BRUSSELS — The European Union is under pressure to keep Ukrainian troops fully online after Elon Musk’s Starlink was restricted amid volatile U.S. support for Kyiv. “It was a very dangerous and unpleasant surprise,” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy told reporters after EU leaders met in Brussels, referring to Starlink speed limitations experienced by military troops in recent days. “We were using Starlink to intercept jet-powered Shaheds [combat drones] that are attacking our civilian infrastructure and killing our families … When the speed limits were lowered, we became incapable of shooting [them] down.” Ukraine has long relied critically on Musk’s satellite constellation for wartime efforts. Reuters reported Friday that the order to slow Ukraine’s military-grade Starshield service came from the White House, days after Washington pressed Kyiv to halt strikes on Russian refineries, amid soaring energy prices and ahead of November’s midterm elections. “It is unacceptable for Ukraine’s defense — and therefore Europe’s security — to depend on the goodwill of a single American billionaire or on Donald Trump’s decisions,” French centrist Member of the European Parliament Christophe Grudler told POLITICO. Ahead of Thursday’s high-level meeting, European lawmakers had been calling on the EU executive to fast-track Kyiv’s access to satellite capabilities already pooled under the bloc’s Govsatcom program — which gives participating governments secure communications capabilities. Negotiations between the EU executive and Ukraine over this access have been ongoing since March, with no breakthrough. Norway and Iceland secured such an agreement earlier this year. “What I don’t understand is why the European Commission and the Member States have not done everything possible to quickly reach an agreement that would allow Ukraine to benefit from it,” added Christophe Grudler, who wrote to EU leaders. He also called on them to speed up work on IRIS² — the EU’s in-house, planned satellite network and full-fledged match to Starlink, which is only expected to come online in 2030. Commission spokesperson Thomas Regnier confirmed in a statement that it is “currently in talks with Ukraine to fully associate” the country with the EU’s Govsatcom program. “The war in Ukraine shows that our security also depends on space. And the EU has been doing quite a lot. We are ready to support Ukraine where we can support Ukraine,” he added. Calls to crack down on dependence on foreign providers and boost alternatives to Starlink also come at a time when legislators are negotiating a series of laws that could tame Musk’s ambitions in Europe. “Ukraine’s dependence on Starlink highlights the vulnerability of European defence systems that rely on U.S. technology, Another reminder that Europe must reduce its dangerous technological dependencies — ASAP,” center-right Finnish lawmaker Aura Salla said on social media. Policymakers across Europe have been joining forces to curb Starlink’s dominance in low-Earth orbit, where satellites fly close to Earth to deliver faster connections. “As legislators, we must ensure that European operators are well positioned in the market and limit the dominance of foreign players,” German center-left lawmaker Matthias Ecke said. In Brussels, lawmakers, including Ecke, are backing European telcos gunning for prized satellite frequencies, currently licensed to U.S. operators until next year and eyed by Starlink. Meanwhile, Zelenskyy said Ukraine was working bilaterally with EU countries to secure more capabilities, citing France. He also expressed hopes that Starlink restrictions could be lifted. “My partners told me there were signals from the White House that they would return these capabilities.” SpaceX — Starlink’s parent company — didn’t respond to POLITICO’s request for comment.

LONDON — Keir Starmer has successfully won Donald Trump back around to supporting his controversial Chagos Islands deal, rescuing a key foreign policy goal that the U.S. president blasted last month as an “act of GREAT STUPIDITY.” The U.K. prime minister’s plan to hand over sovereignty of the archipelago in the Indian Ocean to Mauritius while retaining use of a joint U.S.-U.K. military base on the island of Diego Garcia was thrown into disarray a fortnight ago by the president’s surprise criticism. But Trump wrote Thursday on Truth Social, the same platform where he had unleashed his criticism, that he now understands it’s the best deal Britain was able to get after he had “very productive discussions” with Starmer — though he warned he wouldn’t hesitate to get involved if he felt U.S. interests were at risk.   “If the lease deal, sometime in the future, ever falls apart, or anyone threatens or endangers U.S. operations and forces at our Base, I retain the right to Militarily secure and reinforce the American presence in Diego Garcia,” the president added.  To the ire of British officials, Reform UK leader Nigel Farage and the Conservatives’ Kemi Badenoch had lobbied Trump to oppose the deal, which will cost Britain around £3.4 billion over the initial 99-year lease.  But official diplomatic channels have won the debate, and Starmer will take Trump’s backing as a modicum of sweet relief during a dire moment in which his authority is being questioned. Government officials, speaking under condition of anonymity to avoid further fraying diplomatic relations, had ascribed Trump’s Jan. 20 criticism of the Chagos deal to Starmer’s public defense of Greenland from American threats to seize the Danish territory. Starmer broached the agreement with Trump in a call over the weekend, as well as during another on Thursday.  Downing Street’s account of the call said the leaders had “agreed on the importance of the deal to secure the joint U.K.–U.S. base on Diego Garcia, which remains vital to shared security interests.” The men also agreed that both sides would “continue to work closely on the implementation of the deal,” the statement added.

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

KYIV — Ukraine and Russia agreed to swap 314 prisoners of war during the latest round of talks in Abu Dhabi on Thursday, U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff said. The trilateral discussions ended Thursday afternoon, with Ukrainian, American and Russian negotiating teams working together and in special subgroups for two days. In a post on X, Witkoff described the latest trilateral negotiating round as “detailed and productive.” “While significant work remains, steps like this demonstrate that sustained diplomatic engagement is delivering tangible results and advancing efforts to end the war in Ukraine,” Witkoff said, adding that discussions will continue in the coming weeks. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy confirmed that the PoW exchange, the first in five months, happened on Thursday. “We are bringing our people home — 157 Ukrainians. Warriors from the Armed Forces, National Guard, and the State Border Guard Service. Soldiers, sergeants, and officers. Along with our defenders, civilians are also returning. Most of them had been in captivity since 2022,” Zelenskyy said in a post on X. Russia also received the return of 157 of its PoWs. The last prisoner exchange between Russia and Ukraine was in October, when the sides swapped 185 soldiers and 20 civilians. Zelenskyy explained that Moscow had halted the swaps. “They are not particularly interested in exchanging people, because they do not feel that it gives them anything. They believe it benefits us. But I think they should also be thinking about their own people — their own soldiers,” Zelenskyy told reporters in Kyiv last week. Since Kyrylo Budanov, former head of Ukrainian military intelligence, joined the negotiating group, Russia began to take the negotiations more seriously, Zelenskyy said last week. “I believe it was a higher-level delegation than before, considering what the people who represented Russia this time are responsible for. We saw this as a more serious opportunity for discussion,” Zelenskyy said. “Because one thing is when you come only to receive information and deliver some fantastical historical briefing from a playbook that everyone has heard many times before. And another thing is when you move closer to real steps to end the war,” Zelenskyy added. Territorial issues remain the most difficult issue in the negotiations. Russia demands that Ukraine withdraw from the remaining 30 percent of Donbas, Kyiv’s most secure stronghold in the region. Kyiv insists everyone should stand where they are, calling it enough of a compromise. “The American side understands this and says that there is a compromise solution, proposing a free economic zone. However, the issue of control over any territory — including a free economic zone — must also be fair. Specifically, it must involve Ukraine maintaining control over the territories that we currently control,” Zelenskyy said last week.

Listen on * Spotify * Apple Music * Amazon Music Während Friedrich Merz in Riad und Katar wieder in die Rolle des „Außenkanzlers“ schlüpft, herrscht in Berlin politische Windstille. Doch hinter dem „Winteridyll“ an der Spree brodelt es: Landtagswahlkämpfe und aufgeschobene Reformen setzen die Koalition unter Druck. Rasmus Buchsteiner analysiert, ob die Regierung gerade wirklich arbeitet oder nur eine riskante Pause einlegt, bevor das „Reformfenster“ im Sommer endgültig zuschlägt. Im 200-Sekunden-Interview geht Juso-Chef Philipp Türmer zum Angriff auf die CDU über und warnt vor einem „Großangriff auf das soziale Sicherungssystem“. Er stellt klar, warum die SPD keinen „dänischen Weg“ einschlagen sollte, während die eigene Partei am Wochenende den Prozess zum neuen Grundsatzprogramm starten wird. ⁠Neue Recherchen von Frederik Schindler von WELT⁠ decken eine für die AfD-Chefin Alice Weidel sehr unliebsame Personalie in Bayern auf: Der Bundessprecher der Identitären Bewegung ist Mitglied der AfD. Ein direkter Bruch der Unvereinbarkeitsliste, die Weidel in Erklärungsnot bringt und die interne Machtfrage zwischen Berlin und den Landesverbänden neu entfacht. Und: ein kurzes Gespräch mit Cathrin Wilhelm von ⁠Avilus⁠ über die Anwendung von Drohnen, die vielen Deutschen so bisher unbekannt sein dürfte. Das Berlin Playbook als Podcast gibt es jeden Morgen ab 5 Uhr. Gordon Repinski und das POLITICO-Team liefern Politik zum Hören – kompakt, international, hintergründig. Für alle Hauptstadt-Profis: Der Berlin Playbook-Newsletter bietet jeden Morgen die wichtigsten Themen und Einordnungen. ⁠Jetzt kostenlos abonnieren.⁠ Mehr von Host und POLITICO Executive Editor Gordon Repinski: Instagram: ⁠@gordon.repinski⁠ | X: ⁠@GordonRepinski⁠. POLITICO Deutschland – ein Angebot der Axel Springer Deutschland GmbH Axel-Springer-Straße 65, 10888 Berlin Tel: +49 (30) 2591 0 information@axelspringer.de⁠ Sitz: Amtsgericht Berlin-Charlottenburg, HRB 196159 B USt-IdNr: DE 214 852 390 Geschäftsführer: Carolin Hulshoff Pol, Mathias Sanchez Luna

BRUSSELS ― The EU’s conservatives are convening for the second time in a week as they increase internal coordination after a tough first year of Ursula von der Leyen’s second term at the head of the European Commission. After last weekend’s meeting of European People’s Party leaders in Croatia, this week sees EPP members of the European Parliament gather in Slovenia, where they will discuss policy with the bloc’s commissioners in charge of defense and regional development. The party has powerful national chiefs, including German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, but is up against surging opposition figures across the political spectrum. “Populists on the left and right oppose everything without proposing anything,” said European People’s Party Vice Chair Romana Tomc in a statement. The party “will discuss who we will work with to deliver real change in Europe.” Von der Leyen has seen off four no-confidence votes since the start of her second term on Dec. 1, 2024 while the EPP has been boosted since May by the return of a German chancellor from its ranks. But the group’s traditional Brussels allies from the center left and liberal center have distanced themselves from some EPP policies, especially those supported by the far right such as the rollback of EU green rules, including cuts to corporate sustainability and deforestation legislation. The Ljubljana meeting is another example of how Manfred Weber, chair of the EPP and head of its European Parliament faction, is trying to tighten decision-making and bring more central control over policy in the Commission, the Parliament and the Council of the EU, which represents national governments, according to two EPP officials. Weber wants to use the different iterations of EPP gatherings to increase the number of touch points for center-right leaders and senior EU officials to meet and coordinate policies ahead of big moments on the calendar, they said. Next week’s EU diplomacy is particularly intense, with a meeting of defense ministers in Brussels on Wednesday, a summit of EU leaders in the Belgian countryside on Thursday, and the Munich Security Conference, which brings together some of the world’s most powerful decisionmakers, from Friday to Sunday. COMING TOGETHER The EPP is well represented in Brussels, with von der Leyen and Parliament President Roberta Metsola its two leading figures. In addition to regular pre-summit gatherings, where EPP leaders meet on the morning of European Councils, Weber has inaugurated annual meetings of national chiefs, of which last weekend’s gathering in Zagreb was the most recent. “The more coordination we can have between various groups of people, the better,” said an EU official granted anonymity to speak freely, like others in this story. “Because then you have the relationships and the format to stop the wheels coming off completely.” At informal dinners held on the Tuesday ahead of the Parliament’s plenary session in Strasbourg, the EPP’s commissioners, among them von der Leyen, as well as economy chief Valdis Dombrovskis and tech boss Henna Virkkunen, sit down with Weber and his Parliament vice presidents. These dinners “were set at the beginning of the term and structured in a way that allowed [the party] to have greater influence on the work of the Commission,” said an EPP official. “The goal — I won’t hide it — is to know in advance the direction the Commission is heading and to have an impact already at the preparatory stage, even before proposals are formally presented,” they added. IRONCLAD SECURITY The summit of MEPs in the Slovene capital, which kicked off Wednesday and runs until Friday, is aimed at what the organizers call “strategic planning.” Party members also pointed to the increasingly important role of policy position papers that the EPP now regularly publishes. | Marko Perkov/AFP via Getty Images In Zagreb last weekend, leaders agreed to work on making the EU’s mutual-defense clause operational, and tasked two national leaders, as yet unidentified, with spelling out how to make it an ironclad security guarantee. It’s never been used because NATO has a similar provision, but leaders are worried U.S. President Donald Trump will make that obsolete. Such moves highlight how the EPP is trying to influence wider EU policy and get ahead of security or economic decisions taken by the Commission or by leaders, where opinions from parties opposed to the center right have to be taken into account. Party members also pointed to the increasingly important role of policy position papers that the EPP now regularly publishes, which give direction to the party’s senior officials and leaders. The push to water down planks of the Green Deal, as well as an ongoing deregulation drive, both originated in policy papers drafted by the EPP following coordination meetings, two party officials said. In its 2024 manifesto the party called for the creation of a defense commissioner role, which von der Leyen made a reality when she took office. The party also called for deregulation and watering down the EU Green Deal, which became a central part of von der Leyen’s policy agenda during her second mandate. Gerardo Fortuna contributed reporting.

BERLIN — A German parliamentary delegation visiting Washington late last month saw center-left MPs frozen out by the U.S. State Department, people familiar with the matter told POLITICO. German MPs refused to take part in the meeting after their colleagues were blocked — a highly unusual step. U.S. authorities insisted there had been no effort to favor right-leaning parties and that they speak to a “wide spectrum” of politicians during such visits. In a separate encounter, an MP with the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD), Peter Felser, who was also part of the delegation, arranged a meeting at the Pentagon where he talked with a U.S. official about Germany’s defense posture. The clash over the visit comes in the wake of a new National Security Strategy from December that harshly criticized U.S.-allied nations in Europe for their efforts to rein in far-right parties; denounced their high rates of migration; and called for the continent to “correct its current trajectory.” The German lawmakers were supposed to be on a routine visit, during which they would take part in the German-American Dialogue on China. The delegation included two senior lawmakers from Germany’s governing coalition — Norbert Röttgen with the center-right Christian Democrats and Siemtje Möller for the center-left Social Democrats (SPD), as well as MPs from the opposition center-left Greens and the AfD. The plan had been for lawmakers from all parties to attend a meeting with Brendan Hanrahan, a senior official at the State Department’s Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs, on Jan. 21 before the China event. Five people with knowledge of the matter, who spoke to POLITICO on condition of anonymity, said the planned meeting collapsed after State Department officials told the German Embassy in Washington that it was prepared to receive only Christian Democratic and AfD lawmakers, excluding the SPD and the Greens. Röttgen rejected that format, saying he would not proceed without his coalition partner, four people familiar with the matter said.  It’s unclear, however, who ultimately cancelled the appointment. In response to POLITICO’s request for comment, Germany’s foreign ministry declined to explain the cancellation, saying only that the State Department had called off the meeting for “scheduling reasons.” The State Department denied any preference for particular parties during delegation visits, saying in a statement that “senior State Department officials engage regularly with representatives from a wide spectrum of political parties and leaders, and we do not comment on private diplomatic meetings.” Norbert Röttgen, who rejected the meeting format, saying he would not proceed without his coalition partner, four people familiar with the matter said. | Elisa Schu/picture alliance via Getty Images Such parliamentary trips are normally built around engagement with both sitting governments and opposition — and the episode left German officials privately uneasy about how parts of the Trump administration are approaching Europe. Möller and Röttgen nonetheless went on to hold meetings with U.S. lawmakers and officials at the National Security Council during their visit. Röttgen’s office did not immediately respond to POLITICO’s request for comment.  In a statement to POLITICO, Möller said the episode showed that “even a year into office, parts of the U.S. administration still lack clear coordination and reliable alignment,” but stressed that talks with administration officials and Republican members of Congress nevertheless took place. PENTAGON BRIEFING In the separately arranged Pentagon visit, the AfD’s Felser held a one-on-one meeting with David A. Baker, the deputy assistant secretary of defense for European and NATO policy.  Felser had requested the appointment roughly two weeks earlier through the German embassy, people familiar with the arrangements on both the U.S. and German side said. The conversation focused on the new U.S. National Security Strategy and Washington’s expectations that Germany take on a greater leadership role in European defense. The AfD has surged in popularity and is now Germany’s most popular party, according to POLITICO’s poll of polls. Last year, Vice President JD Vance sharply criticized European centrists for excluding the far right and later met with AfD national co-leader Alice Weidel.  Felser told POLITICO that Washington’s willingness to meet him showed the U.S. was not “falling for” what he called the coalition’s attempt to sideline the AfD, adding that the “channel of conversation” the U.S. had opened amounted to “important support” for his party. Speaking about the Pentagon meeting, a Department of Defense official said that its officials “meet with allied parliamentarians regularly to discuss defense issues of mutual concern.” Both Felser and Gerald Otten, the other AfD politician who was present in Washington with the parliamentary delegation, said that U.S. officials had over the last months actively reached out to their party to establish whether future cooperation would be viable. For now, the conversations revolved around pinning down the AfD’s positions on a range of issues that included the EU, NATO, and the promise of NATO member countries to increase defense spending to 5 percent of GDP.  Back in Berlin, Röttgen told reporters he had been surprised at what he described as the “entrenched, virtually impenetrable worldview” of members of the pro-Trump MAGA camp — including the diplomats, politicians and lobbyists the German delegation had met over a lunch in the U.S. That was something, Röttgen said, he had “never encountered in all the years I have traveled to Washington.”

Finland has urged U.S. officials not to describe future security pledges to a postwar Ukraine as “Article 5-like,” implying that doing so could undercut the mutual defense clause at the heart of the NATO military alliance, according to a State Department cable obtained by POLITICO. The Jan. 20 cable hints at worries in some corners over the labels used during peace talks between Kyiv and Moscow. They show how sensitive some phrases can be in the national security realm, even when officials are merely trying to offer an analogy to various audiences. According to the cable, sent from the U.S. Embassy in Helsinki to Washington, Finnish Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen discussed the issue on Jan. 19 with U.S. Reps. Jack Bergman (R-Mich.) and Sarah Elfreth (D-Md.), both of whom are members of the House Armed Services Committee. Valtonen underscored Finland’s view that Russia is a “long-term strategic threat” and cautioned against a “weak” peace deal for Ukraine that would hinder its ability to defend itself against future Russian aggression, the cable states. But Valtonen cautioned against any suggestions of “Article 5-like” security guarantees in a postwar Ukraine, the cable adds. She warned that it risked conflating NATO’s Article 5 guarantees with whatever bilateral promises are made to Ukraine. It also quotes her as saying there should be a “firewall” between NATO and future security guarantees to Ukraine. Finland’s defense minister made similar points in a later meeting, according to the cable. Article 5 is a critical clause in the NATO pact that means an armed attack on one member of the 32-member alliance will be treated as an attack on all members. NATO has invoked the article only once: after Islamist terrorists attacked the U.S. on Sept. 11, 2001. The documents’ contents offer insight into concerns voiced by other Finnish leaders who have said that, while they want to help Ukraine protect itself, the concept of a security “guarantee” is a more serious matter they’re not ready to agree to just yet. A Finnish official said Valtonen’s office wouldn’t comment on confidential discussions, though underscored Helsinki’s long-standing goal of eventually accepting Ukraine into the NATO alliance. “Finland’s objective is to ensure that Ukraine receives the strongest possible security arrangements and guarantees in support of a sustainable and lasting peace,” the official said, who was granted anonymity to speak about sensitive policy matters. “Finland’s position is that Ukraine’s future lies within NATO.” Former NATO officials and analysts said the cable reflects growing concerns in various capitals about how engaging with a postwar Ukraine could affect individual countries in the long run. One potential problem is that “using the term Article 5 in other contexts implies NATO involvement that is not in fact a part of any of these proposed arrangements,” said Edward Wrong, a former NATO official. “Finland and many other NATO members want to ensure it is understood that Article 5 is unique to NATO.” The State Department declined to comment. Elfreth, one of the U.S. lawmakers Valtonen met with, did not address the session with the Finnish foreign minister directly, but said in a statement: “From our many meetings, it was clear to me that our NATO allies, new and old, are committed to advancing shared goals of defending our partners from Russian and other adversarial influences. Bergman declined to comment. Using Article 5 as a parallel has multiple upsides and downsides, especially given the range of attitudes toward Ukraine in NATO, the former officials and analysts said. That’s further complicated by the likelihood that individual countries, or select groups of countries — but not NATO itself — will offer Ukraine security aid in the near future. One challenge is that by referring to Article 5, even with the “like” attached to it, national leaders could hand political ammunition to opposition groups, said Josh Shifrinson, a scholar with the University of Maryland, College Park, who advocates for a more restrained foreign policy. There’s also the possibility that framing a security pledge to Ukraine as “Article 5-like” will entice Russia to test what that truly means. If Russia stages some sort of an armed attack and the countries backing Ukraine struggle to respond, that could raise questions about the strength of NATO’s Article 5, said Rachel Ellehuus, a former Biden administration Defense Department official assigned to NATO. On top of that, other members of NATO, especially those in Europe, are acutely aware of President Donald Trump’s dim views of the alliance. They are reacting to his demands that they step up defense spending and have taken on the lion’s share of aid to Ukraine. Given economic uncertainties in the years ahead, just how much they can support Ukraine is in question. “I’m guessing the Finns don’t want to overpromise and under-deliver,” Ellehuus said. Spokespeople for NATO declined to comment. Finland is one of NATO’s newest members, having joined after Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. The Finnish foreign minister comes across in the cable as tough on Russia, a country with which Finland shares an 830-mile border. “We should not be naïve in thinking they will change, especially if sanctions get [lifted]” and Russia becomes “empowered politically and economically,” Valtonen is quoted as saying. Although there are ongoing talks among the U.S., Ukraine and Russia in various formats, Russian leader Vladimir Putin has not committed to a substantial cease-fire and has made demands that many Ukrainians consider unacceptable for a peace deal. Victor Jack contributed to this report from Brussels.

PARIS — Prosecutors in Paris opened an investigation Wednesday into allegations that Chinese citizens had sought to capture sensitive French government and military data using Starlink. “Four people were brought before the investigating judge for indictment, with two of them being remanded in custody,” the public prosecutor’s office said in a statement. Investigators are looking into possible acts of “delivering information to a foreign power or a company or organization under foreign control, or to their agents, in a manner likely to harm the fundamental interests of [France],” the statement added — a crime that can lead to up to 15 years in prison. The prosecutor’s office said police had been notified last week that the arrested pair were suspected of conducting satellite interception operations from an AirBnB they had rented in the Gironde region, near the city of Bordeaux, after neighbors noticed that “a satellite dish approximately two meters in diameter” had been installed and local residents were experiencing internet outages. “The device installed was used to illegally intercept satellite downlinks, including exchanges between military entities of vital importance,” the statement added. On their visa application to enter France, the suspects said they worked for a company that focuses on “smart beams, signal recognition and satellite networks, and cooperates with universities establishing military-oriented projects.” POLITICO has reached out to the Chinese Embassy in Paris for a comment.

BRUSSELS — Ukraine’s war chest stands to get a vital cash injection after EU envoys agreed on a €90 billion loan to finance Kyiv’s defense against Russia, the Cypriot Council presidency said on Wednesday. “The new financing will help ensure the country’s fierce resilience in the face of Russian aggression,” Cypriot Finance Minister Makis Keravnos said in a statement. Without the loan Ukraine had risked running out of cash by April, which would have been catastrophic for its war effort and could have crippled its negotiating efforts during ongoing American-backed peace talks with Russia. EU lawmakers still have some hurdles to clear, such as agreeing on the conditions Ukraine must satisfy to get a payout, before Brussels can raise money on the global debt market to finance the loan — which is backed by the EU’s seven-year budget. A big point of dispute among EU countries was how Ukraine will be able to spend the money, and who will benefit. One-third of the money will go for normal budgetary needs and the rest for defense. France led efforts to get Ukraine to spend as much of that as possible with EU defense companies, mindful that the bloc’s taxpayers are footing the €3 billion annual bill to cover interest payments on the loan. However, Germany, the Netherlands and the Scandinavian nations pushed to give Ukraine as much flexibility as possible. The draft deal, seen by POLITICO, will allow Ukraine to buy key weapons from third countries — including the U.S. and the U.K. — either when no equivalent product is available in the EU or when there is an urgent need, while also strengthening the oversight of EU states over such derogations. The list of weapons Kyiv will be able to buy outside the bloc includes air and missile defense systems, fighter aircraft ammunition and deep-strike capabilities. If the U.K. or other third countries like South Korea, which have signed security deals with the EU and have helped Ukraine, want to take part in procurement deals beyond that, they will have to contribute financially to help cover interest payments on the loan. The European Parliament must now examine the changes the Council has made to the legal text. | Philipp von Ditfurth/picture alliance via Getty Images The text also mentions that the contribution of non-EU countries — to be agreed in upcoming negotiations with the European Commission — should be proportional to how much their defense firms could gain from taking part in the scheme. Canada, which already has a deal to take part in the EU’s separate €150 billion SAFE loans-for-weapons scheme, will not have to pay extra to take part in the Ukraine program, but would have detail the products that could be procured by Kyiv. NEXT STEPS Now that ambassadors have reached a deal, the European Parliament must examine the changes the Council has made to the legal text before approving the measure. If all goes well, Kyiv will get €45 billion from the EU this year in tranches. The remaining cash will arrive in 2027. Ukraine will only repay the money if Moscow ends its full-scale invasion and pays war reparations. If Russia refuses, the EU will consider raiding the Kremlin’s frozen assets lying in financial institutions across the bloc. While the loan will keep Ukrainian forces in the fight, the amount won’t cover Kyiv’s total financing needs — even with another round of loans, worth $8 billion, expected from the International Monetary Fund. By the IMF’s own estimates, Kyiv will need at least €135 billion to sustain its military and budgetary needs this year and next. Meanwhile, U.S. and EU officials are working on a plan to rebuild Ukraine that aims to attract $800 billion in public and private funds over 10 years. For that to happen, the eastern front must first fall silent — a remote likelihood at this point. Veronika Melkozerova contributed reporting from Kyiv.