BRUSSELS — More than 80 percent of Europe’s companies will be freed from environmental-reporting obligations after EU institutions reached a deal on a proposal to cut green rules on Monday.   The deal is a major legislative victory for European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in her push cut red tape for business, one of the defining missions of her second term in office. However, that victory came at a political cost: The file pushed the coalition that got her re-elected to the brink of collapse and led her own political family, the center-right European People’s Party (EPP), to team up with the far right to get the deal over the line. The new law, the first of many so-called omnibus simplification bills, will massively reduce the scope of corporate sustainability disclosure rules introduced in the last political term. The aim of the red tape cuts is to boost the competitiveness of European businesses and drive economic growth. The deal concludes a year of intense negotiations between EU decision-makers, investors, businesses and civil society, who argued over how much to reduce reporting obligations for companies on the environmental impacts of their business and supply chains — all while the effects of climate change in Europe were getting worse. “This is an important step towards our common goal to create a more favourable business environment to help our companies grow and innovate,” said Marie Bjerre, Danish minister for European affairs. Denmark, which holds the presidency of the Council of the EU until the end of the year, led the negotiations on behalf of EU governments. Marie Bjerre, Den|mark’s Minister for European affairs, who said the agreement was an important step for a more favourable business environment. | Philipp von Ditfurth/picture alliance via Getty Images Proposed by the Commission last February, the omnibus is designed to address businesses’ concerns that the paperwork needed to comply with EU laws is costly and unfair. Many companies have been blaming Europe’s overzealous green lawmaking and the restrictions it places on doing business in the region for low economic growth and job losses, preventing them from competing with U.S. and Chinese rivals.   But Green and civil society groups — and some businesses too — argued this backtracking would put environmental and human health at risk. That disagreement reverberated through Brussels, disturbing the balance of power in Parliament as the EPP broke the so-called cordon sanitaire — an unwritten rule that forbids mainstream parties from collaborating with the far right — to pass major cuts to green rules. It set a precedent for future lawmaking in Europe as the bloc grapples with the at-times conflicting priorities of boosting economic growth and advancing on its green transition. The word “omnibus” has since become a mainstay of the Brussels bubble vernacular with the Commission putting forward at least 10 more simplification bills on topics like data protection, finance, chemical use, agriculture and defense. LESS PAPERWORK   The deal struck by negotiators from the European Parliament, EU Council and the Commission includes changes to two key pieces of legislation in the EU’s arsenal of green rules: The Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD).  The rules originally required businesses large and small to collect and publish data on their greenhouse gas emissions, how much water they use, the impact of rising temperatures on working conditions, chemical leakages and whether their suppliers — which are often spread across the globe — respect human rights and labor laws.    Now the reporting rules will only apply to companies with more than 1,000 employees and €450 million in net turnover, while only the largest companies — with 5,000 employees and at least €1.5 billion in net turnover — are covered by supply chain due diligence obligations. They also don’t have to adopt transition plans, with details on how they intend to adapt their business model to reach targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.   Importantly the decision-makers got rid of an EU-level legal framework that allowed civilians to hold businesses accountable for the impact of their supply chains on human rights or local ecosystems. MEPs have another say on whether the deal goes through or not, with a final vote on the file slated for Dec. 16. It means that lawmakers have a chance to reject what the co-legislators have agreed to if they consider it to be too far from their original position.

The EU is adding Russia to its blacklist of countries at high risk of money laundering and financing terrorism, according to two EU officials and a document seen by POLITICO. The global watchdog Financial Action Task Force (FATF) suspended Russia as a member after the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, but failed to blacklist it, despite evidence presented by the Ukrainian government, because of opposition from countries in the BRICS group of emerging economies, which includes Brazil, India, China, and South Africa. EU lawmakers called on the Commission many times to do what FATF was not able to. The Commission committed to complete a review by the end of 2025 to get their support to remove the United Arab Emirates and Gibraltar from the list earlier this year. POLITICO saw a draft of the Russia decision, which will be an annex to the list. In other internal documents, the Commission had said that the assessment was complicated by the lack of information-sharing with Moscow. The EU already has a wide range of sanctions heavily limiting access to EU financial services for Russian firms. The blacklisting is landing as the EU executive is trying to end Belgium’s resistance to using the revenues from Moscow’s frozen assets to fund Ukraine. The move will oblige financial institutions to strengthen due diligence on all transactions and force banks that have not already acted to further de-risk. The EU has usually aligned itself with FATF decisions, but from this year, it has its own Anti-Money Laundering Authority. AMLA will contribute to drafting the blacklist from July 2027. Dutch top official Hennie Verbeek-Kusters, a former chair of the financial intelligence cooperation body Egmont Group, is set to join the AMLA authority executive board after a positive hearing with lawmakers held behind closed doors, one of the EU officials said. A vote on the appointment is due on Dec. 15, said a third official.

Heidi Kingstone is a journalist and author covering human rights issues, conflict and politics. Her most recent book is “Genocide: Personal Stories, Big Questions.” Slavery is alive and thriving, and it’s wrapped inside shiny chocolate bars that promise to be “fair trade,” “child-labor free” and “sustainable.” In West Africa, which produces more than 60 percent of the world’s cocoa, over 1.5 million children still work under hazardous conditions. Kids, some as young as five, use machetes to crack pods open in their hands, carry loads that weigh more than they do and spray toxic pesticides without protection. Meanwhile, of the roughly 2 million metric tons of cocoa the Ivory Coast produces each year, between 20 percent and 30 percent is grown illegally in protected forests. And satellite data from Global Forest Watch shows an increase in deforestation across key cocoa-growing regions as farmers, desperate for income, push deeper into forest reserves. The bitter truth is that despite decades of pledges, certification schemes and packaging glowing with virtue — of forests saved, farmers empowered and consciences soothed — most chocolate companies have failed to eradicate exploitation from their supply chains. Today, many cocoa farmers in the Ivory Coast and Ghana still earn less than a dollar a day, well below the poverty line. According to a 2024 report by the International Cocoa Initiative, the average farmer earns only 40 percent of a living wage. Put starkly, as the global chocolate market swells close to a $150 billion a year in 2025, the average farmer now receives less than 6 percent of the value of a single chocolate bar, whereas in the 1970s they received more than 50 percent. Then there’s the use of child labor, which is essentially woven into the fabric of this economy, where we have been sold the illusion of progress. From the 2001 Harkin-Engel Protocol — a voluntary agreement to end child labor by the world’s chocolate giants — to today’s glossy environmental, social and governance (ESG) reports, every initiative has promised progress and delivered delay. In 2007, the industry quietly redefined “public certification,” shifting it from a commitment to consumer labeling to a vague pledge to compile statistics on labor conditions. It missed the original 2010 deadline to eliminate child labor, as well as a new target to reduce it by 70 percent by 2020. And that year, a study by the University of Chicago’s National Opinion Research Center found that hazardous child labor in cocoa production increased from 2008 to 2019. “We covered a story about a ship carrying trafficked children,” recalled journalist Humphrey Hawksley, who first exposed the issue in the BBC documentary called Slavery: A Global Investigation. “The chocolate companies refused to comment and spoke as one industry. That was their rule. Even now, none of them is slave-free,” he added. As it stands, many of the more than 1.5 million West African children working in cocoa production are trafficked from neighboring Burkina Faso and Mali. Traffickers lure them with false promises or outright abduction, offering children as young as 10 either bicycles or small sums to travel to the Ivory Coast. There, they are sold to farmers for as little as $34 each. And once on these farms, they are trapped. They work up to 14 hours a day, sleep in windowless sheds with no clean water or toilets, and most never see the inside of a classroom. Last but not least, we come to deforestation: Since its independence, more than 90 percent of the Ivory Coast’s forests have disappeared due to cocoa farming. In 2024, deforestation accelerated despite corporate commitments to halt it by 2025, as declining soil fertility and stagnant prices pushed farmers farther into the forest to plant new cocoa trees. But as Reuters Correspondent for West and Central Africa Ange Aboa described them, such labels are “the biggest scam of the century!” | Lena Klimkeit/Picture Alliance via Getty Images Certification labels like “Rainforest Alliance” and “Fairtrade” are supposed to prevent this. But as Reuters Correspondent for West and Central Africa Ange Aboa described them, such labels are “the biggest scam of the century!” Complicit in all of this are the financiers and investors who profit. For example, Norway’s sovereign wealth fund is the world’s largest investor, and Norges Bank Investment Management (NBIM) is a shareholder in 9,000 corporations, including Nestlé, Mondelez, Hershey, Barry Callebaut and Lindt — all part of the direct chocolate cluster. NBIM also has shares in McDonald’s, Starbucks, Unilever, the Dunkin’ parent company and Tim Hortons — the indirect high-volume buyer cluster. “The richest families in cocoa — the Marses, the Ferreros, the Cargills, the Jacobs — are billionaires thanks to the exploitation of the poorest children on earth,” said journalist and human rights campaigner Fernando Morales-de la Cruz, the founder of Cacao for Change. “And countries like Norway, which claim to be ethical, profit from slavery and child labor.” The problem is, few are asking who picks the cocoa. And though the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive, which was adopted last year, requires large companies to address human rights and environmental abuses in their supply chains, critics say the directive’s weaknesses, loopholes, and delayed enforcement will blunt its impact. However, all of this could still be fixed. Currently, a metric ton of cocoa sells for about $5,000 on world markets, but Morales-de la Cruz estimates that a fair farm-gate price would be around $7,500 per metric ton. To that end, he advocates for binding international trade standards that enforce living incomes and transparent pricing, modeled on the World Trade Organization’s compliance mechanisms. “Human rights should be as binding in trade as tariffs,” he insisted. The solution isn’t to buy more “ethical” bars but to demand accountability and support legislation that makes exploitation unprofitable. “We can’t shop our way to justice,” he said. So, as the trees in the Ivory Coast’s forests fall, the profits in Europe and North America continue to soar. And two decades after the industry vowed to end child labor, the cocoa supply chain remains one of the world’s most exploitative and least accountable. Moreover, the European Parliament’s vote on the Omnibus simplification package last month laid bare the corporate control and moral blindness still present in EU policymaking, all behind talk of “cutting red tape.” “Yet Europe’s media and EU-funded NGOs stay silent, talking of competitiveness and green transitions, while ignoring the children who harvest its cocoa, coffee and cotton,” said Morales-de la Cruz. “Europe cannot claim to defend human rights while profiting from exploitation.” However, until the industry pays a fair price and governments enforce real accountability, every bar of chocolate remains an unpaid moral debt.

LONDON — Senior British government officials on Monday defended the ill-fated hiring of Peter Mandelson as Britain’s ambassador to Washington despite his relationship with the late pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. Mandelson was ousted from his role as Britain’s man in Washington earlier this year after emails were published which showed him telling the financier he “thinks the world” of him and was “furious” at his 2008 conviction for soliciting sex from a minor. In a grilling by the MPs on the Foreign Affairs Committee Monday afternoon, Foreign Office Permanent Under-Secretary Oliver Robbins and Cabinet Secretary Chris Wormald — Britain’s top civil servant — insisted that the government had not been aware of this specific information at the time of the appointment. Wormald, who is the head of the civil service, confirmed that there was “no panel interview” when Mandelson was being considered for the role because the post was filled through a direct ministerial appointment by Prime Minister Keir Starmer. A panel interview would normally be used to ask a candidate if there was anything in their history that would bring the government into disrepute, Wormald explained, but Mandelson did not go through this process, and therefore the question was not directly posed. Mandelson’s relationship with Epstein did come up during due diligence checks, Robbins said. But Wormald said the information that ultimately saw Mandelson ousted from his role was “not available to us at the time that the due diligence was done.” Quizzing the pair, Labour MP and committee member Uma Kumaran argued that it ought to have been foreseen that a “well-publicized friendship with the world’s most notorious pedophile might be a problem to the government,” while Conservative MP Aphra Brandreth read out a list of publicly available information on Mandelson, saying he “kept a notoriously close relationship” with the pedophile and stayed in his Manhattan townhouse after Epstein had pleaded guilty. Brandreth asked: “At what point were questions raised about whether that was appropriate, and why does it seem that suddenly a small additional bit of information would tip the balance on that being, at one point deemed appropriate to then not appropriate?” Speaking in the House of Commons in September after the sacking, Starmer said the Mandelson-Epstein relationship was “far different to what I’d understood to be the position at the point of appointment,” and “had I known then what I know now, I’d have never appointed him.” Under questioning by the committee, Robinson confirmed that Mandelson — who has said he feels “utterly awful about my association with Epstein twenty years ago and the plight of his victims” — is no longer on the government payroll, but refused to say if the former ambassador received any settlement following his exit. The pair said there had been a “number” of changes to the direct ministerial appointment system since Mandelson was appointed. Wormald said these reforms would “effectively replicate what would normally happen in a panel interview,” introducing a higher degree of scrutiny.

The Trump administration is ramping up the pressure on the European Union to repeal or overhaul a regulation on corporations’ greenhouse gas pollution — in the latest example of the United States’ willingness to wield its economic might against an international climate initiative. It comes less than a week after the U.S. scored a surprising victory over a proposed United Nations climate fee on shipping, in what one Trump Cabinet member described Wednesday as an “all hands on deck” lobbying blitz. In its newest effort, the Energy Department joined the government of Qatar in warning the EU that it’s risking higher prices for “critical energy supplies” unless it alters or deletes its Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive. “It is our genuine belief, as allies and friends of the EU, that the CSDDD will cause considerable harm to the EU and its citizens, as it will lead to higher energy and other commodity prices, and have a chilling effect on investment and trade,” the department and the Qataris said in an open letter Wednesday to European heads of state and EU members. During a press conference later in the day, European Commission spokesperson Markus Lammert declined to discuss the European Parliament’s negotiations over the climate directive. The new pressure on the EU comes after months of attempts by President Donald Trump and his appointees to blunt climate regulations at home and abroad that threaten to impinge on U.S. “dominance” in fossil fuels. And lately he’s succeeded in drawing some countries to the United States’ side. ‘WIN FOR THE WORLD’ On Friday, U.S. pressure succeeded in thwarting a proposal by U.N.’s International Maritime Organization to impose the first worldwide tax on climate pollution from shipping. The maritime body had been widely expected to adopt the shipping fee at a meeting in London, but instead it postponed the initiative for at least a year. Fellow petro-giants Russia and Saudi Arabia lobbied for the pause, and EU members Greece and Cyprus helped that effort by abstaining from the final vote. The aftermath of that vote continued to affect European climate diplomacy this week, temporarily upending internal EU discussions about the bloc’s negotiating position for next month’s COP30 summit in Brazil. U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins were exultant Wednesday in outlining the pressure they had brought to bear to block the maritime fee. Wright said he phoned 20 countries while Rollins handled nations such as Antigua and Jamaica in what she characterized as an “all hands on deck” effort. The effort also included Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Wright said. Wright added that he had personally written a Truth Social message that Trump posted the night before the vote, in which the president warned that the “United States will NOT stand for this Global Green New Scam Tax on Shipping.” (Trump changed “three or four words on it,” the secretary said.) “We’re going to come back to realistic views on energy,” Wright said at an event hosted by America First Policy Institute. “That’s a win not just for America, that’s a win for the world.” EUROPEAN CLIMATE PRESSURE The EU has already said it will not scrap its corporate climate directive, though it may dismantle a civil liability provision in a bid to simplify the law. But revising the directive has been a challenge for Europe because lawmakers are divided on how far to roll back sustainability reporting obligations for companies. The rule, which the EU put into force last year but still needs to be adopted by member states, would require companies to identify and address adverse human rights and environmental impacts of their actions inside and outside Europe. Europe’s move to wean itself off Russian energy supplies since Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 has forced the continent to increase its reliance on U.S. liquefied natural gas imports. But U.S. gas producers have warned that the climate directive will increase the cost of doing business with customers in the EU. In the letter, DOE and Qatar said the climate directive “poses a significant risk to the affordability and reliability of critical energy supplies for households and businesses across Europe and an existential threat to the future growth, competitiveness, and resilience of the EU’s industrial economy.” The governments also advise the EU to repeal the directive or, barring that, rewrite key provisions dealing with the penalties and civil liabilities for companies that don’t comply with the regulation. The U.S. and Qatar also want the Europeans to change language requiring companies to provide transition plans for climate change mitigation. Marianne Gros contributed to this report from Brussels.

PARIS — France’s Emmanuel Macron will arrive in Brussels for a key European Council meeting Thursday with his reputation as the continent’s idea man long gone and replaced by a new one: chief party pooper. As European Union leaders gather to game-plan in the face of existential crises ranging from combatting the rise of the far right to preventing a bad Trump-Putin deal on Ukraine, they can no longer rely on Macron’s grandiose ideas. Conversations with 10 diplomats and officials from across the European Union, all of whom were granted anonymity to candidly discuss the French president’s political fortunes, suggest the 47-year-old centrist’s domestic troubles and focus on his legacy have made him an obstacle to progress rather than a motor of it. Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s proposed “drone wall” to protect European skies from Russia’s increasingly invasive unmanned aerial vehicles? Unrealistic, per Macron. European Council President António Costa’s idea to streamline the EU accession process by eliminating the need for unanimity? Nah. France isn’t giving up its veto power. Making our planet great again? Maybe one day. But now is not the time for the due diligence directive requiring companies to monitor their global suppliers for human rights and environmental abuses. Or for 2040 climate targets, for that matter. Macron in recent months has become more cautious, balking at proposals that risk generating a backlash in France, and more prickly with regard to proposals he doesn’t control. France has instead poured its energy into slashing red tape. In recent weeks the French leader has been pushing for more controls on migration and for red tape to be slashed, while lobbying for new rules to keep children off social media and bidding to create carveouts for automakers on green targets. Hardly the stuff of European dreams. “This Macron has been consumed by domestic troubles,” said an EU diplomat. “He is no longer the European champion we once knew.” Macron in recent months has become more cautious, balking at proposals that risk generating a backlash in France. | Ludovic Marin/AFP via Getty Images NOT THE SAME MAN(U) When it comes to the changes the European Union has seen in the last decade, it’s hard to understate Macron’s influence and foresight. Speaking at the Sorbonne University in 2017, he argued forcefully for a more muscular Europe that wasn’t so dependent on partners overseas, either for manufactured goods or for its own defense. His call fell on deaf ears at the time. Today, however, the European Commission and leaders across the bloc preach Macron’s gospel of “strategic autonomy” as they try to diversify away from China and beef up the continent’s military capacities in the face of Russian aggression and American military retrenchment. Macron earned the nickname of the EU’s “think-tanker in chief,” and his blizzard of initiatives and ideas for reforming Europe defined his early tenure as a leader on the world stage. Fast-forward to October 2025, though, and it’s become clear that politics and legacy loom large in Macron’s calculus. Just look at enlargement. Macron was long seen as a supporter of bringing new members into the European Union to increase the bloc’s economic and geopolitical heft. He spearheaded the European Political Community as a sort of waiting room for wannabe EU members in 2022, and a year later pledged to bring aspiring candidate countries into the bloc as “fast as possible.” Little wonder, then, that Macron’s allies had trouble understanding France’s decision to oppose Costa’s proposal to lift the veto power of Hungary’s Viktor Orbán on parts of the accession process. A heavyweight from Macron’s Renew group in the European Parliament said the move was “in total contradiction” with Macron’s previous commitments. “It’s a fundamental error,” the individual said. According to a top Macron ally, the French president simply doesn’t have the political capital to back some of his own ambitions, especially those that provide fodder to Euroskeptics and Marine Le Pen’s far-right National Rally. “It’s not the right moment, we have the far right breathing down our necks,” the ally said.  “Any talk about Albania, Montenegro entering the Union is a gift for … Le Pen,” he said, noting that French farmers would be the first to take to the streets to protest the entry of agricultural giant Ukraine.  WANING INFLUENCE Influence in Brussels has been a casualty of France’s chaos at home. Macron has cycled through five prime ministers in less than two years and was nearly forced to hunt for a sixth after his current pick, Sébastien Lecornu, resigned after his first government lasted just 14 hours. The French president eventually reappointed Lecornu and the crisis abated, at least temporarily. Macron was long seen as a supporter of bringing new members into the European Union to increase the bloc’s economic and geopolitical heft. | Jure Makovec/AFP via Getty Images While successive French governments have shared similar views on EU affairs, their successive collapse has left France increasingly less influential in Brussels. “If you have a non-functioning government for one-and-a-half years, that gives you a little bit less influence on decisions,” an EU diplomat from outside France said.   The churn makes it harder in the room when ministers meet, the diplomat added. It also makes it difficult for the French government to craft and circulate the ever-important policy papers ahead of ministerial meetings that drive the agenda and represent national priorities. As Macron approaches the twilight of his presidency, he might yet sketch out some grand designs for Europe, but his ability to turn dreams into reality has been largely eclipsed.  Even if the French president somehow pulls off yet another great escape and manages to find a way through the political mire with a government that lasts and a budget that passes, the crushing truth for those working in the institutions and embassies of Brussels is that Macron’s influence is seriously weakened. And that his own grand pro-European project is finished.  Diplomats from outside France are already speaking of Macron in the past tense and talking about his “legacy,” even though he’s not due to leave office until 2027.  “He was something special,” one told POLITICO. Victor Goury-Laffont contributed reporting.

LUXEMBOURG — The European Commission has dropped a plan to delay its flagship anti-deforestation law, just a month after announcing it wanted to pause it for another year. However, the EU executive has proposed a number of changes to the law to reduce paperwork, Environment Commissioner Roswall announced on Tuesday during the Environment Council meeting in Luxembourg. Only the company that first places a product onto the market will have to submit a due diligence statement for example, she said, with the aim of reducing paperwork and reducing the load on the IT system. The announcement follows a string of unexpected developments regarding the EU Deforestation-free Regulation(EUDR), which was enacted in 2023 and is designed to ensure products such as coffee, beef, cocoa and palm oil imported to the EU do not come from deforested land. It was already delayed by 12 months last year. Under the new proposal, micro- and small businesses will still be given an extra year to comply. The EUDR will come into force on December 30 this year as planned, however companies that can’t comply immediately have a six-month grace period until June 30. The European Parliament and Council of the EU must approve the Commission’s proposal.

PARIS — Some signatories of a joint appeal by French and German business bosses to loosen merger rules and scrap environmental laws to promote European industrial “champions” have distanced themselves from the letter, saying they were encouraged to write it by their national governments.  The letter to French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, first reported by POLITICO a week ago, quickly drew rebukes from green NGOs and competition regulators, with France’s Benoît Cœuré challenging the notion that the bloc’s merger rules had prevented the creation of leading European businesses. Co-authored by TotalEnergies CEOs Patrick Pouyanné and Roland Busch of Siemens, the letter was written “in the name of” 46 chief executives who met with the two heads of state during a high-level, closed-door meeting between industry and the governments in Evian, France, in early September.   But since the letter came to light, some of the French companies it claims to speak on behalf of are backtracking.   The letter is a good summary of the discussion held at Evian, said BPIFrance, the French public investment bank. But its CEO, Nicolas Dufourcq, doesn’t consider himself bound by it, he told POLITICO in a written statement.  Dufourcq said the letter was “not a big effort.” Although he was in Evian, he did not see it before it was published, and therefore doesn’t consider that he signed it. The letter complained that the current European competition rules “often hinder the formation of European champions” and urged that, by the end of this year, the mandate of the European Commission’s Competition Directorate be widened to consider strategic mergers in the context of the global market. It also demands that EU leaders get rid of EU rules on supply chain transparency. ‘A LITTLE STRONG’ A representative from a second French company among the signatories said that the origin of the letter was “a little nebulous” and that they were not informed of the wording ahead of time. Granted anonymity to discuss the sensitive matter, they said that they did not disagree with the letter, but “the wording is a little strong.” Even TotalEnergies, one of the two top signatories, has sought to clarify how the letter came about. Shortly after POLITICO reported on it, the company reached out directly to provide “more context.”  “The CEO of Siemens and TotalEnergies were the co-chairmen of the Evian Franco-German meeting gathering 46 CEOs,” a spokesperson said. “They welcomed Chancellor Merz and President Macron during a special session, and they were encouraged by both leaders to express their priorities as CEOs to develop Europe’s competitiveness.”   The letter, he added, “summarizes the 5 top priorities and call for actions in the short term which resulted from the debates between the CEOs.”   Siemens declined to comment in response to TotalEnergies’ assertions.  NO GERMAN COMPLAINTS No criticism has emerged from German companies, which appeared to be aligned with the message. “The letter emerged from the group discussion, so [Deutsche Börse Group CEO] Stephan Leithner, who was among the participants, was involved, and we support the contents of the letter,” a spokesperson for Deutsche Börse told POLITICO. A spokesperson for Bosch — whose CEO is also listed among the participants — called the initiative one “spearheaded by companies from Europe’s two largest economies.” They added that a central pillar of the demands is “aimed at securing and strengthening the competitiveness of European industry.”  Neither the Elysée nor the German representation in Brussels responded to requests for comment.  Francesca Micheletti and Marianne Gros reported from Brussels, Alexandre Léchenet reported from Paris. Jordyn Dahl contributed reporting from Brussels, and Tom Schmidtgen from Berlin.

LONDON — Prime Minister Keir Starmer insisted Monday he would have “never appointed” Peter Mandelson as Britain’s ambassador to the U.S. if he had been aware of the full scale of Mandelson’s connections to disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein. In his latest show of contrition, Starmer expressed regret for handing the Labour grandee such a plum job. Mandelson was sacked last week after leaked emails exposed the extent of his friendship with Epstein, even after the latter was charged with sex offenses. “Peter Mandelson, before he was appointed, went through a due diligence process,” said Starmer to broadcasters. “That’s the propriety and ethics team. He went through a process, and therefore I knew of his association with Epstein.” The PM added: “But had I known then what I know now, I’d have never appointed him, because what emerged last week were emails, Bloomberg emails, which showed that the nature and extent of the relationship that Peter Mandelson had with Epstein was far different to what I had understood to be the position when I appointed him.” Leaked emails to Bloomberg showed Mandelson wrote to Epstein “I think the world of you and I feel hopeless and furious about what has happened,” the day before Epstein begin serving time for soliciting sex from a minor in June 2008. Mandelson said he should “fight for early release” and told Epstein “your friends stay with you and love you.” The PM said this “went and cut across the whole approach that I’ve taken on violence against women and girls for many years,” and Mandelson’s responses to questions from government officials were not “at all satisfying.” Just 24 hours before Mandelson’s sacking, Starmer said at prime minister’s questions that “full due process was followed” during Mandelson’s selection last year and he had confidence in him.

CHIATURA, Georgia — Giorgi Neparidze, a middle-aged man from near the town of Chiatura in western Georgia, still has marks on his lips from where he sewed his mouth shut during a hunger strike last year. He says Georgian Manganese, a mining company with close links to the government, has wrought environmental devastation around his home and has ignored the rights of its workers. He is seeking compensation.  Europe, which imports Georgia’s manganese, is partly to blame for the black rivers and collapsing houses in Chiatura district, Neparidze says. The former miner-turned-environmental and civil rights activist claims that in one village, Shukruti, toxic dust from the pits is making people unwell. Filthy black water, laced with heavy metals, periodically spurts out of pumps there. Houses are collapsing as the tunnels underneath them cave in.  Manganese, a black metal traditionally used to reinforce steel, is crucial for Europe’s green energy transition as it is used in both wind turbines and electric car batteries. The metal is also vital for military gear like armor and guns. In 2022, the European Union bought 20,000 metric tons of manganese alloys from Georgia — almost 3 percent of its total supply. A year later the bloc added manganese to its list of critical minerals. But Chiaturans say their lives are being ruined so that Western Europeans can breathe cleaner air. “We are sacrificed so that others can have better lives,” Neparidze says. “There are only 40,000 people in Chiatura. They might feel ill or live in bad conditions but they are sacrificed so that millions of Europeans can have a cleaner environment.” Neparidze says cancer rates in the region are unusually high. Doctors at a hospital in Chiatura back up the observation, but no official study has linked the illnesses to the mines. An aerial view of Chiatura with the polluted Kvirila River running through the town | Olivia Acland Hope that things will improve appears dim. European companies often don’t know where their manganese is sourced from. As ANEV, Italy’s wind energy association, confirms: “There is no specific obligation to trace all metals used in steel production.”  Last year the EU enacted a law that was meant to change that. The Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive obliges companies to run closer checks on their supply chains and clamp down on any human rights violations, poor working conditions and environmental damage.  But barely a year after it took effect, the European Commission proposed a major weakening of the law in a move to reduce red tape for the bloc’s sluggish industry. EU member countries, motivated by this deregulation agenda, are now pushing for even deeper cuts, while French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz want to get rid of the law altogether.  Meanwhile, Europe’s appetite for mined raw materials like manganese, lithium, rare earths, copper and nickel is expected to skyrocket to meet the needs of the clean energy transition and rearmament. Many of these resources are in poorly regulated and often politically repressive jurisdictions, from the Democratic Republic of Congo to Indonesia and Georgia. Weakening the EU supply chain law will have consequences for communities like Neparidze’s. “Only an empty shell of the directive remains,” says Anna Cavazzini, a member of the European Parliament’s Green Party, adding that the legislature caved to pressure from businesses seeking to reduce their costs. “Now is not the time to abandon the defense of human rights and give corporations a free hand,” she says.  A resident of Chiatura standing on a collapsed house following a mining-related landslide in Itkhvisi village. | Olivia Acland As Georgia’s government pivots toward Russia and stifles dissent, life is becoming increasingly dangerous for activists in Chiatura. On April 29, four activists including Neparidze were arrested for allegedly assaulting a mine executive. A statement put out by Chiatura Management Company, the firm in charge of staffing Georgian Manganese’s underground operations, says that Tengiz Koberidze, manager of the Shukruti mine, was “verbally abused and pelted with stones.” Supporters call it a staged provocation in which Koberidze tried to incite violence, and say it’s part of a broader campaign to silence resistance. If convicted they face up to six years behind bars. Koberidze did not respond to requests for comment. Chiatura residents are protesting over two overlapping issues. On one side, miners are demanding safer working conditions underground, where tunnel collapses have long been a risk, along with higher wages and paid sick leave. When the mine was temporarily shut in October 2024, they were promised 60 percent of their salaries, but many say those payments never materialized. Workers are also raising concerns about mining pollution in the region. “The company doesn’t raise wages, doesn’t improve safety, and continues to destroy the natural environment. Its profits come not just from extracting resources, but from exploiting both workers and the land,” says one miner, David Chinchaladze. Georgian Manganese did not respond to interview requests or written questions. Officials at Georgia’s Ministry of Mines and the government’s Environment Protection and Natural Resources Department did not respond to requests for comment. A collapsing building in Shukruti. | Olivia Acland.  The second group of protesters comes from the village of Shukruti, which sits directly above the mining tunnels. Their homes are cracking and sinking into the ground. In 2020, Georgian Manganese pledged to pay between 700,000 and 1 million Georgian lari ($252,000 to $360,000) annually in damages — a sum that was meant to be distributed among residents. But while the company insists the money has been paid, locals — backed by watchdog NGO Social Justice — say otherwise. According to them, fewer than 5 percent of Shukruti’s residents have received any compensation.  Their protest has intensified in the last year, with workers now blocking the roads and Shukruti residents barring entry to the mines. But the risks are intensifying too. Since suspending EU accession talks last year amid deteriorating relations with the bloc, Georgia’s ruling party has shuttered independent media, arrested protestors and amplified propaganda. The country’s democracy is “backsliding,” says Irakli Kavtaradze, head of the foreign department of the largest opposition political party, United National Movement. Their tactics “sound like they come from a playbook that is written in the Kremlin,” he adds. ‘KREMLIN PLAYBOOK’ In the capital Tbilisi, around 200 kilometers east of Chiatura, protesters have taken to the streets every night since April 2, 2024 when the government unveiled a Kremlin-style “foreign agents” law aimed at muzzling civil society.  Many demonstrators wear sunglasses, scarfs and masks to shield their identities from street cameras, wary of state retaliation.  A scene from the 336th day of protests in Tbilisi in April 2025. | Olivia Acland. Their protests swelled in October last year after the government announced it would suspend talks to join the EU. For Georgians, the stakes are high: Russia already occupies 20 percent of the country after its 2008 invasion, and people fear that a more profound drift from the EU could open the door to further aggression. When POLITICO visited in April, a crowd strode down Rustaveli Avenue, the city’s main artery. Some carried EU flags while others passed around a loudspeaker, taking it in turns to voice defiant chants. “Fire to the oligarchy!” one young woman yelled, the crowd echoing her call. “Power lies in unity with the EU!” another shouted. They also called out support for protestors in Chiatura, whose fight has become something of a cause célèbre across the country: “Solidarity to Chiatura! Natural resources belong to the people!”  The fight in Chiatura is a microcosm of the country’s broader struggle: The activists are not just taking on a mining company but a corporate giant backed by oligarchs and the ruling elites.  Georgian Manganese’s parent company, Georgian American Alloys, is registered in Luxembourg and counts Ukrainian oligarch Ihor Kolomoisky as a shareholder. He is in custody in Kyiv over allegations that he hired a gang to kill a lawyer who threatened his business interests in 2003. Kolomoisky has also been sanctioned by the United States for his alleged involvement in siphoning billions out of PrivatBank, Ukraine’s largest bank.  Giorgi Kapanadze — a businessman closely connected with the ruling Georgian Dream party of Bidzina Ivanishvili — is listed as general manager of Georgian American Alloys.  Until recently, Kapanadze owned Rustavi TV, a channel notorious for airing pro-government propaganda. The European Parliament has called on the EU to hit Kapanadze with sanctions, accusing him of propping up the country’s repressive regime. Kolomoisky and Kapanadze did not respond to POLITICO’s requests for comment. The government swooped in to help Georgian Manganese in 2016 when a Georgian court fined it $82 million for environmental destruction in the region. The state placed it under “special management” and wrote off the fine. A new government-appointed manager was tasked, on paper, with cleaning up the mess. He was supposed to oversee a cleanup of the rivers that flow past the mines, among other promises. Manganese mining pit in Chiatura region, Georgia. | Olivia Acland But POLITICO’s own tests based on four samples taken in April 2025 from the Kvirila River, which runs through Chiatura, as well as its tributary, the Bogiristiskali, which were examined in a U.K. licensed laboratory, show the manganese levels in both rivers are over 10 times the legal limit. Iron levels are also higher than legally permitted. Locals use the polluted water to irrigate their crops. Fishermen are also pulling in increasingly empty nets as the heavy metals kill off aquatic life, according to local testimonies. The water from the Kvirila River flows out into the Black Sea, home to endangered dolphins, sturgeons, turtles and sharks.  A 2022 analysis by the Georgian NGO Green Policy found even worse results, with manganese in the Kvirila River averaging 42 times the legal limit. The group also detected excessive levels of iron and lead. Chronic manganese exposure can lead to irreversible neurological damage — a Parkinson’s-like condition known as manganism — as well as liver, kidney and reproductive harm. Lead and iron are linked to organ failure, cancer and cardiovascular disease. On Georgian Manganese’s website, the company concedes that “pollution of the Kvirila River” is one of the region’s “ecological challenges,” attributing it to runoff from manganese processing. It claims to have installed German-standard purification filters and claims that “neither polluted nor purified water” currently enters the river. Protesters like Neparidze aren’t convinced. They claim the filtration system is turned on only when inspectors arrive and that for the rest of the time, untreated wastewater is dumped straight into the rivers. BLOCKING EXPORTS Their protests having reaped few results, Chiaturans are taking increasingly extreme measures to make their voices heard.  Gocha Kupatadze, a retired 67-year-old miner, spends his nights in a tarpaulin shelter beside an underground mine, where he complains that rats crawl over him. “This black gold became the black plague for us,” he says. “We have no choice but to protest.” Kupatadze’s job is to ensure that manganese does not leave the mine. Alongside other protesters he has padlocked the gate to the generator that powers the mine’s ventilation system, making it impossible for anyone to work there. Kupatadze says he is only resorting to such drastic measures because conditions in his village, Shukruti, have become unlivable. His family home, built in 1958, is now crumbling, with cracks in the walls as the ground beneath it collapses from years of mining. The vines that once sustained his family’s wine-making traditions have long since withered and died. Gocha Kupatadze, an activist sleeping in a tarpaulin tent outside a mine. | Olivia Acland. For over a year, protesters across the region have intermittently blocked mine entrances as well as main roads, determined to stop the valuable ore from leaving Chiatura. In some ways it has worked: Seven months ago, Chiatura Management Company, the firm in charge of staffing Georgian Manganese’s underground operations, announced it would pause production.  “Due to the financial crisis that arose from the radical protests by the people of Shukruti village, the production process in Chiatura has been completely halted,” it read. Yet to the people of Chiatura, this feels more like a punishment than a triumph.  Manganese has been extracted from the area since 1879 and many residents rely on the mines for their livelihoods. The region bears all the hallmarks of a mining town that thrived during the Soviet Union when conditions in the mines were much better, according to residents. Today, rusted cable cars sway above concrete buildings that house washing stations and aging machinery.   While locals had sought compensation for the damage to their homes, they now just find themselves out of work.  Soviet-era buildings and mining infrastructure around Chiatura. | Olivia Acland.  Making matters worse, Georgian Manganese, licensed to mine 16,430 hectares until 2046, is now sourcing much of its ore from open pits instead of underground mines. These are more dangerous to the communities around them: Machines rip open the hillsides to expose shallow craters, while families living next to the pits say toxic dust drifts off them into their gardens and houses.  MORE PITS The village of Zodi is perched on a plateau surrounded by gently undulating hills, 10 kilometers from Chiatura. Many of its residents rely on farming, and cows roam across its open fields. “It is a beautiful village with a unique microclimate which is great for wine-making,” says Kote Abdushelishvili, a 36-year-old filmmaker from Zodi.  Mining officials say the village sits on manganese reserves. In 2023, caterpillar trucks rolled into Zodi and began ripping up the earth. Villagers, including Abdushelishvili, chased them out. “We stopped them,” he says, “We said if you want to go on, you will have to kill us first.” A padlocked gate to the mine’s ventilation system. | Olivia Acland Abdushelishvili later went to Georgian Manganese’s Chiatura office to demand a meeting with the state-appointed special manager. When he was turned away, he shouted up to the window: “You can attack us, you can kill us, we will not stop.” Two days later, as Abdushelishvili strolled through a quiet neighborhood in Tbilisi, masked men jumped out of a car, slammed him to the pavement and beat him up. Despite the fierce resistance in Chiatura, Georgian Manganese continues to send its metal to European markets. In the first two months of 2025, the EU imported 6,000 metric tons of manganese from Georgia. With the bloc facing mounting pressures — from the climate crisis to new defense demands — its hunger for manganese is set to grow. As the EU weakens its corporate accountability demands and Georgia drifts further into authoritarianism, the voices of Chiatura’s people are growing even fainter.  “We are not asking for something unreasonable,” says activist Tengiz Gvelesiani, who was recently detained in Chiatura along with Neparidze, “We are asking for healthy lives, a good working environment and fresh air.” Georgian Manganese did not respond to requests for comment. This article was developed with the support of Journalismfund Europe.