BRUSSELS — If European governments didn’t realize before that Donald Trump’s threats to seize Greenland were serious, they do now. Policymakers are no longer ignoring the U.S. president’s ramped-up rhetoric — and are desperately searching for a plan to stop him. “We must be ready for a direct confrontation with Trump,” said an EU diplomat briefed on ongoing discussions. “He is in an aggressive mode, and we need to be geared up.” U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Wednesday that he planned to discuss a U.S. acquisition of Greenland with Danish officials next week. The White House said Trump’s preference would be to acquire the territory through a negotiation and also that it would consider purchasing the island — but that a military takeover was possible. As diplomatic efforts intensified in Europe, French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot said he and his counterparts from Germany and Poland had discussed a joint European response to Trump’s threats. “What is at stake is the question of how Europe, the EU, can be strengthened to deter threats, attempts on its security and interests,” Barrot told reporters. “Greenland is not for sale, and it is not for taking … so the threats must stop.” POLITICO spoke with officials, diplomats, experts and NATO insiders to map out how Europe could deter the U.S. president from getting that far, and what its options are if he does. They were granted anonymity to speak freely. “Everyone is very stunned and unaware of what we actually have in the toolbox,” said a former Danish MP. “No one really knows what to do because the Americans can do whatever they want. But we need answers to these questions immediately. They can’t wait three or five or seven years.” On Wednesday, POLITICO set out the steps Trump could take to seize Greenland. Now here’s the flip side: What Europe does to stop him. OPTION 1: FIND A COMPROMISE Trump says Greenland is vital for U.S. security interests and accuses Denmark of not doing enough to protect it against increasing Chinese and Russian military activity in the Arctic.  A negotiated settlement that sees Trump come out of talks with something he can sell as a win and that allows Denmark and Greenland to save face is perhaps the fastest route out of trouble. A former senior NATO official suggested the alliance could mediate between Greenland, Denmark and the U.S., as it has done with alliance members Turkey and Greece over their disputes. U.S. NATO Ambassador Matthew Whitaker said on Wednesday that Trump and his advisers do not believe Greenland is properly secured. | Omar Havana/Getty Images U.S. NATO Ambassador Matthew Whitaker said on Wednesday that Trump and his advisers do not believe Greenland is properly secured. “As the ice thaws and as the routes in the Arctic and the High North open up … Greenland becomes a very serious security risk for the mainland of the United States of America.” NATO allies are also mulling fresh overtures to Trump that could bolster Greenland’s security, despite a widely held view that any direct threat from Russian and Chinese ships to the territory is overstated. Among other proposals, the alliance should consider accelerating defense spending on the Arctic, holding more military exercises in the region, and posting troops to secure Greenland and reassure the U.S. if necessary, according to three NATO diplomats.  The alliance should also be open to setting up an “Arctic Sentry” scheme — shifting its military assets to the region — similar to its Eastern Sentry and Baltic Sentry initiatives, two of the diplomats said. “Anything that can be done” to bolster the alliance’s presence near Greenland and meet Trump’s demands “should be maxed out,” said one of the NATO diplomats cited above. Trump also says he wants Greenland for its vast mineral deposits and potential oil and gas reserves. But there’s a reason Greenland has remained largely untapped: Extracting resources from its inhospitable terrain is difficult and very expensive, making them less competitive than Chinese imports. Denmark’s envoys say they tried for years to make the case for investment in Greenland, but their European counterparts weren’t receptive — though an EU diplomat familiar with the matter said there are signs that attitude is shifting. OPTION 2: GIVE GREENLAND A TON OF CASH The Trump administration has thrown its weight behind Greenland’s independence movement. The pitch is that if the Arctic territory leaves the Kingdom of Denmark and signs up to a deal with the U.S., it will be flooded with American cash.  While Trump has repeatedly refused to rule out using military force to take Greenland, he has also insisted he wants it to come willingly. The EU and Denmark are trying to convince Greenlanders that they can give them a better deal. Brussels is planning to more than double its spending on Greenland from 2028 under long-term budget plans drawn up after Trump started to make claims on the Danish-held territory, according to a draft proposal from the European Commission published in September. Under the plans, which are subject to further negotiations among member countries, the EU would almost double spending on Greenland to €530 million for a seven-year period starting in 2028.  That comes on top of the money Denmark sends Greenland as part of its agreement with the self-governing territory. Greenland would also be eligible to apply for an additional €44 million in EU funding for remote territories associated with European countries, per the same document. Danish and European support currently focuses mainly on welfare, health care, education and the territory’s green transition. Under the new spending plans, that focus would expand to developing the island’s ability to extract mineral resources. “We have many, many people below the poverty line, and the infrastructure in Greenland is lagging, and our resources are primarily taken out without good profit to Greenland but mostly profit to Danish companies,” said Kuno Fencker, a pro-independence Greenlandic opposition MP.  An attractive offer from Denmark and the EU could be enough to keep Greenlanders out of America’s grasp. OPTION 3: RETALIATE ECONOMICALLY Since Trump’s first term in office, “there’s been a lot of effort to try and think through how we ensure European security, Nordic security, Arctic security, without the U.S. actively involved,” said Thomas Crosbie, a U.S. military expert at the Royal Danish Defense College, which provides training and education for the Danish defense force. “That’s hard, but it’s possible. But I don’t know if anyone has seriously contemplated ensuring European security against America. It’s just crazy,” Crosbie said. The EU does have one strong political tool at its disposal, which it could use to deter Trump: the Anti-Coercion Instrument, the “trade bazooka” created after the first Trump administration, which allows the EU to retaliate against trade discrimination. The EU threatened to deploy it after Trump slapped tariffs on the bloc but shelved it in July after the two sides reached a deal. With the U.S. still imposing tariffs on the EU, Brussels could bring the bazooka back out. “We have exports to the United States a bit above €600 billion, and for around one-third of those goods we have a market share of more than 50 percent and it’s totally clear that this is also the power in our hands,” said Bernd Lange, chair of the European Parliament’s trade committee. But Trump would have to believe the EU was serious, given that all its tough talk amounted to nothing the last time around. OPTION 4: BOOTS ON THE GROUND If the U.S. does decide to take Greenland by military force, there’s little Europeans could do to prevent it.  “They are not going to preemptively attack Americans before they claim Greenland, because that would be done before an act of war,” said Crosbie, the Danish military educator. “But in terms of responding to the first move, it really depends. If the Americans have a very small group of people, you could try and arrest those people, because there’d be a criminal act.” It’s a different story if the U.S. goes in hard. Legally speaking, it’s possible Denmark would be forced to respond militarily. Under a 1952 standing order, troops should “immediately take up the fight without waiting for, or seeking orders” in “the event of an attack on Danish territory.” European countries should weigh the possibility of deploying troops to Greenland — if Denmark requests it — to increase the potential cost of U.S. military action, an EU diplomat said, echoing suggestions that Berlin and Paris could send forces to deter any incursion. While those forces are unlikely to be able to withstand a U.S. invasion, they would act as a deterrent. “You could have a tripwire effect where you have some groups of people who are physically in the way, like a Tiananmen Square-type situation, which would potentially force the [U.S.] military to use violence” or to back down, said Crosbie.  But that strategy comes at a high cost, he said. “This is completely unexplored territory, but it is quite possible that people’s lives will be lost in the attempt to reject the American claim over Greenland.” Gerardo Fortuna, Clea Caulcutt and Eli Stokols contributed reporting.

HELSINKI — Europe’s easternmost countries have a blunt message for Brussels: Russia is testing their borders, and the EU needs to start paying for the response. Leaders from eight EU states bordering Russia will use a summit in Helsinki on Tuesday to press for dedicated defense funding in the bloc’s next long-term budget, arguing that frontline security can no longer be treated as a national expense alone, according to three European government officials. “Strengthening Europe’s eastern flank must become a shared responsibility for Europe,” Estonian Prime Minister Kristen Michal said Monday. The first-of-its-kind summit, spearheaded by Finnish Premier Petteri Orpo, underscores a growing anxiety among the EU’s so-called Eastern flank countries about Russia’s increasingly brazen efforts to test their defenses and stir panic among their populations. In recent months Russia has flown fighter jets into Estonian airspace and sent dozens of drones deep into Polish and Romanian territory. Its ally Belarus has repeatedly brought Lithuanian air traffic to a standstill by allowing giant balloons to cross its borders. And last week, Moscow’s top envoy Sergey Lavrov issued a veiled threat to Finland to exit NATO.  “Russia is a threat to Europe … far into the future,” Orpo told Finnish daily Helsingin Sanomat on Saturday. “There is always a competition for resources in the EU, but [defense funding] is not something that is taken away from anyone.” Tuesday’s confab, attended by Finland, Sweden, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania and Bulgaria, comes during a critical week for Europe. On Monday several EU leaders met with U.S. officials as they strain to hammer out a peace deal in Ukraine, just three days before all 27 EU countries reconvene for a crucial summit that will determine whether they unlock €210 billion in frozen Russian cash for Kyiv. OPEN THE VAULTS At the heart of Tuesday’s discussion will be unblocking EU money.  The frontline countries want the EU to “propose new financial possibilities for border countries and solidarity-based financial tools,” said one of the government officials. As part of its 2028-2034 budget proposal, the European Commission plans to raise its defense spending fivefold to €131 billion. Frontline countries would like some of that cash to be earmarked for the region, two of the government officials said, a message they are likely to reiterate during Thursday’s European Council summit in Brussels. “Strengthening Europe’s eastern flank must become a shared responsibility for Europe,” Estonian Prime Minister Kristen Michal said. | Hendrik Schmidt/Getty Images In the meantime, the EU should consider new financial instruments similar to the bloc’s €150 billion loans-for-weapons program, called the Security Action For Europe, the same two officials said. European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen told POLITICO last week she had received calls to set up a “second SAFE” after the first iteration was oversubscribed. The frontline countries also want to throw their political weight behind two upcoming EU projects to buttress the bloc’s anti-drone and broader defenses, the two officials said. EU leaders refused to formally endorse the Eastern Flank Watch and European Drone Defense Initiative at a summit in October amid opposition by countries like Hungary, France and Germany, who saw them as overreach by Brussels on defense, two EU diplomats said at the time. A request to reserve part of the EU budget for a specific region may also face opposition from other countries. To get around this, Eastern flank countries should link defense “infrastructure improvements to overall [EU] economic development,” said Jamie Shea, a senior defense fellow at the Friends of Europe think tank and a former NATO spokesperson. Frontline capitals should also look at “opening up [those infrastructure projects] for competitive bidding” to firms outside the region, he added. DIFFERENT REGION, DIFFERENT VIEW Cash won’t be the only divisive issue in the shadows of Tuesday’s gathering. In recent weeks Donald Trump’s administration has repeatedly rebuked Europe, with the U.S. president branding the continent’s leaders “weak” in an interview with POLITICO. Countries like Germany and Denmark have responded to growing U.S. admonishments by directly rebutting recent criticisms and formally branding Washington a “security risk”.  But that approach has rankled frontline countries, conscious of jeopardizing Washington’s commitment to NATO’s collective defense pledge, which they see as a last line of protection against Moscow. This view also reflects a growing worry inside NATO that a peace deal in Ukraine will give Moscow more bandwidth to rearm and redirect its efforts toward frontline countries. “If the war stops in Ukraine … [Russia’s] desire is to keep its soldiers busy,” said one senior NATO diplomat, arguing those troops are likely to be “relocated in our direction.” “Europe should take over [its own] defenses,” the diplomat added. But until the continent becomes militarily independent, “we shouldn’t talk like this” about the U.S., they argued. “It’s really dangerous [and] it’s stupid.” Jacopo Barigazzi contributed to this report from Brussels.

Europe’s populist worries will intensify when right-wing billionaire Andrej Babiš becomes Czech prime minister today. Czech President Petr Pavel is set to appoint Babiš to the position after resolving longstanding conflict-of-interest issues related to the PM-elect’s conglomerate, Agrofert. Babiš and his future government have sparked fears in Brussels, where his opponents worry that alliances he could form at the European level may tilt Central Europe in an anti-establishment direction. Combined with Hungary’s Viktor Orbán and Slovakia’s Robert Fico, Babiš has the potential to jam up the legislative machinery in Brussels as it works on key files. Babiš regularly speaks of reviving the so-called Visegrád Four group, something both Orbán and Fico hope for, after it became largely dormant following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. A new Visegrád grouping would likely count three rather than the four members it had after being founded as a cultural and political alliance in the 1990s. Poland’s current center-right prime minister, Donald Tusk, is staunchly pro-Ukraine and is thus unlikely to enter any entente with Orbán. Polish President Karol Nawrocki of the right-wing populist Law and Justice (PiS) party, though, has been talking up the prospects for Visegrád. Babiš’ government — his Patriots for Europe-aligned ANO party is in a coalition with the far-right Freedom and Direct Democracy and right-wing Motorists for Themselves parties — is also likely to fight against EU-level pro-environment initiatives. That could cause issues for climate files like ETS2, the Emissions Trading System for road and buildings, and Brussels’ bid to ban combustion engines. Czech President Petr Pavel is set to appoint Andrej Babiš to the position after resolving longstanding conflict-of-interest issues related to the PM-elect’s conglomerate, Agrofert. | Martin Divisek/EPA Following his decisive victory in the Czech election Oct. 3-4, however, Babiš has toned down his previous remarks about canceling the Czech ammunition initiative in support of Ukraine, raising questions about whether the campaign rhetoric will translate into actual policy reversals. The extent to which Czechia becomes another EU disrupter might become clearer later this week as Babiš travels to Brussels to take part in the European Council — assuming the rest of his cabinet is appointed by then.

Czech right-wing billionaire Andrej Babiš will be the new prime minister in Prague after announcing Thursday evening that he would dispose of a potential conflict of interest. Babiš’ ANO party won the Czech parliamentary election in October and formed a coalition with the far-right Freedom and Direct Democracy and right-wing Motorists for Themselves parties. But the proposed prime minister and coalition ministers must be green-lit by Czech President Petr Pavel before taking office. Babiš has been entangled in legal woes, both at home and abroad, concerning his agriculture business empire Agrofert, which is a major recipient of EU subsidies. “Of course, I could have left politics after winning the election and had a comfortable life, or ANO could have appointed someone else as prime minister,” Babiš said Thursday night in a video address to voters. “But I am convinced that you would perceive it as a betrayal,” he added. “That is why I have decided to irrevocably give up the Agrofert company, with which I will no longer have anything to do, I will never own it, I will not have any economic relations with it, and I will not be in any contact with it.” Babiš’ ascension to the Czech premiership further tilts Central Europe in an anti-establishment direction, as the populist tycoon joins Hungary’s Viktor Orbán and Slovakia’s Robert Fico as potential thorns in Brussels’ side on key EU files. In stepping back from Agrofert, however, Babiš made clear the importance of retaking the prime ministerial role. The holding’s shares will now be managed through a trust structure by an independent administrator. “This step, which goes far beyond the requirements of the law, was not easy for me. I have been building my company for almost half my life and I am very sorry that I will also have to step down as chairman of the Agrofert Foundation,” Babiš said. “My children will only get Agrofert after my death,” he added. In response, Pavel announced that he would appoint Babiš as prime minister on Dec. 9. Andrej Babiš has been entangled in legal woes, both at home and abroad, concerning his agriculture business empire Agrofert, which is a major recipient of EU subsidies. | Gabriel Kuchta/Getty Images “I appreciate the clear and understandable manner in which Andrej Babiš has fulfilled our agreement and publicly announced how he will resolve his conflict of interest,” Pavel said. Pavel previously noted that strong pro-NATO and pro-EU stances, along with safeguarding the country’s democratic institutions, will be key factors in his decision-making regarding the proposed Cabinet. Czech conflict of interest law bars officials (or their close relatives) from owning or controlling a business that would create a conflict with their governing function. This doesn’t mean ministers can’t own businesses, just that they must prioritize the public interest over their own. Similar rules exist at the EU level. When he was prime minister the first time round, from 2017 to 2021, Babiš placed Agrofert — which consists of more than 250 companies — in trust funds, but the Czech courts as well as the European Commission in 2021 concluded that he still retained influence over them and was therefore in violation of EU conflict-of-interest rules.

Angelika Niebler, head of the powerful center-right German delegation in the European Parliament, is being investigated for misusing EU funds, according to four parliamentary officials.  The European Parliament’s legal affairs committee will start discussing on Tuesday afternoon whether to lift the parliamentary immunity of Niebler — a member of the European People’s Party — following a request from the European Public Prosecutor’s Office. A committee hearing with Niebler herself will follow, and a final decision is not expected for several months. According to two of the four parliamentary officials, all granted anonymity to discuss the sensitive case, Niebler has been accused by EPPO of hiring assistants to chauffeur her from her hometown of Munich to Brussels and Strasbourg, as well as to private and business appointments not linked to her work as an MEP. EPPO also alleges that she got her assistants in Brussels to carry out private chores not related to her work as a lawmaker, and hired an assistant in Germany using Parliament cash to work for a former MEP colleague. The Parliament’s rules state that assistants can only help with parliamentary duties.  “The allegations are unfounded. I wish that the facts of the matter are clarified as quickly and completely as possible,” Niebler told POLITICO. “I will fully support this investigation.” A spokesperson for EPPO said the organization would “neither comment, nor do we confirm which investigations we are working on. This is to not endanger the outcome of the possible investigation.” MEPs get €30,769 a month to spend on staff, either in the Parliament in Brussels or in their local constituency office. Niebler, a longtime MEP, is a member of the Christian Social Union, the sister party of the Christian Democratic Union of Chancellor Friedrich Merz. The CSU and CDU are part of the EU’s biggest political family, the EPP. Since 2014, Niebler has co-led the CDU/CSU delegation in the Parliament along with Daniel Caspary, who is due to step down to join the European Court of Auditors at the end of the year. 

BRUSSELS ― The far-right Patriots for Europe is taking legal action after the European Parliament suspended access to millions of euros in public funds over alleged misspending. In two separate cases, the Patriots party is contesting rulings by the Parliament and the EU’s party watchdog that resulted in it losing access to more than €4 million in funds, arguing the decisions were illegitimate and the product of bias and lack of impartiality. The far-right political family, home to France’s Marine Le Pen and Hungary’s Viktor Orbán, has consistently complained of being sidelined from EU policymaking and key positions of power since the 2024 European elections, where it surged to become the third-largest group in Parliament. Mainstream politicians have kept the Patriots at arm’s length under the so-called cordon sanitaire — an informal pact to avoid cooperation with factions on the far right and far left. Now, the Patriots are also accusing EU officials of sabotaging their access to public cash earmarked for political parties. “There is a problem with certain agents of the administration of the Parliament,” said Belgian MEP Gerolf Annemans, honorary president of the Patriots party. The Patriots scored its first win on Wednesday when the European Court of Justice annulled a sanction by the party watchdog, the APPF, which had required the party to pay a €47,000 fine. The sanction came after the party wrongly referred to one of its lawmakers as being part of its board in a social media post, which the APPF took as a sign the party had lied in its entry to the authority’s register — a serious offense that could lead to all public funding for the party being withheld. The APPF ruling enabled the European Parliament to cut the Patriots party off from accessing €4 million of EU funding in 2023, documents obtained by POLITICO show. That meant a substantial cut to the party’s available budget for the 2024 elections — where other European political parties carried their 2023 funds over for the following year. Wednesday’s court ruling will allow the Patriots to try to claim part of these funds back — and will likely bolster the party’s claims of bias from the Parliament’s administration. EQUAL TREATMENT In a separate lawsuit filed mid-July, the Patriots accused the Parliament of bias and lack of impartiality after it ruled the party had misspent funds in a campaign in Czechia. The Parliament’s Bureau, composed of MEPs and tasked with taking decisions on administrative issues, ruled the Patriots should pay for that campaign with their own money and give back the EU funds spent on it, which came to €228,000. The decision violated “the principles of equal treatment and non-discrimination, as it deemed similar campaigns by other parties to be reimbursable,” the Patriot’s case document, seen by POLITICO, read. The far-right political family, home to France’s Marine Le Pen and Hungary’s Viktor Orbán, has consistently complained of being sidelined from EU policymaking and key positions of power since the 2024 European elections. | Wojtek Radwanski/Getty Images They also argue that the decision was not impartial, as the Bureau is composed mostly of center-right, liberal and left-wing lawmakers, with no far-right MEPs from the Patriots present to defend the case. On top of that, they contend the Parliament violated their rights to defense as it censored big chunks of the letter the Patriots had sent to the bureau to defend themselves. In the first version of the letter, the Patriots compared their campaign with that of another EU party. In the letter that the administration circulated in the bureau, the justification was redacted. ‘VERY GOOD LAWYERS’ The Parliament refused to comment on the ongoing judicial proceedings. The APPF “remains committed to protecting integrity of European democracy” in accordance with its obligations under EU law, it said after the ruling. These two lawsuits follow threats of a separate challenge from the Patriots group — a distinct legal entity from the Patriots party, which represents the far-right camp in Parliament. At the beginning of September, the Parliament’s budgetary control committee recommended the administration seek the reimbursement of €4.3 million from the group in reparations for alleged misspending by the now-defunct far-right Identity and Democracy. The ID group dissolved in the summer of 2024, with many of its members and staff joining the new Patriots. “We will fight it in court if necessary,” said a Patriots group official, granted anonymity to speak about sensitive matters. “We have very good lawyers, and we are sure we are right.”

BRUSSELS ― The European Commission is set to tighten the screws on countries that breach democratic norms by linking billions of euros in payouts to adherence to European standards. It means that governments, notably Hungary, which have fallen foul of EU rule-of-law standards through crackdowns on judicial and media freedoms, risk losing substantial funding from the EU’s centralized budget. The EU’s 2028-2034 spending plan, scheduled to be published next Wednesday and marking the start of at least a couple of years of laborious negotiations, will extend the link between payments and democratic backsliding, according to a document seen by POLITICO. Previously, only parts of the €1.2 trillion budget have been linked. The move is likely to exacerbate tensions between the Commission and Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, who faces the very real prospect of losing power after 15 years in an election slated for 2026. He’s had a turbulent relationship with EU policymakers and fellow governments, which have criticized what they see as his Russia-friendly and authoritarian policies. While the EU has taken action against Hungary and already withheld some funding ― and Orbán has made life difficult by threatening to block European efforts to sanction Moscow ― the next budget “will provide for a streamlined and harmonized conditionality system for all EU funds allocated to member states,” according to the document. The Commission wants to move away from the current system where “member states with particular issues could be tempted to shift some investments between programs to avoid being subject to a particular condition,” it states. Several EU countries supported tightening the link between the rule of law and funding in their submissions to the Commission ahead of the budget proposal. After its publication, governments will begin negotiations with each other on a final text ― but this is a lengthy process that is not expected to conclude until 2027. “The Conditionality Regulation must be applied to all EU funding,” Finland wrote in its position paper on the new budget, seen by POLITICO. But Hungary retorted in its own document that these rules “allowed for exerting arbitrary political pressure in policy areas unrelated to the protection of the Union’s budget.” Slovakia, which has also been criticized over rule-of-law issues, echoed these arguments in its own submission. OUT OF OFFICE Hungary is already losing out on €18 billion in funding that was suspended over its breaches of European law in the past few years. Orbán, who is campaigning on an anti-EU platform, is unlikely to make moves to claim back the payments before he faces the public vote. According to an EU diplomat, the Commission is exploiting Orbán’s domestic weaknesses ― he is trailing behind his conservative pro-EU rival Péter Magyar in the polls ― to propose stricter rules. With national capitals not expected to vote on the new rules until 2027, there’s a chance Orbán might be out of office before the budget is approved. Commission officials are confident that a Magyar-led government would mend ties with Brussels and implement the EU-required reforms to access blocked funds. Viktor Orbán, who is campaigning on an anti-EU platform, is unlikely to make moves to claim back the payments before he faces the public vote. | Oliver Matthys/EPA Under the plan, the budget would contain a direct link between a government’s breach of the rule of law and the related payment that is put on hold, an EU official said. This means that while farmers’ subsidies will be untouched by a government’s authoritarian drift, a student exchange program might suffer if there have been breaches of academic freedom. The Commission wants to keep the money flowing to the recipients of EU funding ― such as NGOs or universities ― regardless of whether a government complies with the rule of law. The overall idea is that civil society shouldn’t bear the brunt of a leader’s misdoings. Renew, the European Parliament’s liberal group, wants to take this a step further. It supports directly handing the frozen EU funds to civil society, effectively bypassing the central government. This new system, known as “smart conditionality,” would mark a change from the current rules, where frozen funds are handed back to the EU’s 27 countries collectively after an expiration date. “We set clear conditions: No EU money for autocrats, but continued support for civil society,” Valérie Hayer, the chair of Renew, said on Thursday. “She [Commission President Ursula von der Leyen] made a commitment. Now it’s up to her to keep her word.” However, “smart conditionality” has been criticized on the grounds that it reduces the incentives for national governments to carry out the required reforms. Commissioners are expected to iron out this issue during emergency talks on the budget slated for the weekend.

Center-left lawmakers will not support Thursday’s motion of no confidence in Ursula von der Leyen, giving a timely boost to the beleaguered European Commission president. In a U-turn, the European Parliament’s Socialists and Democrats dropped its abstention threats, according to two group officials. To win their support, von der Leyen promised to keep funds dedicated to social spending in the EU’s seven year budget from 2028, which is currently being drawn up. Had the Socialists abstained, von der Leyen would still almost certainly have won Thursday’s vote, but it would have raised doubts about the Commission’s support in Parliament and ability to push through legislation. “S&D has achieved the inclusion of ESF+ [European Social Fund] in next MFF [the EU’s long-term budget, known as the multiannual financial framework] ― a major win for people across Europe,” said a group spokesperson. “Yesterday the ESF+ was out of the MFF. Today it is in it, thanks to the firmness of the S&D family,” the spokesperson added. The motion of no confidence is expected to fail to meet the two-thirds majority threshold, given the centrist groups, comprising von der Leyen’s center-right European People’s Party, the Socialists, and the liberals of Renew Europe, have now all confirmed they will vote against. “Von der Leyen has made a major concession on a topic that is dear to the S&D,” said MEP René Repasi, leader of the German SPD in the Parliament. “I think that she finally understood what is happening in the Parliament after Monday‘s debate and she saw the need to act,” he added. “We recognize this effort and we take it into consideration when taking our final decision how to vote tomorrow.” Ahead of the presentation of the next EU seven year long budget slated for next week, the Socialists, the second-largest group in the European Parliament, linked their support to the preservation of the European Social Fund, which is supposed to tackle poverty and support vulnerable groups.  Commissioner for social rights Roxana Mînzatu, herself a Socialist, also led a push inside the EU executive to save the fund. The EPP’s budget lead negotiator, Siegfried Mureșan, shrugged at the Socialists’ victory chants. This was always the S&D’s main demand, he said, adding that regardless of the vote the Parliament was always going to demand the Social Fund be included. PAYMENTS TO REGIONS Von der Leyen already conceded key Parliament demands on Tuesday evening to secure the support of centrist MEPs. The EPP’s budget lead negotiator, Siegfried Mureșan, shrugged at the Socialists’ victory chants. | Teresa Suarez/EPA During a high-stakes meeting with party chairs in Strasbourg on Tuesday, von der Leyen said that payments to regions — which currently make up a third of the EU’s multi-year budget — will continue to be handed out to local authorities as opposed to national governments in the new budget. Supporters of the move said that von der Leyen’s about-face is a “gamechanger” as it will make it harder for autocratic leaders, such as Hungary’s Viktor Orbán, to cut EU funding to regions governed by political rivals. Von der Leyen’s plan to dramatically increase the power of national governments in handling regional funds has been criticized by lawmakers from across the spectrum and by several of her own commissioners. They argue that it would undermine local democracy and widen the gap between the richer and poorer parts of Europe. Sarah Wheaton contributed to this report.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has promised more power for EU regions in an effort to quell a brewing parliamentary revolt before Thursday’s no-confidence vote. Socialists and Liberals are threatening to abstain during the vote in an attempt to squeeze political commitments from von der Leyen on the bloc’s next seven-year budget, which she will unveil next Wednesday. Von der Leyen extended an olive branch to critics on the eve of a crucial no-confidence vote in the European Parliament that could severely dent her leadership. During a high-stakes meeting with party chairs in Strasbourg on Tuesday, von der Leyen said that payments to regions — which currently make up a third of the EU’s multi-year budget — will continue to be handed out to local authorities as opposed to national governments in the new budget, two people in the room told POLITICO. Von der Leyen’s offer, however, was not enough to quell concerns from the Socialists and Democrats, who have been increasingly critical of her leadership in recent weeks. “We missed clarity and commitment … If nothing changes, it will be difficult for the S&D to decide not to abstain on Thursday,” a spokesperson for the group told POLITICO after Tuesday’s meeting.  Von der Leyen is expected to survive the vote even if the Socialist and Liberal parliamentary groups abstain, as the motion would need a two-thirds majority in Parliament to pass. But it would send a strong message that she can’t count on Parliament to back her unconditionally. The Socialists, the second-largest group in the European Parliament, are linking their support to the preservation of the European Social Fund, which is supposed to tackle poverty and support vulnerable groups.  Commissioner for social rights Roxana Mînzatu, herself a Socialist, is leading a push inside the EU executive to save the fund. “If you cut this out of the budget, you hit Europe at its heart, and what will remain is a Europe without a soul,” Socialist lawmaker Mohammed Chahim said in the European Parliament. CONCESSION TO REGIONS Supporters say that von der Leyen’s about-face is a “gamechanger” as it will make it harder for autocratic leaders, such as Hungary’s Viktor Orbán, to cut EU funding to regions governed by political rivals. Yet von der Leyen’s plan to dramatically increase the power of national governments in handling regional funds has been criticized by lawmakers from across the spectrum and by several of her own commissioners. They argue that it will undermine local democracy and widen the gap between the richer and poorer parts of Europe. In a major concession, however, von der Leyen on Tuesday guaranteed that regions will continue to directly receive amounts that are determined in Brussels. She had previously announced the move in a private meeting with Polish Budget Commissioner Piotr Serafin, who is also campaigning for a stronger role for regions. “This is an important demand for the European Parliament,” said Siegfried Mureșan, the budget negotiator for the center-right European People’s Party. Lawmakers and Italian regions commissioner Raffaele Fitto, however, are pressuring von der Leyen to go one step further. They support maintaining a mechanism ― known as the Berlin formula ― that allocates a major share of the cohesion cash to underdeveloped regions across the bloc. Discussions over this sensitive issue are expected to be resolved over the weekend during high-stakes talks between von der Leyen and several commissioners.

A clear message flowed through the halls of the third United Nations Ocean Conference (UNOC3) in Nice last week: the ocean is in crisis. The ocean covers over 70 percent of our planet and is essential to all life on Earth. It is a vital source of biodiversity, and marine ecosystems that support the livelihoods and cultures of billions of people around the world. It cools and regulates our climate. And yet this vast resource, much of which is still unseen or unknown, is transforming at an alarming pace. “Ecosystems are threatened, coral reefs are bleaching faster than ever before, cyclones are more intense than ever,” said the president of France, Emmanuel Macron, in his opening remarks. “The globe is burning, our oceans are boiling.” > The ocean covers over 70 percent of our planet and is essential to all life on > Earth. It is a vital source of biodiversity, and marine ecosystems that > support the livelihoods and cultures of billions of people around the world. Ten years on from the Paris Agreement, UNOC3 — co-hosted by France and Costa Rica — sought to catalyze further action and policy commitments toward protecting our ocean. This major global event brought together ocean stakeholders from intergovernmental organizations, civil society, academic institutions, and Indigenous and local communities, among others, to share ideas, insights and ongoing projects in support of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 14: Life Below Water. In Nice’s Palexpo, rebranded for the conference as “The Whale”, the European Commission hosted the European Digital Ocean Pavilion, implemented by Mercator Ocean International. The Pavilion formed a central hub for the European ocean community, while showcasing cutting-edge EU assets and technologies for ocean observation. “Through state-of-the-art simulations, multimedia screens and interactive installations, visitors could visualize ocean processes, explore ‘what-if’ scenarios, and better understand the ocean’s vital signs,” said Elisabeth Hamdouch-Fuehrer, deputy head of earth observation at the European Commission. Mercator Ocean, Philippe Fitte The Pavilion was split into three sections, each highlighting the EU’s progress toward a sustainable blue future. INSPIRE hosted daily forums on a broad range of ocean topics, connecting scientists, policymakers and the public in discussions on major ocean challenges and the inspiring solutions working to solve them. ENGAGE took visitors on an immersive journey through the ocean that combined ocean knowledge, art pieces and ocean monitoring technology. DECIDE offered a hands-on experience of Europe’s digital ocean revolution, in a command center filled with screens visualizing the past, present and future conditions of the ocean. These simulations were powered by a revolutionary technology: the European Digital Twin of the Ocean (EU DTO). This cutting-edge digital replica provides real-time simulations of ocean dynamics and potential future changes — whether from harmful impacts like plastic pollution or the effects of mitigation policies. The EU DTO draws on the EU’s extensive ocean data resources, a comprehensive marine observation network that includes Copernicus satellite data, EMODnet data produced by underwater autonomous drones, and in-situ sensors across the world’s seas and and numerical models. Using powerful, state-of-the-art AI-driven modelling, the EU DTO takes this data and creates — in seconds— intricate ocean simulations. > This cutting-edge digital replica, , provides real-time simulations of ocean > dynamics and potential future changes — whether from harmful impacts like > plastic pollution or the effects of mitigation policies. On the opening day of the conference, Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, visited the European Digital Ocean Pavilion to experience first-hand the technology she announced three years ago in Brest. “Today we proudly present the first demonstration version,” said von der Leyen. “It’s an amazing tool that helps us better understand the ocean, from pollution to navigation but also from risk to our coasts to biodiversity — you name it.”  The EU DTO’s arrival brings significant advances to European and global ocean management. It is a fundamental pillar supporting the European Ocean Pact, the EU’s strategic framework for ocean sustainability leading up to 2029, which seeks to promote the health, productivity and resilience of the ocean and support European coastal communities into the future. The EU DTO’s real-time monitoring, predictions and scenario testing can transform insights on ocean health into concrete action, supporting evidence-based policies that lead to meaningful change. “We have in Europe a lot of data and a lot of excellent science, and the Digital Twin Ocean is going to be the machinery through which we will bring this knowledge in an actionable state here and now,” said the policy officer for the Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries (DG MARE), Zoe Konstantinou.   Mercator Ocean, Philippe Fitte Mercator Ocean International has a scientific legacy in the field of operational oceanography, working at the forefront of digital ocean model development for over three decades. In a major announcement of the week, Mercator Ocean International was took a step closer to transitioning into an intergovernmental organization. This transition will establish Mercator International Centre for the Ocean as a global platform that provides scientific ocean intelligence and digital ocean services to its member states, and supports of international commitments. “Addressing these challenges requires international collaboration and governance to deliver, access to ocean information that is really trustworthy,” said Pierre Bahurel, director general of Mercator Ocean International. “We are ready to support you in the decisions you have to make and offer you digital knowledge and services that you can trust.” > Mercator Ocean International has a scientific legacy in the field of > operational oceanography, working at the forefront of digital ocean model > development for over three decades. During the week, the Digital Ocean Pavilion showcased several key international ocean monitoring projects hosted by Mercator Ocean International. These included the OceanPrediction Decade Collaborative Centre (DCC), a global platform aiming to advance coordinated ocean forecasting and build a “Predicted Ocean” — designed to be a transformative outcome of the UN Decade of Ocean Science. A part ofthis initiative is the OPERA project, a program dedicated to advancing ocean science and innovation in sub-Saharan Africa, while the Ocean Prediction for Costa Rica project, launched in March 2025, will boost forecasting in Costa Rica particularly around Cocos Island National Park, a UNESCO World Heritage Site. Together, these events illustrated the instrumental role of coordinated ocean prediction in supporting climate resilience and sustainable development.  Though the challenges faced by the ocean are severe, the Digital Ocean Pavilion highlighted the formidable capacity of European society in tackling them together through collaboration. Charlina Vitcheva, director general of DG MARE, urged everyone in the ocean community to continue their important work to better understand the ocean. “Only then can we take the right policy actions, put the right investments in the blue economy, and unleash the potential of marine technologies.”