HELSINKI — The U.K. is ready to work with its European allies to intercept vessels in Russia’s “shadow fleet,” Britain’s chief foreign minister said Wednesday. A week after British armed forces supported the U.S. seizure of a Russian-flagged oil tanker in the North Atlantic, Yvette Cooper said Britain is prepared to work on enforcement with “other countries and other allies” against ships suspected of carrying sanctioned oil or damaging undersea infrastructure. Promising “stronger action” to break the shadow fleet’s “chokehold,” she added: “It means a more robust response, and it means as we see operations by shadow fleet vessels, standing ready to be able to act.” While the foreign secretary would not be drawn on the specific action the U.K. might take, her charged rhetoric appears to be laying the ground for future interventions that go beyond last week’s coordination with the Trump administration. Officials believe that the U.K. government has identified a legal basis for the military to board shadow fleet vessels in international shipping lanes, in certain cases. Cooper did not rule out the prospect of British forces boarding vessels, telling POLITICO: “It means looking at whatever is appropriate, depending on the circumstances that we face.” She also did not rule out using oil from seized vessels to fund the Ukrainian war effort — but cautioned that the prospect was of a different order to using frozen Russian assets to fund Ukraine. That idea hit a wall in discussions between EU countries in December. The foreign secretary said: “As you know, we’ve had all sorts of discussions in the past about different Russian sovereign assets. That’s a different set of circumstances. So we take the approach that it always has to be done within an international legal framework and on a case-by-case basis.” Asked directly if she was talking about joint shadow fleet operations with European allies, Cooper said: “We stand ready to work with allies on stronger enforcement around the shadow fleet.” Cooper made her comments on Wednesday after a demonstration on board the Finnish Border Guard ship Turva. It took part in a Dec. 31 operation to seize a cargo ship sailing from Russia to Israel, which was accused of deliberately damaging a cable between Helsinki and Estonia. Finnish authorities demonstrated a mock operation similar to the one that seized the ship on New Year’s Eve. Cooper watched as five armed officers slid down a rope from a helicopter onto the deck and stormed the bridge, shouting: “Hands up.” The operation took around three minutes. Cooper said after the demonstration: “The reason for being here is to see the work that Finland has been doing around the shadow fleet, and to look at what the further potential is for us to work with allies to strengthen that enforcement work.” Mari Rantanen, Finland’s interior minister, said the age of some Russian-linked tankers using northern shipping routes risks an ecologically disastrous oil spill. | Olivier Hoslet/EPA She name-checked work by France and Finland, while one U.K. official said she also intends to work with Norway. Mari Rantanen, Finland’s interior minister, said the age of some Russian-linked tankers using northern shipping routes risks an ecologically disastrous oil spill. “These vessels, these tankers, are very old,” she told POLITICO. “They are not built [for] this kind of icy weather, and they are in very bad shape, so the environmental risk is huge.” Mikko Simola, the commander of the Gulf of Finland coastguard, said he has seen “a rapid change since early 2022” in the prevalence of malign activity, for which Moscow denies responsibility. Simola said he would let the courts decide who was culpable, but said it was “certainly very strange to believe that in a short period of time, many cable and gas pipe damages would happen by accident in the same area.”

Nationalist leaders lined up to endorse Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán in a campaign video released this week as the election race begins in earnest. The nearly two-minute clip, posted by Orbán, rolls out support from a who’s who of European and international conservatives, including Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, her deputy Matteo Salvini, French far-right leader Marine Le Pen, Alternative for Germany (AfD) co-leader Alice Weidel, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The coordinated show of support comes as Orbán heads into what is likely to be his most competitive election in more than a decade. Hungary’s President Tamás Sulyok confirmed Tuesday that the country will go to the polls on April 12. After nearly 20 years at the helm, Orbán faces mounting criticism at home and abroad over democratic backsliding, curbs on media freedom, and the erosion of the rule of law. His Fidesz party, which has governed since 2010, is now trailing the opposition Tisza Party, led by former Orbán ally Péter Magyar. “Together we stand for a Europe that respects national sovereignty, is proud of its cultural and religious roots,” Meloni said in the video, as she endorsed Hungary’s incumbent leader. “Security cannot be taken for granted, it must be won. And I think Viktor Orbán has all those qualities. He has the tenacity, the courage, the wisdom to protect his country,” Netanyahu added. Also featured are Spain’s Vox chief Santiago Abascal, Austria’s Freedom Party (FPÖ) leader Herbert Kickl, Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić, and Czech Prime Minister Andrej Babiš, all key figures in the conservative, populist and far-right political sphere. Argentine President Javier Milei also appears in the video. POLITICO’s Poll of Polls puts Magyar’s Tisza on 49 percent, well ahead of Fidesz on 37 percent. Magyar has built momentum by campaigning on pledges to strengthen judicial independence, clamp down on corruption and offer voters a clear break from Orbán’s rule. In Brussels, Orbán has frequently clashed with EU institutions and other member states over issues including support for Ukraine, sanctions on Russia and LGBTQ+ rights, making him a polarizing figure within the bloc. The campaign video, featuring a slate of foreign leaders, positions his re-election bid in a broader international context, tying Hungary’s vote to themes of national sovereignty and political alignment beyond the country’s borders. POLITICO was able to confirm the video’s authenticity via representatives for Weidel and Salvini. Ketrin Jochecová, Nette Nöstlinger and Gerardo Fortuna contributed to this report.

BRUSSELS — European governments are pressuring the EU to appoint a negotiator to represent their interests on Ukraine, fearing the United States will stitch up a deal with Russia behind their backs. Supporters of the plan — including France and Italy — have secured support in the European Commission and among a handful of other countries for the post, according to three diplomats and officials with direct knowledge of the talks who were granted anonymity to speak to POLITICO. They say Europe can only maintain its red lines, such as Ukraine’s potential future membership in NATO, if the EU has a seat at the table. The unprecedented move would mark a major shift in how Europe engages with the string of bilateral talks brokered by U.S. President Donald Trump, and comes as the continent works to demonstrate it is ready to play a major role in any settlement to end the four-year war. French President Emmanuel Macron and Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni have joined forces in recent weeks to call for the opening of diplomatic channels to Russian leader Vladimir Putin and his inner circle, even as White House peace talks falter. “Macron has been advocating in the last days that, in view of the bilateral discussions between the Americans and the Russians, it is important to play at least a role in the discussion,” a senior French official said. “Meloni very much supported that … they’re not naive about what can be reached through these discussions, but on the balance between not engaging and engaging, there’s a growing appreciation [of the merits of engaging] in some capitals.” Major disagreements remain over the details of the position. Critics say appointing a negotiator would imply that Russia is ready to negotiate in good faith and would accept anything other than Ukraine’s total subjugation. Trump’s efforts to broker a deal have failed so far, with the Kremlin refusing to budge from its demand that Ukraine hand over swaths of territory that Russian troops have been unable to conquer. MESSAGE TO MOSCOW Discussions have been taking place in Brussels about what the bloc would contribute to any talks, and how they could be used to ensure Trump doesn’t sideline its concerns. “There are some issues which cannot be discussed with [only] the U.S. when they have direct implications on our security as Europeans,” the official said. “The message to Washington is as important as [the message] to Moscow.” Kurt Volker, who served as U.S. Special Representative for Ukraine Negotiations in Trump’s first term and as ambassador to NATO in 2008-2009 under then-President George W. Bush, told POLITICO that Brussels has to be more assertive if it wants to be included in the talks. “It’s been made clear Trump is going to keep up his dialog with Putin both directly and through [U.S. envoy Steve] Witkoff,” he said. “That’s not going away. So you have to have your own communication if it’s going on — it’s not about being in the same room as the Americans and the Russians, it’s about having any kind of communication.” JOB CREATION European leaders first discussed the idea of a special envoy at an EU summit last March, a senior EU official confirmed. Despite getting broad backing, no decision was taken and the proposals were left out of the subsequent joint statement. The role would have been narrowly focused on representing Brussels in talks alongside Kyiv — an altogether different proposition to Meloni’s suggestion of an interlocutor for Moscow. “Countries that were supportive of a Ukraine envoy may not be supportive of an envoy to speak with Russia,” the official said. Kaja Kallas, the EU’s high representative for foreign affairs, has consistently positioned herself as the only candidate for any role in negotiations over Ukraine’s future. | Filip Singer/EPA Kaja Kallas, the EU’s high representative for foreign affairs, has consistently positioned herself as the only candidate for any role in negotiations over Ukraine’s future. The former Estonian prime minister has been a steadfast ally of Kyiv and has used her role to corral capitals into backing stronger sanctions designed to force Russia to end its war of aggression. “If Europe were to name a special envoy, the question is who does that person represent? Who do they report to?” Volker asked. “If it were [Commission President Ursula]von der Leyen, that sidelines Kaja Kallas and the External Action Service [the EU’s diplomatic corps] — most envoys have typically been within the action service, but then that would be at such a low level when they need to talk to Putin directly, it wouldn’t work. “But then I can just imagine the discussions in the Commission if it were to be the Council who had an envoy. That would never fly.” Officials confirmed that key aspects of the job — such as whether it would represent just the EU or the entire “coalition of the willing,” including the U.K. and others — have yet to be worked out. Ditto the diplomatic rank, and whether to formally appoint a bureaucrat or informally delegate the role to a current national leader. Italian government minister Giovanbattista Fazzolari — an influential ally of Meloni whose Ukrainian wife is credited with building support for Kyiv within Rome’s governing coalition — said over the weekend that former Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi should be offered the special envoy job. Another four diplomats, meanwhile, noted that Finnish President Alexander Stubb has often been considered a potential representative for Europe in any talks with Washington and Moscow. The center-right veteran diplomat has struck up friendly relations with Trump while playing golf, while his country shares a border with Russia and has been on the receiving end of hybrid campaigns from the Kremlin. According to one of them, relying on “a sitting leader” means they could be “a bit more free in what they say.” However, “another question is figuring out what is the moment to speak with Putin. Is there a risk that if you do so, you’re also in a way legitimizing his positions?” Two EU officials underlined to POLITICO that no special envoy role exists and that any talk of candidates was premature. That said, a third noted, “none of these jobs exist until they do.” Jacopo Barigazzi contributed reporting. 

President Donald Trump has set his sights on several targets in the Western Hemisphere beyond Venezuela — from Mexico with its drug cartels to the political cause célèbre of Cuba. But one place is oddly missing from Trump’s list: Nicaragua. This is a country led not by one, but two dictators. A place where the opposition has been exiled, imprisoned or otherwise stifled so much the word “totalitarian” comes to mind. A place the first Trump administration named alongside Cuba and Venezuela as part of a “troika of tyranny.” Yet it’s barely been mentioned by the second Trump administration. That could change any moment, of course, but right now Nicaragua is in an enviable position in the region. That got me wondering: What is the regime in Managua doing right to avoid Trump’s wrath? What does it have that others don’t? Or, maybe, what does it not have? And what does Nicaragua’s absence from the conversation say about Trump’s bigger motives? Current and former government officials and activists gave me a range of explanations, including that the regime is making smart moves on battling drug trafficking, that it’s benefiting from a lack of natural resources for Trump to covet and that it doesn’t have a slew of migrants in the U.S. Taken together, their answers offer one of the strongest arguments yet that Trump’s actions in the Western Hemisphere or beyond are rarely about helping oppressed people and more about U.S. material interests. “The lesson from Nicaragua is: Don’t matter too much, don’t embarrass Washington and don’t become a domestic political issue,” said Juan Gonzalez, a former Latin America aide to then-President Joe Biden. “For an administration that doesn’t care about democracy or human rights, that’s an effective survival strategy for authoritarians.” Some Nicaraguan opposition leaders say they remain optimistic, and I can’t blame them. Trump is rarely consistent about anything. He’s threatening to bomb Iran right now because, he says, he stands with protesters fighting an unjust regime (albeit one with oil). So maybe he might direct some fury toward Nicaragua? “The fact that Nicaragua is not at the center of the current conversation doesn’t mean that Nicaragua is irrelevant,” Felix Maradiaga, a Nicaraguan politician in exile, told me. “It means that the geopolitical interests of the U.S. right now are at a different place.” Nicaragua is run by Daniel Ortega and Rosario Murillo, a husband and wife who take the term “power couple” somewhat literally. They are now co-presidents of the Central American nation of 7 million. Over the years, they’ve rigged elections, wrested control over other branches of the government and crushed the opposition, while apparently grooming their children to succeed them. It has been a strange and circular journey for a pair of one-time Sandinista revolutionaries who previously fought to bring down a dynastic dictatorship. Hundreds of thousands of Nicaraguans have fled the impoverished country, some to the United States. Meanwhile, the regime has enhanced ties to Russia, China and other U.S. adversaries, while having rocky relations with Washington. Nicaragua is part of a free trade agreement with Washington, but it has also faced U.S. sanctions, tariffs and other penalties for oppressing its people, eroding democracy and having ties to Russia. Even the current Trump administration has used such measures against it, but the regime hasn’t buckled. Nicaraguan officials I reached out to didn’t respond with a comment. Several factors appear to make Nicaragua a lower priority for Trump. Unlike Venezuela, Nicaragua isn’t a major source of oil, the natural resource Trump covets most. It has gold, but not enough of that or other minerals to truly stand out. (Although yes, I know, Trump loves gold.) It’s also not a major source of migrants to the U.S. Besides, Trump has largely shut down the border. Unlike Panama, another country Trump has previously threatened, it doesn’t have a canal key to global commerce, although there’s occasional talk of building one. Nicaragua may be placating the president and his team by taking moves to curb drug trafficking. At least, that’s what a White House official told me when I sought comment from the administration on why Nicaragua has not been a focus. “Nicaragua is cooperating with us to stop drug trafficking and fight criminal elements in their territory,” the official said. I granted the White House official anonymity to discuss a sensitive national security issue. It’s difficult to establish how this cooperation is happening, and the White House official didn’t offer details. In fact, there were reports last year of tensions between the two countries over the issue. A federal report in March said the U.S. “will terminate its Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) operations in Nicaragua in 2025, partly due to the lack of cooperation from Nicaragua’s agencies.” The DEA didn’t reply when I asked if it had followed up with that plan, but it’s possible the regime has become more helpful recently. The U.S. and Nicaragua’s cooperation on drugs has waxed and waned over the years. In any case, although drug runners use Nicaraguan territory, it’s not a major cartel hub compared to some other countries facing Trump’s ire, such as Mexico. Some Nicaraguan opposition activists have been hoping that U.S. legal moves against Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro would expose narcotrafficking links between Managua and Caracas, providing a reason for the U.S. to come down harder on the regime. They’ve pointed to a 2020 U.S. criminal indictment of Maduro that mentioned Nicaragua. But the latest indictment, unveiled upon Maduro’s Jan. 3 capture, doesn’t mention Nicaragua. When I asked the White House official why the newer indictment doesn’t mention Nicaragua, the person merely insisted that “both indictments are valid.” A spokesperson for the Department of Justice declined to comment. Nicaraguan opposition leaders say that although the new indictment doesn’t mention the country, they still hope it will come up during Maduro’s trial. My sense, though, is that Ortega and Murillo are cooperating just enough with the U.S. that the administration is willing to go easy on them for now. It probably also doesn’t hurt that, despite railing frequently against Washington, Ortega and Murillo don’t openly antagonize Trump himself. They may have learned a lesson from watching how hard Trump has come down on Colombia’s president for taunting him. Another reason Nicaragua isn’t getting much Trump attention? It is not a domestic political flashpoint in the U.S. Not, for example, the way Cuba has been for decades. The Cuban American community can move far more votes than the Nicaraguan American one. Plus, none of the aides closest to Trump are known to be too obsessed with Nicaragua. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has long denounced the Nicaraguan regime, but he’s of Cuban descent and more focused on that island’s fate. Cuba’s regime also is more dependent on Venezuela than Nicaragua’s, making it an easier target. Ortega and Murillo aren’t sucking up to Trump and striking deals with him like another area strongman, El Salvador’s Nayib Bukele. But, especially since the U.S. capture of Maduro, the pair seem bent on proving their anti-imperialist credentials without angering Trump. The results can be head-scratching. For example, in recent days, the regime is reported to have detained around 60 people for celebrating Maduro’s capture. But around the same time, the regime also reportedly freed “tens” of prisoners, at least some of whom were critics of Ortega and Murillo. Those people were released after the U.S. embassy in the country called on Nicaragua to follow in Venezuela’s recent footsteps and release political prisoners. However, the regime is reported to have described the releases as a way to commemorate 19 years of its rule. Alex Gray, a former senior National Security Council official in the first Trump administration, argued that one reason the president and his current team should care more about Nicaragua is its ties to U.S. adversaries such as Russia and China — ties that could grow if the U.S. ignores the Latin American country. Russia in particular has a strong security relationship with the regime in Managua. China has significantly expanded its ties in recent years, though more in the economic space. Iran also has warm relations with Managua. Nicaragua is the “poster child” for what Trump’s own National Security Strategy called the Trump Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine, which warns the U.S. will deny its adversaries the ability to meddle in the Western Hemisphere, Gray said. The White House official said the administration is “very closely” monitoring Nicaragua’s cooperation with U.S. rivals. But even that may not be enough for Trump to prioritize Nicaragua. Regardless of what his National Security Strategy says, Trump has a mixed record of standing up to Russia and China, and Nicaragua’s cooperation with them may not be as worrisome as that of a more strategically important country. With Trump, who himself often acts authoritarian, many things must fall in place at the right moment for him to care or act, and Nicaraguan opposition activists haven’t solved that Rubik’s Cube. Many are operating in exile. (In 2023, Ortega and Murillo put 222 imprisoned opposition activists on a plane to the U.S., then stripped them of their Nicaraguan citizenship. Many are now effectively stateless but vulnerable to Trump’s immigration crackdown.) It’s not lost on these activists that Trump has left much of Maduro’s regime in place in Venezuela. It suggests Trump values stability over democracy, human rights or justice. Some hope Ortega and Murillo will be weakened by the fall of their friend, Maduro. The two surely noticed how little Russia, China and others did to help the former leader. Maybe Nicaragua’s co-dictators will ease up on internal repression as one reaction. “When you get this kind of pressure, there are things that get in motion,” said Juan Sebastian Chamorro, a Nicaraguan politician forced out of the country. “They are feeling the heat.”

BRUSSELS — A new EU rule mandating that a higher proportion of passengers pass through electronic identity border checks risks “wreaking significant discomfort on travelers,” warned the head of the bloc’s airport lobby. But a Commission spokesperson insisted that the electronic check system, which first went into limited use in October with a higher proportion of travelers to be checked from Friday, “has operated largely without issues.” The new Entry/Exit System is aimed at replacing passport stamps and cracking down on illegal stays in the bloc. Under the new system, travelers from third countries like the U.K. and the U.S. must register fingerprints and a facial image the first time they cross the frontier before reaching a border officer. But those extra steps are causing delays. In October, 10 percent of passengers had to use the new system; as of Friday, at least 35 percent of non-EU nationals entering the Schengen area for a short stay must use it. By April 10, the system will be fully in place. Its introduction last year caused issues at many airports, and industry worries that Friday’s step-up will cause a repeat. The EES “has resulted in border control processing times at airports increasing by up to 70 percent, with waiting times of up to three hours at peak traffic periods,” said Olivier Jankovec, director general of ACI Europe, adding that Friday’s new mandate is “sure to create even worse conditions.” Brussels Airport spokesperson Ihsane Chioua Lekhli said: “The introduction of EES has an impact on the waiting time for passengers and increases the need for sufficient staffing at border control,” adding: “Peak waiting times at arrival (entry of Belgium) can go up to three hours, and we also saw an increase of waiting times at departures.” But the Commission rejected the accusation that EES is wreaking havoc at EU airports. “Since its start, the system has operated largely without issues, even during the peak holiday period, and any initial challenges typical of new systems have been effectively addressed, moreover with it, we know who enter in the EU, when, and where,” said Markus Lammert, the European Commission’s spokesperson for internal affairs. Lamert said countries “have refuted the claim” made by ACI Europe of increased waiting times and that concerns over problems related to the new 35 percent threshold have been “disproven.” That’s in stark contrast with the view of the airport lobby, which pointed to recent problems in Portugal. Under the new system, travelers from third countries like the U.K. and the U.S. must register fingerprints and a facial image the first time they cross the frontier before reaching a border officer. | iStock “There are mounting operational issues with the EES rollout — the case in point being the suspension of the system by the Portuguese government over the holidays,” Jankovec said. In late December, the Portuguese government suspended the EES at Lisbon Humberto Delgado Airport for three months and deployed military personnel to bolster border control capabilities. ADR, which operates Rome Fiumicino Airport, is also seeing issues. “Operational conditions are proving highly complex, with a significant impact on passenger processing times at border controls,” ADR said in a written reply. Spain’s hotel industry association asked the country’s interior ministry to beef up staffing, warning of “recurring bottlenecks at border controls.” “It is unreasonable that, after a journey of several hours, tourists should face waits of an hour or more to enter the country,” said Jorge Marichal, the lobby’s president. The Spanish interior ministry said the EES is being used across the country with “no queues or significant incidents reported to date.” However, not all airports are having trouble implementing the new system. The ADP Group, which manages the two largest airports in Paris, said it has “not observed any chaos or increase in waiting times at this stage.”

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said that Kyiv is moving to step up pressure on Moscow with new operations targeting Russia, following a week of Russian attacks that knocked out power to Ukrainian cities as freezing temperatures set in. “Some of the operations have already been felt by the Russians. Some are still underway,” Zelenskyy said in his nightly address Saturday. “ I also approved new ones.” Zelenskyy said Ukraine’s actions include deep strikes and special measures aimed at weakening Russia’s capacity to continue the war. “We are actively defending ourselves, and every Russian loss brings the end of the war closer,” he said. He declined to provide details, saying it was “too early” to speak publicly about certain operations, but stressed that Ukraine’s security services and special forces are operating effectively. As part of Kyiv’s efforts to reduce Russia’s offensive capabilities, Ukrainian forces attacked the Zhutovskaya oil depot in Russia’s Volgograd region overnight Saturday, the General Staff said in a post on social media. Zelenskyy’s comments come after a week of escalating Russian strikes on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure, which left the regions of Zaporizhzhia and Dnipropetrovsk without electricity and heating as temperatures plunged well below zero. In the capital, renewed attacks killed at least four people and injured 25 others. The city’s mayor urged residents who could leave to do so, as roughly half of Kyiv’s apartment buildings were left without power or heat. Russia also launched a nuclear-capable Oreshnik ballistic missile at Ukraine’s Lviv region on Thursday, striking near the EU and NATO border as part of a massive barrage.

Moscow said its military launched a “massive strike” against Ukraine overnight, including a nuclear-capable missile, calling the attack retaliation for an unverified claim of a Ukrainian assault on a residence belonging to Russian President Vladimir Putin. The Oreshnik ballistic missile struck the Lviv region, near the eastern border of the EU and NATO, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha wrote in a post on X, saying the strike represents “a grave threat to the security on the European continent.” The strike marks only the second known combat use of the hypersonic Oreshnik missile, which is capable of carrying nuclear weapons, following its first firing against the Ukrainian region of Dnipro in November 2024. The strike on the Lviv region was part of a wider Russian barrage across Ukraine. Russia’s defense ministry said the assault was retaliation for an alleged Ukrainian attack on Putin’s residence on Dec. 29 — a claim that Kyiv has denied. “It is absurd that Russia attempts to justify this strike with a fake ‘Putin residence attack’ that never happened,” Ukraine’s Sybiha said on X. “This is further proof that Moscow does not need real reasons for its terror and war.” Ukraine’s Western Air Command said in a Facebook post that the intermediate-range Oreshnik missile was traveling at approximately 13,000 kilometers per hour, with social media reports indicating the strike occurred only minutes after air-raid sirens sounded. The Lviv regional military administration said specialists conducted on-site tests and laboratory analyses following the strike. “The radiation background is within normal limits,” they said, adding that no harmful substances were detected in the air. Sybiha announced that Ukraine will be calling for an urgent United Nations Security Council meeting in response to the strike. “Such a launch near the borders of the EU and NATO is a serious threat to security on the European continent and a test for the transatlantic community,” Sybiha wrote. “We demand a decisive response to Russia’s reckless actions.”

Officials from Denmark and Greenland met with several lawmakers on Capitol Hill this week as President Donald Trump reiterated his threats to take Greenland, possibly by force. The meetings come as the Trump administration has repeatedly declined to rule out the possibility of using the U.S. military if diplomatic efforts to purchase the country do not succeed. Secretary of State Marco Rubio is set to meet with Danish officials next week to discuss a U.S. acquisition of Greenland, which is a territory of Denmark. Danish Ambassador Jesper Møller Sørensen and Jacob Isbosethsen, the head of Greenland representation, met with a mix of Republican and Democratic House members and senators on Wednesday and Thursday — including Rep. Gregory Meeks, the highest ranking Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee — in addition to briefing a group of bipartisan Hill staffers. Sørensen and Isbosethsen “expressed an openness to discuss any measure that would enhance the security of the United States, while respecting the sovereignty of the Kingdom of Denmark” during a Tuesday meeting, Rep. Mike Flood (R-Neb.) said in a statement. He added that the meeting left him “confident that Secretary of State Marco Rubio can navigate a diplomatic win-win solution with one of our finest allies.” Sens. Roger Wicker (R-Miss) and Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) struck a different tone following a bipartisan meeting with the officials on Thursday morning. “I think it’s been made clear from our Danish friends and from our friends in Greenland that that future does not include a negotiation,” Wicker told reporters after the meeting. “There’s no willingness on their part to negotiate for the purchase or the change in title to their land, which they’ve had for so long. That’s their prerogative and their right, and they’ve made that very clear to us” Shaheen added that “there’s no reason for a negotiation around who controls Greenland, because Greenland, the United States and Denmark have been allies” for several decades. Wicker — who told POLITICO on Tuesday that “this is a topic that should be dropped” — is one of several GOP lawmakers who have broken with the Trump administration’s push to acquire Greenland, including Republican Sens. Susan Collins of Maine, Thom Tillis of North Carolina and Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. Isbosethsen reiterated on Thursday that “Greenland is not for sale,” a position that the territory’s leadership has repeatedly stood by in recent months as Trump has doubled down on his threats to purchase or take Greenland by force. Trump’s increasingly forceful threats of possible U.S. intervention in countries like Greenland, Colombia and Cuba in the wake of the ouster of Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro have alarmed western allies, who worry that his efforts could destabilize NATO. Eight European leaders threw their support behind Greenland in a joint statement released Tuesday, writing that “Security in the Arctic must therefore be achieved collectively, in conjunction with NATO allies including the United States, by upholding the principles of the UN Charter, including sovereignty, territorial integrity and the inviolability of borders.” Polish Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski also called on Congress to take a stance on Trump’s threats to seize Greenland on Wednesday, telling reporters, “The topic of territories, of war and peace, belongs to the U.S. Congress.” Ambassadors from several NATO countries discussed taking steps to reinforce the organization’s Arctic flank at a closed-door meeting in Brussels on Thursday as concerns grow about the Trump administration’s insistence on taking Greenland by any means necessary. Denmark, meanwhile, has no intention of rolling over, according to an EU diplomat with knowledge of the thinking in Copenhagen. While Denmark had until this week largely avoided officially raising the Greenland issue to the EU level to avoid inflaming the situation and giving credence to the idea that Trump could buy or annex Greenland, the government in Copenhagen has now changed its strategy in response to the most recent spate of U.S. rhetoric. The Danish ambassador and the Greenlandic representative hope to hammer the message that Greenland does not want to become a part of the U.S. and that the rest of Europe has their backs, the diplomat said. A spokesperson for Rep. Jason Crow (D-Colo.), who sits on the House Armed Services Committee, told POLITICO in a statement that he “reiterated his support for the people of Greenland’s sovereignty, and stressed their importance to the NATO alliance” during a Wednesday meeting with Sørensen and Isbosethsen. The officials have several more meetings planned with lawmakers on Thursday afternoon and Friday. Zoya Sheftalovich contributed to this report.

The first American pope is on a collision course with U.S. President Donald Trump. The latest fault line between the Vatican and the White House emerged on Sunday. Shortly after Trump suggested his administration could “run” Venezuela, the Chicago-born Pope Leo XIV appeared at the Angelus window overlooking St. Peter’s Square to deliver an address calling for the safeguarding of the “country’s sovereignty.” For MAGA-aligned conservatives, this is now part of an unwelcome pattern. While Leo is less combative in tone toward Trump than his predecessor Francis, his priorities are rekindling familiar battles in the culture war with the U.S. administration on topics such as immigration and deportations, LGBTQ+ rights and climate change. As the leader of a global community of 1.4 billion Catholics, Leo has a rare position of influence to challenge Trump’s policies, and the U.S. president has to tread with uncustomary caution in confronting him. Trump traditionally relishes blasting his critics with invective but has been unusually restrained in response to Leo’s criticism, in part because he counts a large number of Catholics among his core electorate. “[Leo] is not looking for a fight like Francis, who sometimes enjoyed a fight,” said Chris White, author of “Pope Leo XIV: Inside the Conclave and the Dawn of a New Papacy.” “But while different in style, he is clearly a continuation of Francis in substance. Initially there was a wait-and-see approach, but for many MAGA Catholics, Leo challenges core beliefs.” In recent months, migration has become the main combat zone between the liberal pope and U.S. conservatives. Leo called on his senior clergy to speak out on the need to protect vulnerable migrants, and U.S. bishops denounced the “dehumanizing rhetoric and violence” leveled at people targeted by Trump’s deportation policies. Leo later went public with an appeal that migrants in the U.S. be treated “humanely” and “with dignity.” Leo’s support emboldened Florida bishops to call for a Christmas reprieve from Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids. “Don’t be the Grinch that stole Christmas,” said Archbishop Thomas Wenski of Miami. As if evidence were needed of America’s polarization on this topic, however, the Department of Homeland Security described their arrests as a “Christmas gift to Americans.” Leo also conspicuously removed Cardinal Timothy Dolan, Trump’s preferred candidate for pope and a favorite on the conservative Fox News channel, from a key post as archbishop of New York, replacing him with a bishop known for pro-migrant views. This cuts to the heart of the moral dilemma for a divided U.S. Catholic community. For Trump, Catholics are hardly a sideshow as they constitute 22 percent of his electorate, according to a poll by the Pew Research Center. While the pope appeals to liberal causes, however, many MAGA Catholics take a far stricter line on topics such as migration, sexuality and climate change. To his critics from the conservative Catholic MAGA camp, such as Trump’s former strategist Steve Bannon, the pope is anathema. U.S.-born Pope Leo XIV appeared at the Angelus window overlooking St. Peter’s Square to deliver an address calling for the safeguarding of Venezuela’s “sovereignty.” | Stefano Costantino/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images Last year the pope blessed a chunk of ice from Greenland and criticized political leaders who ignore climate change. He said supporters of the death penalty could not credibly claim to be pro-life, and argued that Christians and Muslims could be friends. He has also signaled a more tolerant posture toward LGBTQ+ Catholics, permitting an LGBTQ+ pilgrimage to St Peter’s Basilica. Small wonder, then, that Trump confidante and conspiracy theorist Laura Loomer branded Leo the “woke Marxist pope.” Trump-aligned Catholic conservatives have denounced him as “secularist,” “globalist” and even “apostate.” Far-right pundit Jack Posobiec has called him “anti-Trump.” “Some popes are a blessing. Some popes are a penance,” Posobiec wrote on X. PONTIFF FROM CHICAGO There were early hopes that Leo might build bridges with U.S. hardliners. He’s an American, after all: He wears an Apple watch and follows baseball, and American Catholics can hardly dismiss him as as foreign. The Argentine Francis, by contrast, was often portrayed by critics as anti-American and shaped by the politics of poorer nations. Leo can’t be waved away so easily. Early in his papacy, Leo also showed signs he was keen to steady the church after years of internal conflict, and threw some bones to conservatives such as allowing a Latin Mass in St. Peter’s Basilica and wearing more ornate papal vestments. But the traditionalists were not reassured. Benjamin Harnwell, the Vatican correspondent for the MAGA-aligned War Room podcast, said conservatives were immediately skeptical of Leo. “From day one, we have been telling our base to be wary: Do not be deceived,” he said. Leo, Harnwell added, is “fully signed up to Francis’ agenda … but [is] more strategic and intelligent.” After the conclave that appointed Leo, former Trump strategist Bannon told POLITICO that Leo’s election was “the worst choice for MAGA Catholics” and “an anti-Trump vote by the globalists of the Curia.” Trump had a long-running feud with Francis, who condemned the U.S. president’s border wall and criticized his migration policies. Francis appeared to enjoy that sparring, but Leo is a very different character. More retiring by nature, he shies away from confrontation. But his resolve in defending what he sees as non-negotiable moral principles, particularly the protection of the weak, is increasingly colliding with the core assumptions of Trumpism. Trump loomed large during the conclave, with an AI-generated video depicting himself as pope. The gesture was seen by some Vatican insiders as a “mafia-style” warning to elect someone who would not criticize him, Vatican-watcher Elisabetta Piqué wrote in a new book “The Election of Pope Leo XIV: The Last Surprise of Pope Francis.” NOT PERSONAL Leo was not chosen expressly as an anti-Trump figure, according to a Vatican official. Rather, his nationality was likely seen by some cardinals as “reassuring,” suggesting he would be accountable and transparent in governance and finances. But while Leo does not seem to be actively seeking a confrontation with Trump, the world views of the two men seem incompatible. “He will avoid personalizing,” said the same Vatican official. “He will state church teaching, not in reaction to Trump, but as things he would say anyway.” Despite the attacks on Leo from his allies, Trump himself has also appeared wary of a direct showdown. When asked about the pope in a POLITICO interview, Trump was more keen to discuss meeting the pontiff’s brother in Florida, whom he described as “serious MAGA.” When pressed on whether he would meet the pope himself, he finally replied: “Sure, I will. Why not?” The potential for conflict will come into sharper focus as Leo hosts a summit called an extraordinary consistory this week, the first of its kind since 2014, which is expected to provide a blueprint for the future direction of the church. His first publication on social issues, such as inequality and migration, is also expected in the next few months. “He will use [the summit] to talk about what he sees as the future,” said a diplomat posted to the Vatican. “It will give his collaborators a sense of where he is going. He could use it as a sounding board, or ask them to suggest solutions.” It’s safe to assume Leo won’t be unveiling a MAGA-aligned agenda. The ultimate balance of power may also favor the pope. Trump must contend with elections and political clocks; Leo, elected for life, does not. At 70, and as a tennis player in good health, Leo appears positioned to shape Catholic politics well after Trump’s moment has passed. “He is not in a hurry,” the Vatican official said. “Time is on his side.”

LONDON — Choosing your Brexit camp was once the preserve of Britain’s Tories. Now Labour is joining in the fun.  Six years after Britain left the EU, a host of loose — and mostly overlapping — groupings in the U.K.’s ruling party are thinking about precisely how close to try to get to the bloc. They range from customs union enthusiasts to outright skeptics — with plenty of shades of grey in between. There’s a political urgency to all of this too: with Prime Minister Keir Starmer tanking in the polls, the Europhile streak among many Labour MPs and members means Brexit could become a key issue for anyone who would seek to replace him. “The more the screws and pressure have been on Keir around leadership, the more we’ve seen that play to the base,” said one Labour MP, granted anonymity like others quoted in this piece to speak frankly. Indeed, Starmer started the new year explicitly talking up closer alignment with the European Union’s single market. At face value, nothing has changed: Starmer’s comments reflect his existing policy of a “reset” with Brussels. His manifesto red lines on not rejoining the customs union or single market remain. Most of his MPs care more about aligning than how to get there. In short, this is not like the Tory wars of the late 2010s. Well, not yet. POLITICO sketches out Labour’s nascent Brexit tribes. THE CUSTOMS UNIONISTS  It all started with a Christmas walk. Health Secretary Wes Streeting told an interviewer he desires a “deeper trading relationship” with the EU — widely interpreted as hinting at joining a customs union. This had been a whispered topic in Labour circles for a while, discussed privately by figures including Starmer’s economic adviser Minouche Shafik. Deputy Prime Minister David Lammy said last month that rejoining a customs union is not “currently” government policy — which some took as a hint that the position could shift. But Streeting’s leadership ambitions (he denies plotting for the top job) and his willingness to describe Brexit as a problem gave his comments an elevated status among Labour Europhiles.  “This has really come from Wes’s leadership camp,” said one person who talks regularly to No. 10 Downing Street. Naomi Smith, CEO of the pro-EU pressure group Best for Britain, added any Labour leadership contest will be dominated by the Brexit question. MPs and members who would vote in a race “are even further ahead than the public average on all of those issues relating to Europe,” she argued. Joining a customs union would in theory allow smoother trade without returning to free movement of people. But Labour critics of a customs union policy — including Starmer himself — argue it is a non-starter because it would mean tearing up post-Brexit agreements with other countries such as India and the U.S. “It’s just absolutely nonsense,” said a second Labour MP.    Keir Starmer has argued that the customs union route would mean hard conversations with workers in the car industry after Britain secured a U.K.-U.S. tariff deal last summer. | Colin McPherson/Getty Images And since Streeting denies plotting and did not even mention a customs union by name, the identities of the players pushing for one are understandably murky beyond the 13 Labour MPs who backed a Liberal Democrat bill last month requiring the government to begin negotiations on joining a bespoke customs union with the EU. One senior Labour official said “hardly any” MPs back it, while a minister said there was no organized group, only a vague idea. “There are people who don’t really know what it is, but realize Brexit has been painful and the economy needs a stimulus,” they said. “And there are people who do know what this means and they effectively want to rejoin. For people who know about trade, this is an absolute non-starter.” Anand Menon, director of the UK in a Changing Europe think tank, said a full rejoining of the EU customs union would mean negotiating round a suite of “add-ons” — and no nations have secured this without also being in the EU single market. (Turkey has a customs union with the EU, but does not benefit from the EU’s wider trade agreements.) “I’m not convinced the customs union works without the single market,” Menon added.  Starmer has argued that the customs union route would mean hard conversations with workers in the car industry after Britain secured a U.K.-U.S. tariff deal last summer, a person with knowledge of his thinking said. “When you read anything from any economically literate commentator, the customs union is not their go-to,” added the senior Labour official quoted above. “Keir is really strong on it. He fully believes it isn’t a viable route in the national interest or economic interest.” THE SINGLE MARKETEERS (A.K.A. THE GOVERNMENT) Starmer and his allies, then, want to park the customs union and get closer to the single market.  Paymaster General Nick Thomas-Symonds has long led negotiations along these lines through Labour’s existing EU “reset.” He and Starmer recently discussed post-Brexit policy on a walk through the grounds of the PM’s country retreat, Chequers. Working on the detail with Thomas-Symonds is Michael Ellam, the former director of communications for ex-PM Gordon Brown, now a senior civil servant in the Cabinet Office. Ellam is “a really highly regarded, serious guy” and attends regular meetings with Brussels officials, said a second person who speaks regularly to No. 10.   A bill is due to be introduced to the U.K. parliament by summer which will allow “dynamic” alignment with new EU laws in areas of agreement. Two people with knowledge of his role said the bill will be steered through parliament by Cabinet Office Minister Chris Ward, Starmer’s former aide and close ally, who was by his side when Starmer was shadow Brexit secretary during the “Brexit wars” of the late 2010s. Starmer himself talked up this approach in a rare long-form interview this week with BBC host Laura Kuenssberg, saying: “We are better looking to the single market rather than the customs union for our further alignment.” While the PM’s allies insist he simply answered a question, some of his MPs spy a need to seize back the pro-EU narrative. The second person who talks regularly to No. 10 argued a “relatively small … factional leadership challenge group around Wes” is pushing ideas around a customs union, while Starmer wants to “not match that but bypass it, and say actually, we’re doing something more practical and potentially bigger.”  A third Labour MP was blunter about No. 10’s messaging: “They’re terrified and they’re worrying about an internal leadership challenge.” Starmer’s allies argue that their approach is pragmatic and recognizes what the EU will actually be willing to accept. Christabel Cooper, director of research at the pro-Labour think tank Labour Together — which plans polling and focus groups in the coming months to test public opinion on the issue — said: “We’ve talked to a few trade experts and economists, and actually the customs union is not all that helpful. To get a bigger bang for your buck, you do need to go down more of a single market alignment route.”  Stella Creasy argued that promising a Swiss-style deal in Labour’s next election manifesto (likely in 2029) would benefit the economy — far more than the “reset” currently on the table. | Nicola Tree/Getty Images Nick Harvey, CEO of the pro-EU pressure group European Movement UK, concurred: “The fact that they’re now talking about a fuller alignment towards the single market is very good news, and shows that to make progress economically and to make progress politically, they simply have to do this.”  But critics point out there are still big questions about what alignment will look like — or more importantly, what the EU will go for.  The bill will include areas such as food standards, animal welfare, pesticide use, the EU’s electricity market and carbon emissions trading, but talks on all of these remain ongoing. Negotiations to join the EU’s defense framework, SAFE, stalled over the costs to Britain. Menon said: “I just don’t see what [Starmer] is spelling out being practically possible. Even at the highest levels there has been, under the Labour Party, quite a degree of ignorance, I think, about how the EU works and what the EU wants.   “I’ve heard Labour MPs say, well, they’ve got a veterinary deal with New Zealand, so how hard can it be? And you want to say, I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but New Zealand doesn’t have a land border with the EU.”  THE SWISS BANKERS Then there are Europhile MPs, peers and campaigners who back aligning with the single market — but going much further than Starmer.  For some this takes the form of a “Swiss-style” deal, which would allow single market access for some sectors without rejoining the customs union.   This would plough through Starmer’s red lines by reintroducing EU freedom of movement, along with substantial payments to Brussels.  But Stella Creasy, chair of the Labour Movement for Europe (LME), argued that promising a Swiss-style deal in Labour’s next election manifesto (likely in 2029) would benefit the economy — far more than the “reset” currently on the table. She said: “If you could get a Swiss-style deal and put it in the manifesto … that would be enough for businesses to invest.”  Creasy said LME has around 150 MPs as members and holds regular briefings for them. While few Labour MPs back a Swiss deal — and various colleagues see Creasy as an outlier — she said MPs and peers, including herself, plan to put forward amendments to the dynamic alignment bill when it goes through parliament.  Tom Baldwin, Starmer’s biographer and the former communications director of the People’s Vote campaign (which called for a second referendum on Brexit), also suggests Labour could go further in 2029. “Keir Starmer’s comments at the weekend about aligning with — and gaining access to — the single market open up a whole range of possibilities,” he said. “At the low end, this is a pragmatic choice by a PM who doesn’t want to be forced to choose between Europe and America.   “At the upper end, it suggests Labour may seek a second term mandate at the next election by which the U.K. would get very close to rejoining the single market. That would be worth a lot more in terms of economic growth and national prosperity than the customs union deal favoured by the Lib Dems.”  A third person who speaks regularly to No. 10 called it a “boil the frog strategy.” They added: “You get closer and closer and then maybe … you go into the election saying ‘we’ll try to negotiate something more single markety or customs uniony.’”  THE REJOINERS? Labour’s political enemies (and some of its supporters) argue this could all lead even further — to rejoining the EU one day. “Genuinely, I am not advocating rejoin now in any sense because it’s a 10-year process,” said Creasy, who is about as Europhile as they come in Labour. “Our European counterparts would say ‘hang on a minute, could you actually win a referendum, given [Reform UK Leader and Brexiteer Nigel] Farage is doing so well?’”  With Prime Minister Keir Starmer tanking in the polls, the Europhile streak among many Labour MPs and members means Brexit could become a key issue for anyone who would seek to replace him. | Tom Nicholson/Getty Images Simon Opher, an MP and member of the Mainstream Labour group closely aligned with Burnham, said rejoining was “probably for a future generation” as “the difficulty is, would they want us back?” But look into the soul of many Labour politicians, and they would love to still be in the bloc — even if they insist rejoining is not on the table now. Andy Burnham — the Greater Manchester mayor who has flirted with the leadership — remarked last year that he would like to rejoin the EU in his lifetime (he’s 56). London Mayor Sadiq Khan said “in the medium to long term, yes, of course, I would like to see us rejoining.” In the meantime Khan backs membership of the single market and customs union, which would still go far beyond No. 10’s red lines.  THE ISSUES-LED MPS Then there are the disparate — yet overlapping — groups of MPs whose views on Europe are guided by their politics, their constituencies or their professional interests. To Starmer’s left, backbench rebels including Richard Burgon and Dawn Butler backed the push toward a customs union by the opposition Lib Dems. The members of the left-wing Socialist Campaign Group frame their argument around fears Labour will lose voters to other progressive parties, namely the Lib Dems, Greens and SNP, if they fail to show adequate bonds with Europe. Some other, more centrist MPs fear similar. Labour MPs with a military background or in military-heavy seats also want the U.K. and EU to cooperate further. London MP Calvin Bailey, who spent more than two decades in the Royal Air Force, endorsed closer security relations between Britain and France through greater intelligence sharing and possibly permanent infrastructure. Alex Baker, whose Aldershot constituency is known as the home of the British Army, backed British involvement in a global Defense, Security and Resilience Bank, arguing it could be key to a U.K.-EU Defence and Security Pact. The government opted against joining such a scheme.   Parliamentarians keen for young people to bag more traveling rights were buoyed by a breakthrough on Erasmus+ membership for British students at the end of last year. More than 60 Labour MPs earlier signed a letter calling for a youth mobility scheme allowing 18 to 30-year-olds expanded travel opportunities on time limited visas. It was organized by Andrew Lewin, the Welywn Hatfield MP, and signatories included future Home Office Minister Mike Tapp (then a backbencher).  Labour also has an influential group of rural MPs, most elected in 2024, who are keen to boost cooperation and cut red tape for farmers. Rural MP Steve Witherden, on the party’s left, said: “Three quarters of Welsh food and drink exports go straight to the EU … regulatory alignment is a top priority for rural Labour MPs. Success here could point the way towards closer ties with Europe in other sectors.”  THE NOT-SO-SECRET EUROPHILES (A.K.A. ALL OF THE ABOVE) Many Labour figures argue that all of the above are actually just one mega-group — Labour MPs who want to be closer to Brussels, regardless of the mechanism. Menon agreed Labour camps are not formalized because most Labour MPs agree on working closely with Brussels. “I think it’s a mishmash,” he said. But he added: “I think these tribes will emerge or develop because there’s an intra-party fight looming, and Brexit is one of the issues people use to signal where they stand.” A fourth Labour MP agreed: “I didn’t think there was much of a distinction between the camps of people who want to get closer to the EU. The first I heard of that was over the weekend.”  The senior Labour official quoted above added: “I don’t think it cuts across tribes in such a clear way … a broader group of people just want us to move faster in terms of closeness into the EU, in terms of a whole load of things. I don’t think it fits neatly.” For years MPs were bound by a strategy of talking little about Brexit because it was so divisive with Labour’s voter base. That shifted over 2025. Labour advisers were buoyed by polls showing a rise in “Bregret” among some who voted for Brexit in 2016, as well as changing demographics (bluntly, young voters come of age while older voters die).  No. 10 aides also noted last summer that Farage, the leader of the right-wing populist party Reform UK, was making Brexit less central to his campaigning. Some aides (though others dispute this) credit individual advisers such as Tim Allan, No. 10’s director of communications, as helping a more openly EU-friendly media strategy into being. For all the talk of tribes and camps, Labour doesn’t have warring Brexit factions in the same way that the Tories did at the height of the EU divorce in the 2010s. | Jakub Porzycki/Getty Images THE BLUE LABOUR HOLDOUTS  Not everyone in Labour wants to hug Brussels tight.  A small but significant rump of Labour MPs, largely from the socially conservative Blue Labour tribe, is anxious that pursuing closer ties could be seen as a rejection of the Brexit referendum — and a betrayal of voters in Leave-backing seats who are looking to Reform. One of them, Liverpool MP Dan Carden, said the failure of both London and Brussels to strike a recent deal on defense funding, even amid threats from Russia, showed Brussels is not serious.   “Any Labour MP who thinks that the U.K. can get closer to the single market or the customs union without giving up freedoms and taking instruction from an EU that we’re not a part of is living in cloud cuckoo land,” he said. A similar skepticism of the EU’s authority is echoed by the Tony Blair Institute (TBI), led by one of the most pro-European prime ministers in Britain’s history. The TBI has been meeting politicians in Brussels and published a paper translated into French, German and Italian in a bid to shape the EU’s future from within.   Ryan Wain, the TBI’s senior director for policy and politics, argued: “We live in a G2 world where there are two superpowers, China and the U.S. By the middle of this century there will likely be three, with India. To me, it’s just abysmal that Europe isn’t mentioned in that at all. It has massive potential to adapt and reclaim its influence, but that opportunity needs to be unlocked.”  Such holdouts enjoy a strange alliance with left-wing Euroskeptics (“Lexiteers”), who believe the EU does not have the interests of workers at its heart. But few of these were ever in Labour and few remain; former Leader Jeremy Corbyn has long since been cast out. At the same time many Labour MPs in Leave-voting areas, who opposed efforts to stop Brexit in the late 2010s, now support closer alignment with Brussels to help their local car and chemical industries. As such, there are now 20 or fewer MPs holding their noses on closer alignment. Just three Labour MPs, including fellow Blue Labour supporter Jonathan Brash, voted against a bill supporting a customs union proposed by the centrist, pro-Europe Lib Dems last month.  WHERE WILL IT ALL END?  For all the talk of tribes and camps, Labour doesn’t have warring Brexit factions in the same way that the Tories did at the height of the EU divorce in the 2010s. Most MPs agree on closer alignment with the EU; the question is how they get there.  Even so, Menon has a warning from the last Brexit wars. Back in the late 2010s, Conservative MPs would jostle to set out their positions — workable or otherwise. The crowded field just made negotiations with Brussels harder. “We end up with absolutely batshit stupid positions when viewed from the EU,” said Menon, “because they’re being derived as a function of the need to position yourself in a British political party.” But few of these were ever in Labour and few remain; former Leader Jeremy Corbyn has long since been cast out. | Seiya Tanase/Getty Images The saving grace could be that most Labour MPs are united by a deeper gut feeling about the EU — one that, Baldwin argues, is reflected in Starmer himself. The PM’s biographer said: “At heart, Keir Starmer is an outward-looking internationalist whose pro-European beliefs are derived from what he calls the ‘blood-bond’ of 1945 and shared values, rather than the more transactional trade benefits of 1973,” when Britain joined the European Economic Community.  All that remains is to turn a “blood-bond” into hard policy. Simple, right?