning war in 2023. | Anthony Pizzoferrato/Middle East Images/AFP via Getty Images Further undermining its status in the Middle East, Russia was unable to help Iran when Israel and the U.S. last year bombed the Islamic Republic at will. Russia has long been an important strategic partner to Iran in nuclear technology, but it had no answer to the overwhelming display of military aviation used to strike Iran’s atomic facilities. Now, Venezuela, another of Putin’s longtime allies, has been humiliated, eliciting haughty condemnation (but no action) from Moscow. GREEN WITH ENVY Moscow’s energy and military ties to Caracas run deep. Since 1999 Russia has supplied more than $20 billion in military equipment — financed through loans and secured in part by control over Venezuela’s oil industry — investments that will now be of little avail to Moscow. Maduro’s capture is particularly galling for the Russians, as in the past they have managed to whisk their man to safety — securing a dacha after your escape being among the attractions of any dictator’s pact with Russia. But while ousted Ukrainian leader Viktor Yakunovych and Assad secured refuge in Russia, Maduro on Monday appeared in a New York court dressed in prison garb. Russian officials, predictably, have denounced the American attack. Russia’s foreign ministry described it as “an unacceptable violation of the sovereignty of an independent state,” while senator Alexei Puskov said Trump’s actions heralded a return to the “wild imperialism of the 19th century.” Sovereignty violations and anachronistic imperialism, of course, are exactly what the Russians themselves are accused of in Ukraine.   There has also been the usual saber-rattling.  “All of Russia is asking itself why we don’t deal with our enemies in a similar way,” wrote Aleksandr Dugin, a prominent ultranationalist | Matt Cardy/Getty Images Alexei Zhuravlev, deputy chairman of Russia’s parliamentary defense committee, said Russia should consider providing Venezuela with a nuclear-capable Oreshnik missile.  And the military-themed channel ‘Two Majors,’ which has more than 1.2 million followers, posted on Telegram that “Washington’s actions have effectively given Moscow free rein to resolve its own issues by any means necessary.” (As if Moscow had not been doing so already.) The more optimistic quarters of the Russian camp argue that Trump’s actions in Caracas show international law has been jettisoned, allowing Moscow to justify its own behavior. Others suggest, despite evidence to the contrary in the Middle East, that Trump is adhering to the 19th century Monroe Doctrine and will be content to focus on dominance of the Americas, leaving Russia to its old European and Central Asian spheres of influence. In truth, however, Putin has followed the might-is-right model for years. What’s embarrassing is that he hasn’t proving as successful at it as Trump. Indeed, the dominant emotion among Russia’s nationalists appears to be envy, both veiled and undisguised.  “All of Russia is asking itself why we don’t deal with our enemies in a similar way,” wrote Aleksandr Dugin, a prominent ultranationalist. Russia, he continued, should take a leaf out of Trump’s playbook. “Do like Trump, do it better than Trump. And faster.” Pro-Kremlin mouthpiece Margarita Simonyan was even more explicit, saying there was reason to “be jealous.” Various pro-Kremlin commentators also noted tartly that, unlike Russia, the U.S. was unlikely to face repercussions in the form of international sanctions or being “cancelled.”  To many in Russia, Trump’s audacious move is likely to confirm, rather than upend their world view, said Gallyamov, the analyst. Russian officials and state media have long proclaimed that the world is ruled by strength rather than laws. The irony, though, is that Trump is showing himself to be more skillful at navigating the law of the jungle than Putin. “Putin himself created a world where the only thing that matters is success,” Gallyamov added. “And now the Americans have shown how it’s done, while Putin’s humiliation is obvious for everyone to see.” 

KYIV — Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is planning to remove Vasyl Malyuk as head of the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU), the state’s top counterintelligence agency, as part of an ongoing government reshuffle. The reshuffle has already seen two other top spies — Kyrylo Budanov and Oleh Ivashchenko — shifted to other responsibilities. Budanov has agreed to head the president’s office, while Ivashchenko will be chief of the HUR military intelligence service. Malyuk is said to be fighting to retain his post. “There are attempts to remove Malyuk, but nothing has been decided yet,” a Ukrainian official told POLITICO on Saturday. “Talks are still going on. But if Malyuk is out of SBU, this will seriously weaken Ukraine’s ability to protect itself,” added the official, who was granted anonymity to discuss sensitive matters. “Malyuk is in his place, and the results of the security service prove it. It was he who turned the SBU into an effective special service that conducts unique special operations and gives Ukraine strong ‘cards’ at the negotiating table,” the official said. Enigmatic Malyuk, 42, has been managing the SBU since 2023. Since he was officially appointed by the parliament, he has overseen some of the agency’s high-profile assassinations and most daring special operations inside Russia, like the 2025 operation “Spiderweb” in which Ukrainian drones hit Russia’s strategic bombers on several protected airfields, causing $7 billion in damage to Russian military aviation. Neither Malyuk nor Zelenskyy responded to requests for comment. The SBU press service and the president’s office refused to comment. Holos Yaroslav Zheleznyak, a Ukrainian MP from the opposition party, said that Zelenskyy did not plan to fire Malyuk, but to offer him a new job. The Ukrainian leader has offered Malyuk a post at the Foreign Intelligence Service, which Ivashchenko used to head, or at the National Security Council of Ukraine, now headed by Rustem Umerov. POLITICO confirmed that information through other Ukrainian officials.  Before the final decision on Malyuk, Zelenskyy also offered to make Mykhailo Fedorov, currently deputy prime minister and minister of digital transformation, the new defense minister. “Mykhailo is deeply involved in the issues related to the Drone Line and works very effectively on digitalizing public services and processes,” Zelenskyy said in an evening address to the nation late Friday. “Together with all our military, the army command, national weapons producers, and Ukraine’s partners, we must implement defense-sector changes,” he added. Fedorov has so far issued no public comments on whether he will accept the new post. The Ukrainian parliament would have to formally appoint him and dismiss Denys Shmyhal, who has served as defense minister and also as prime minister in Zelenskyy’s war-time government. Zelenskyy thanked Shmyhal and said he will stay in the team. The Ukrainian official quoted above praised the performance of the SBU under Malyuk. “No other security structure currently has such results as the SBU. Why change those?” the official said. “The Kremlin will open the champagne if Malyuk is dismissed from his post.”

Poland scrambled fighter jets and placed its air defense systems on heightened alert overnight as Moscow launched one of its heaviest air assaults on Ukraine in recent weeks.  The Russian attack sent shockwaves across NATO’s eastern flank just a day before Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is due to meet U.S. President Donald Trump to discuss a newly revised peace proposal. Poland’s Operational Command posted Saturday on X that military aviation operations were launched in Polish airspace “in connection with the activity of long-range aviation of the Russian Federation carrying out strikes on the territory of Ukraine.”  Fighter jets were scrambled and ground-based air defense and radar reconnaissance systems were put on readiness as a preventive measure to protect Polish airspace. The move came as Russia attacked Ukraine overnight with nearly 500 drones — many of them Iranian-designed Shaheds — and around 40 missiles, including Kinzhal hypersonic weapons, according to Ukrainian authorities. “Another Russian attack is still ongoing,” Zelenskyy wrote on X at mid-morning Saturday, saying the primary target was Kyiv, where energy facilities and civilian infrastructure were hit. He said residential buildings were damaged and rescue teams were searching for people trapped under rubble, while electricity and heating were cut in parts of the capital amid freezing temperatures. Ukrainian Interior Minister Ihor Klymenko said at least one person was killed and more than 20 others were injured in Kyiv, with multiple civilian sites damaged and search-and-rescue operations continuing. Zelenskyy said the barrage underscored Russian President Vladimir Putin’s lack of seriousness about ending the war. “Russian representatives engage in lengthy talks, but in reality, Kinzhals and Shaheds speak for them,” Zelenskyy wrote. The attack came one day before Zelenskyy is expected to meet Trump in Florida to present a revised 20-point peace plan, including proposals on security guarantees and territorial arrangements, talks Trump has publicly framed as contingent on his approval. Several hours later, Poland’s military said the air operation had ended and that no violation of Polish airspace had been detected.

Europe prides itself on being a world leader in animal protection, with legal frameworks requiring member states to pay regard to animal welfare standards when designing and implementing policies. However, under REACH — Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) — the EU’s cornerstone regulation on chemical safety, hundreds of thousands of animals are subjected to painful tests every year, despite the legal requirement that animal testing should be used only as a ‘last resort’. With REACH’s first major revamp in almost 20 years forthcoming, lawmakers now face a once-in-a-generation opportunity to drive a genuine transformation of chemical regulation.  When REACH was introduced nearly a quarter of a century ago, it outlined a bold vision to protect people and the environment from dangerous chemicals, while simultaneously driving a transition toward modern, animal-free testing approaches. In practice, however, companies are still required to generate extensive toxicity data to bring both new chemicals and chemicals with long histories of safe use onto the market. This has resulted in a flood of animal tests that could too often be dispensed, especially when animal-free methods are just as protective (if not more) of human health and the environment.  > Hundreds of thousands of animals are subjected to painful tests every year, > despite the legal requirement that animal testing should be used only as a > ‘last resort’. Despite the last resort requirement, some of the cruelest tests in the books are still expressly required under REACH. For example, ‘lethal dose’ animal tests were developed back in 1927 — the same year as the first solo transatlantic flight — and remain part of the toolbox when regulators demand ‘acute toxicity’ data, despite the availability of animal-free methods. Yet while the aviation industry has advanced significantly over the last century, chemical safety regulations remain stuck in the past.   Today’s science offers fully viable replacement approaches for evaluating oral, skin and fish lethality to irritation, sensitization, aquatic bioconcentration and more. It is time for the European Commission and member states to urgently revise REACH information requirements to align with the proven capabilities of animal-free science.   But this is only the first step. A 2023 review projected that animal testing under REACH will rise in the coming years in the absence of significant reform. With the forthcoming revision of the REACH legal text, lawmakers face a choice: lock Europe into decades of archaic testing requirements or finally bring chemical safety into the 21st century by removing regulatory obstacles that slow the adoption of advanced animal-free science.   If REACH continues to treat animal testing as the default option, it risks eroding its credibility and the values it claims to uphold. However, animal-free science won’t be achieved by stitching together one-for-one replacements for legacy animal tests. A truly modern, European relevant chemicals framework demands deeper shifts in how we think, generate evidence and make safety decisions. Only by embracing next-generation assessment paradigms that leverage both exposure science and innovative approaches to the evaluation of a chemical’s biological activity can we unlock the full power of state-of the-art non-animal approaches and leave the old toolbox behind.  > With the forthcoming revision of the REACH legal text, lawmakers face a > choice: lock Europe into decades of archaic testing requirements or finally > bring chemical safety into the 21st century. The recent endorsement of One Substance, One Assessment regulations aims to drive collaboration across the sector while reducing duplicate testing on animals, helping to ensure transparency and improve data sharing. This is a step in the right direction, and provides the framework to help industry, regulators and other interest-holders to work together and chart a new path forward for chemical safety.   The EU has already demonstrated in the cosmetics sector that phasing out animal testing is not only possible but can spark innovation and build public trust. In 2021, the European Parliament urged the Commission to develop an EU plan to replace animal testing with modern scientific innovation. But momentum has since stalled. In the meantime, more than 1.2 million citizens have backed a European Citizens’ Initiative calling for chemical safety laws that protect people and the environment without adding new animal testing requirements; a clear indication that both science and society are eager for change.   > The EU has already demonstrated in the cosmetics sector that phasing out > animal testing is not only possible but can spark innovation and build public > trust. Jay Ingram, managing director, chemicals, Humane World for Animals (founding member of AFSA Collaboration) states: “Citizens are rightfully concerned about the safety of chemicals that they are exposed to on a daily basis, and are equally invested in phasing out animal testing. Trust and credibility must be built in the systems, structures, and people that are in place to achieve both of those goals.”  The REACH revision can both strengthen health and environmental safeguards while delivering a meaningful, measurable reduction in animal use year on year.  Policymakers need not choose between keeping Europe safe and embracing kinder science; they can and should take advantage of the upcoming REACH revision as an opportunity to do both.  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Disclaimer POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT * The sponsor is Humane World for Animals * The ultimate controlling entity is Humane World for Animals More information here.

Lithuania on Tuesday declared a nationwide state of emergency over a surge in contraband-carrying balloons flying over the border from Belarus. “It’s clear that this emergency is being declared not only because of disruptions to civil aviation, but also due to national security concerns and the need for closer coordination among institutions,” Lithuanian Interior Minister Vladislav Kondratovič said during a government meeting Tuesday. Kondratovič added that the government had asked the parliament to grant the military additional powers to work with the law enforcement authorities during the state of the emergency. “By introducing a state of emergency today, we are legitimizing the participation of the military … and indeed, every evening, a number of crews go out together with the police, conduct patrols, monitor the territory, and detect cargo,” he said. Lithuania has accused its neighbor Belarus of repeatedly smuggling contraband cigarettes into the country using balloons, prompting air traffic disruptions and a border closure with Belarus. Belarusian dictator Alexander Lukashenko has called Vilnius’ response “petty.” According to Lithuanian Interior Ministry data, at least 600 balloons and 200 drones entered Lithuania’s airspace this year, disrupting more than 300 flights, affecting 47,000 passengers and leading to around 60 hours of airport closures. Lithuanian Prime Minister Inga Ruginienė said the state emergency will help coordination between joint response teams to better intercept the balloons, which both Lithuania and the EU consider to be hybrid attacks. Lithuanian Foreign Minister Kęstutis Budrys told POLITICO in an interview in October that the EU must prepare new sanctions against Belarus to deprive it of the ability to wage hybrid war.

BRUSSELS — The EU will start using high-resolution satellites and the latest drone technology to crack down on drugs smuggled through its borders, as cocaine and synthetic drugs swarm European capitals and the bloc grapples with growing drug trafficking violence. “When it comes to illegal drugs, Europe is reaching a crisis point,” said European Commissioner for Internal Affairs and Migration Magnus Brunner on Thursday, while presenting the new EU Drugs Strategy and action plan against drug trafficking. They lay out actions to boost international cooperation, stop the import of illicit drugs, dismantle production sites, curb recruitment of young people to criminal networks and tackle the growing drug-related violence that has taken capitals hostage. As gang networks evolve and drug traffickers constantly find new “loopholes” to bring their drugs into Europe, the EU and countries will work with customs, agencies and the private sector to better monitor and disrupt trafficking routes across land, sea or air. This includes using the latest technologies and artificial intelligence to find drugs sent via mail, monitoring aviation and publishing its upcoming EU Ports Strategy for port security. EU border security agency Frontex will get “state of the art resources,” said Brunner, including high-resolution satellites and drones. “Drug traffickers use the latest technologies, which means we need innovation to beat them,” Brunner said. To stay up to date, the European Commission is establishing a Security and Innovation Campus to boost research and test cutting-edge technologies in 2026. “We send the drug lords and their organizations a clear message: Europe is fighting back,” Brunner said. On top of the increased import of illegal drugs, Europe is grappling with the growing in-house production of synthetic drugs, with authorities dismantling up to 500 labs every year. To tackle this, the European Union Drugs Agency will develop a European database on drug production incidents and an EU-wide substance database to help countries identify synthetic drugs and precursor chemicals. The EU is also looking at its existing laws, evaluating the current rules against organized crime and the existing Framework Decision on drug trafficking by 2026. The EUDA’s new European drug alert system, launched a couple of weeks ago, will also help issue alerts on serious drug-related risks, such as highly potent synthetic drugs; while its EU early warning system will help identify new substances and quickly inform the capitals. Europe is grappling with a surge in the availability of cocaine, synthetic stimulants and potent opioids, alongside increasingly complex trafficking networks and rising drug-related violence, particularly in Belgium and the Netherlands. The quantity of drugs seized in the EU has increased dramatically between 2013 and 2023, the commissioner said, with authorities seizing 419 metric tons of cocaine in 2023 — six times more than the previous decade. But it’s not just the drugs — illicit drug trafficking comes with “bloodshed, violence, corruption, and social harm,” Brunner said. Criminal networks are increasingly recruiting young and vulnerable people, often using social media platforms. To fight this, the EU will launch an EU-wide platform to “stop young people being drawn into drug trafficking,” connecting experts across Europe. “I think that is key — to get engaged with the young people at an early stage, to prevent them getting into the use of drugs,” Brunner said. The new strategy — and accompanying action plan — will define how Europe should tackle this escalating crisis from 2026 to 2030. “Already too many have been lost to death, addiction and violence caused by traffickers. Now is the time for us to turn the tides,” he added.

PARIS — France’s business community is rushing to make inroads with the National Rally, the far-right party tipped to win the Elysée Palace in 2027. Their goal is to establish a direct line with the likes of Marine Le Pen and Jordan Bardella, who have at times struggled to articulate a coherent economic vision for France, the eurozone’s second-biggest economy. The lobbying effort represents a marked change of heart for France’s entrepreneurial elite, who for years have been deeply suspicious of a populist party they saw as economically illiterate rabble-rousers. Give the National Rally’s robust showing in polls, France Inc. now feels it has little choice but to bend the ears of the anti-immigration party, pressing it to adopt more a market-friendly agenda. It’s a charm offensive that has played out both behind closed doors and at high-profile events like the Paris Air Show, the influential business lobby Medef’s conference on Roland Garros’ center court and at a lunch with the entrepreneurial association Ethic. The business community’s strategy offers a strong sign of how far France’s political fault lines have shifted. The National Rally is no longer a fringe player, so business leaders are now making a concerted effort to sound them out and, hopefully, influence their economic worldview, said a former government adviser now working in the private sector. And the party itself is keen to beef up its ties and bona fides with the business community. “The last year has been a real tipping point,” said a senior manager at a French firm listed on the benchmark CAC40 stock index who, like others quoted in this piece, was granted anonymity to candidly discuss private discussions. “Business leaders, industry lobbies suddenly thought they are on the threshold of power. Let’s meet them and perhaps convert them,” the manager said. Some entrepreneurs have pinned their hopes on Bardella, the National Rally’s plan B candidate for the 2027 presidential election for if an appeal court fails to overturn Le Pen’s ban from standing in elections after being found guilty of embezzlement. Bardella is seen as being more pro-business than Le Pen, even if his recent comments opening talks with the European Central Bank to buy French debt raised eyebrows. Last week, for the first time, a poll showed Bardella would win both rounds of a presidential election against any other candidate. BUDGETARY JEKYLL AND HYDE  Bardella may be doing his best, in the words of the former government adviser, to “polish” the National Rally’s muddled economic platform, but the business community’s concerns have been exacerbated by the party’s actions during France’s ongoing budget negotiations. At times, the National Rally has tried to play the role of conservative adult in the room during the messy legislative process by calling for spending cuts and lowering public debt, but it has also voted for billions in tax hikes and for lowering the retirement age. National Rally lawmakers on Thursday effectively helped pass a bill authored by the far left to nationalize steel giant ArcelorMittal by abstaining from the vote. And before budget talks began, both Le Pen and Bardella were calling for new snap elections that were anathema to the business community. This week, for the first time, a poll showed Bardella winning both rounds of the presidential election against any other candidate. | Carl Court/Getty Images “The National Rally is reckless,” said the chief executive of a French company listed on the CAC40. “What’s really important for us is stability.” The zigzagging of the far right reflects a deep split within the party. Though the National Rally has gone to great lengths to tamp down any hint of a rift, Le Pen and Bardella clearly represent different camps. Le Pen is the anti-immigration, protectionist champion of disaffected voters from France’s northern rust belt, while Bardella is the slick, polished, more economically liberal but equally anti-immigration option who appeals more to those on the French Riviera. “As the National Rally tries to make these two lines coexist, their position on the economics is not very clear,” said Mathieu Gallard, a pollster at Ipsos. The hope among some business leaders is that the National Rally is posturing ahead of the 2027 presidential election, but that once in power would take a less explosive course, following in the footsteps of Italy’s Giorgia Meloni or Greece’s Alexis Tsipras after he was elected on an anti-austerity platform in 2015. “The National Rally is reckless,” said the CEO of a French company listed on the CAC40. “What’s really important for us is stability.” | Jean-François Monier/AFP via Getty Images “What he [Tsipras] had defended during the campaign was untenable, and very quickly, he had to do a sharp U-turn,” said the boss of another CAC40 company.  The National Rally has proven similarly malleable at times, for example, dropping its support for exiting the eurozone after an election defeat in 2017. Figures like Renaud Labaye, a National Rally heavyweight and close ally of Le Pen, offer some suggestion that a French president from the National Rally would follow the Meloni model. “We need a balanced budget,” Labaye told POLITICO. “We want the lowest possible deficit because it’s good for the country and because our sovereignty is at stake.”  Influential figures like François Durvye, a financier who is the right-hand man of far-right billionaire Pierre-Édouard Stérin, and Le Pen’s chief of staff, Ambroise de Rancourt, a former far-left activist who flipped to the far right last year, have been facilitating behind-closed-doors meetings with the business world. According to the previously quoted senior manager at a CAC40 company, in some of those meetings, the National Rally tries to reassure the entrepreneurs that they would be economically reasonable in government.  But business leaders who think they’ll be able to influence the far right if it wins the next presidential election are going to be in for a rough surprise if Bardella or Le Pen win in 2027, respected political commentator Alain Minc warned. “They don’t grasp the sense of power that comes when 15 million people vote for you,” Minc said. Pauline de Saint Remy and Sarah Paillou contributed reporting.

BRUSSELS — Iberia and TAP Air Portugal were banned from operating in Venezuela Thursday as tensions rise between the South American country and the United States. Venezuela’s National Institute of Civil Aviation (INAC) announced the “revocation of the concession” to operate in the country on Instagram, accusing the airlines of “joining in the acts of state terrorism promoted by the government of the U.S.” The decision was a response to the suspension of operations in Venezuela by Iberia and TAP, as well as Turkish Airlines, Colombia’s Avianca, Chile’s LATAM Airlines, and Brazil’s Gol, due to safety concerns as of Nov. 22. The carriers suspended operations after the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration warned on Nov. 21 of a “worsening security situation and heightened military activity” in Venezuela. The Spanish authority AESA joined the warning on Nov. 24. U.S. President Donald Trump has moved forces close to Venezuela and there is growing worry that the U.S. may attack. The day after Spain’s warning, Venezuela’s INAC requested that the six airlines resume operations within 48 hours, threatening to suspend their traffic rights if they did not comply. They did not, so the Venezuelan authority followed through by banning them. “Iberia cannot operate in areas where there is a high safety risk. This is currently the case in Venezuela,” the Spanish airline, which is part of the IAG Group, told POLITICO. “Iberia hopes to resume flights to Venezuela as soon as possible, once full safety conditions are in place.”