Tag - Skills

UK rejoins EU’s Erasmus exchange scheme after Brexit hiatus
LONDON — British students will once again be able to take part in the EU’s Erasmus+ exchange scheme from January 2027 — following a six-year hiatus due to Brexit. U.K. ministers say they have secured a 30 percent discount on payments to re-enter the program that strikes “a fair balance between our contribution and the benefits” it offers. The move is one of the first tangible changes out of Keir Starmer’s EU “reset,” which is designed to smooth the harder edges off Boris Johnson’s Brexit settlement while staying outside the bloc’s orbit. In an announcement on Wednesday Brussels and London also confirmed they were formally beginning negotiations on U.K. re-entry into the EU’s internal market for electricity. Both sides hope the move, which was called for by industry in both sides of the Channel, will cut energy bills while also making it easier to invest in North Sea green energy projects — which have been plagued by Brexit complications. They also pledged to finish ongoing talks on linking the U.K. and EU carbon trading systems, as well as a new food and drink (SPS) deal, by the time they meet for an EU-U.K. summit in 2026. The planned meeting, which will take place in Brussels, does not yet have a date but is expected around the same time as this year’s May gathering in London. The announcements give more forward momentum to the “reset,” which faltered earlier this month after failing to reach an agreement on British membership of an EU defense industry financing program, SAFE. The two sides could not agree on the appropriate level of U.K. financial contribution. The pledge to finalize carbon trading (ETS) linkage next year is significant because it will help British businesses avoid a new EU carbon border tax — CBAM — which starts from Jan. 1 2026. While the tax, which charges firms for the greenhouse gas emissions in their products, begins on Jan. 1, payments are not due until 2027, by which time the U.K. is expected to be exempt. But it is not yet clear whether British firms will have to make back payments on previous imports once the deal is secured, and there is no sign of any deal to bridge the gap. WIDENING HORIZONS EU Relations Minister Nick Thomas-Symonds, who negotiated the agreement, said the move was “a huge win for our young people” and would break down barriers and widen horizons so that “everyone, from every background, has the opportunity to study and train abroad.” European Parliament President Roberta Metsola welcomes British Minister for the Constitution and European Union Relations Nick Thomas-Symonds. | Ronald Wittek/EPA “This is about more than just travel: it’s about future skills, academic success, and giving the next generation access to the best possible opportunities,” he said. “Today’s agreements prove that our new partnership with the EU is working. We have focused on the public’s priorities and secured a deal that puts opportunity first.” The expected cost of the U.K.’s membership of the Erasmus+ program in 2027 will be £570 million. Skills Minister Jacqui Smith said Erasmus+ membership is “about breaking down barriers to opportunity, giving learners the chance to build skills, confidence and international experience that employers value.” Liberal Democrat Universities Spokesperson Ian Sollom also welcomed U.K. re-entry into the exchange scheme but said it should be a “first step” in a closer relationship with the EU. “This is a moment of real opportunity and a clear step towards repairing the disastrous Conservative Brexit deal,” he said. “However while this is a welcome breakthrough, it must be viewed as a crucial first step on a clear roadmap to a closer relationship with Europe. Starting with negotiating a bespoke UK-EU customs union, and committing to a youth mobility scheme for benefit of the next generation.”
UK
Energy
Borders
Defense
Skills
Inside Martin Selmayr’s conclave of catastrophe
In the secretive cloisters of the Vatican, where bishops and cardinals plot and scheme, Martin Selmayr was seen as a natural (for a Protestant, at least). But the man who once ran the European Commission with an iron grip devoted his best work to charting his course back to the Berlaymont. However, his latest scheme for ending his effective exile in Rome, where he is EU ambassador to the Holy See, and returning to Brussels seems to have come apart. The job that looked set to be his — deputy secretary-general of the European External Action Service (EEAS), a new role strong-arming EU leaders into agreeing on foreign policy — seemed ideal. But it was clumsy politicking that proved to be the downfall of the veteran German civil servant. According to three officials, granted anonymity to talk about the backroom dealings, `Selmayr looks set to stay in Rome for the foreseeable future after opposition from the top of the European Commission sank his bid, particularly because he has so far declined to take an alternative role in the Belgian capital. The scheming came to a head at a meeting of the College of Commissioners on Oct. 21, when a conclave of Ursula von der Leyen allies proposed that Selmayr be given the role of special envoy for religious freedoms, a job that would have brought him back to Brussels but in a much less high-profile role than the one at the EEAS. The plan was drawn up because of Selmayr’s very public maneuvering, which spooked some national capitals, according to those in the room. “This was a way to say OK, if he wants to come back to Brussels, here’s how you do it,” said one of the EU officials of the offer for the religious freedom envoy role. However, at a College of Commissioners meeting earlier this week, Selmayr was not put forward for the role of religious freedom envoy either. “This was the only job open to him,” said the official. “If he doesn’t want that, he stays in Rome.” Selmayr has declined to comment publicly throughout the process. DOMINUS VOBISCUM During his time as chief of staff to former Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker, Selmayr gained a reputation for ruthless efficiency. He was also branded the “Monster of the Berlaymont” for his hard-nosed tactics. Many imagined Selmayr’s 2019 departure, designed to allay fears about German over-representation and give new President von der Leyen a clean slate to govern, would be the end of his time in Brussels. However, Selmayr’s irrepressible energy and intelligence made him stand out even from Rome, where he made a splash entertaining dignitaries, cardinals and other Vatican potentates from his lavish HQ abutting the ancient Baths of Caracalla. During his time as chief of staff to former Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker, Selmayr gained a reputation for ruthless efficiency. | Pool photo by Ludovic Marin/EPA “That someone who’s been a political animal in Brussels can fit in here and earn respect in the Vatican, that speaks to his qualities,” said one emmissary who got to know Selmayr well and was granted anonymity to speak freely. “I’ve seen him leading the room at EU ambassadors’ meetings; he was charming, suave, and very well-informed.” Also tasked with representing the EU in talks with the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization, diplomats said Selmayr provided an immediate boost to the bloc’s standing, turning his Brussels-honed skills to the issues at hand. Clerics and seasoned attachés alike were awed by how much this establishment creature knew about their cloistered Catholic world, with one pointing out that he appeared to enjoy the Vatican brief more than he was supposed to — given he was officially supposed to prioritize the UN part of the job. A diplomatic insider, meanwhile, said Selmayr seemed overqualified for the ambassadorship. “He is quite up for scheming, which is fun, but scheming about multilateral agriculture issues is hardly high geopolitics. You can tell he wants to be more forceful and make stuff happen quickly, but gets that isn’t how it works here … he does the job, it just isn’t a very taxing job.” SEDE VACANTE The sight of one of the EU’s most accomplished backroom operators languishing in the Vatican presented a clear opportunity for the EU’s top diplomat, Kaja Kallas, and her allies. For months, the former Estonian prime minister has been locked in a power struggle with national capitals over flagship policies such as sanctioning Israel and relations with U.S. President Donald Trump. Many imagined Selmayr’s 2019 departure, designed to give new President von der Leyen a clean slate to govern, would be the end of his time in Brussels. | Ronald Wittek/EPA Kallas has also been in an increasingly bitter standoff with von der Leyen and her own all-powerful German head of cabinet, Selmayr’s successor, Björn Seibert. “Kaja wants her own Björn,” said a third diplomat, “and that’s Martin.” But there were concerns that unleashing Selmayr’s scheming in Brussels could worsen the already tense political landscape. “The only similarities between Björn and Martin are that they’re both very smart and they’re both from Germany,” said the senior EU official, arguing that Seibert strives for loyalty and quiet competence while Selmayr is a political animal with few such scruples. “People think he’d be a kind of monster under the bed for von der Leyen — really, he’d be the monster under the bed for Kallas.” CARDINALES ELECTORES A Selmayr return to the EEAS would have been controversial because of his reputation, but the pieces were never really in place, according to Günther Oettinger, who served as Germany’s European commissioner from 2010 until 2019, including the period when Selmayr was at the peak of his powers as secretary-general of the European Commission. “The preparatory work was not convincing,” Oettinger said. “For such a senior post in the EEAS, you need the full backing of several member states: because he’s German, the full backing of the German government, in addition to France, Poland and so on.” A Selmayr return to the EEAS would have been controversial because of his reputation, but the pieces were never really in place, according to Günther Oettinger. | Stephanie Lecocq/EPA “To have the idea is the first step, but to not procure the full backing of member states — I’d say this was a mistake of Madam Kallas,” said Oettinger. Diplomats and officials who spoke to POLITICO said key countries were not asked about a Selmayr return or kept informed on the process. There was also division in Germany over a potential reappearance of Selmayr. Germany’s EU Affairs Minister Gunther Krichbaum told POLITICO in late October that he would “very much welcome” Selmayr returning to the fray in a senior role, sparking an immediate rebuke from his own government. HABEMUS PLAN-AM The high-handed scheming on Selmayr’s future has now alienated even the faith community that he had worked hard to build bridges with. “It’s a bit upsetting that this position [special envoy for religious freedoms] is being politicized, it’s not what Church has asked for,” said Manuel Barrios, who lobbies on behalf of Europe’s bishops’ conferences in Brussels. “We’ve been back and forth some times — a lot of parties have asked for this already, so it’s a bit upsetting that this is being used as a political fight. It seems von der Leyen is not very interested — neither her nor her head of cabinet.” Kaja Kallas has also been in an increasingly bitter standoff with von der Leyen and her own all-powerful German head of cabinet, Selmayr’s successor, Björn Seibert. | Olivier Hoslet/EPA The Commission is also under fire from civil society groups over fears that jobs are being stitched up behind closed doors by its gray cardinals. In a letter to von der Leyen, Humanists International warned that the role of the envoy is too important to play politics with. Officials, they say, should put forward “a transparent and accountable selection process, which should, at a minimum, include public lists of candidates and criteria as well as the meaningful consultation of Parliament and civil society.” For now, the German apparatchik is pushing on with his plans undeterred. “Mr. Selmayr successfully completed the application process at the EEAS last week,” said a person with knowledge of his application. “Whether he will be able to take up this position in the near future or will continue to serve as EU Ambassador to the United Nations in Rome and to the Holy See must now be decided jointly by the EU High Representative and the President of the Commission ‘in the interest of the service.'” But, as Selmayr’s best-laid plans come up against those of the EU’s leadership, all he and his allies can do is double down on their plotting and hope they can do it better than his rivals. “He’s eminently qualified,” said a fourth diplomat. “If he doesn’t get the job, it’s down to politics.” Gabriel Gavin reported from Paris. Ben Munster reported from Brussels. Hannah Roberts reported from Rome. Hans von der Burchard reported from Berlin.
Politics
Energy
Agriculture
Skills
Foreign policy
Lithuania’s PM fires defense minister after military budget clash
Lithuania’s Prime Minister Inga Ruginienė has dismissed Defense Minister Dovilė Šakalienė after a massive bust-up over the Baltic country’s defense budget. The public rift saw Ruginienė last week criticizing fellow Social Democrat Šakalienė for lobbying on the budget behind the government’s back, as Vilnius considers how best to counter potential Russian aggression. Lithuania is one of the three Baltic nations neighboring Russia. It’s increasingly preparing for a potential attack from Moscow by boosting military expenditure and strengthening its borders to fend off an invasion. Šakalienė’s defense ministry had indicated that next year’s military budget would be lower than planned and reportedly sought to pressure the government to increase it during an unofficial meeting with influencers and journalists. “The events of recent weeks were really just the final straw,” the prime minister told reporters on Wednesday after meeting with President Gitanas Nausėda. “While this decision [to boot Šakalienė] came sooner than expected, it may have been unavoidable,” she said. In a scathing rebuke, Ruginienė cited dishonesty, “a complete lack of willingness to cooperate,” poor team management and “various small details” as reasons for dismissing Šakalienė. “It is unfortunate that I have to take this decision and it is certainly a challenging moment for me as Prime Minister,” Ruginienė said. Šakalienė said she’d resigned rather than being pushed out. “I kept my promise. The resignation letter was sent this morning at 10 a.m.” she said in a Facebook post, in which she acknowledged that working with her “was not for the faint-hearted.” “Just a month ago, I had hoped that we could work with the prime minister, but unfortunately, we cannot, as we have fundamentally different views on how to strengthen national defense,” she added. The government has proposed spending 5.38 percent of GDP on defense in 2026, but it still needs to be approved by the parliament. Šakalienė shared photos of budget slides presented at the government meeting on Oct. 1, allocating 4.87 percent of GDP to defense — and an email from the finance ministry on the evening of Oct. 14, the day of the unofficial meeting, which increased the defense budget to 5.38 percent of GDP. Asked whether the initial defense budget was indeed smaller, which triggered Šakalienė’s controversial lobbying session, Ruginienė said it was “strange to interpret draft versions.” Dovilė Šakalienė said she’d resigned rather than being pushed out. | Thomas Traasdahl/EPA “It doesn’t matter when you season the soup — what matters is the final result. The same applies to the budget: what counts is the final outcome, and that’s what’s important,” she said. This is the second ministerial exit since Ruginienė took office in August. Culture Minister Ignotas Adomavičius resigned after just one week in October, following public backlash and protests from Lithuania’s cultural community over the allocation of the related ministry to the populist party Dawn of Nemunas. The Social Democrats have since taken over the culture ministry and are currently searching for a new minister. Potential candidates for defense minister have already been discussed with the president, though Ruginienė has not released any names. Until a new minister is appointed, Interior Minister Vladislavas Kondratovičius will temporarily lead one of the Baltic country’s most strategic ministries. “It is especially important to select the right defense minister, since the defense budget is an absolute priority both for us and for the prime minister,” said Nausėda’s chief adviser on national security, Deividas Matulionis, calling the budget for defense “historical.” “This is not just an internal security issue; it is a matter of our international image. The future deployment of a German brigade and the presence of American troops depend on it. Everything is at stake,” he told reporters Wednesday. Šakalienė, in her Facebook post, said that the defense budget cannot be below 5.5 percent of GDP. “This year, the Ministry of Defense managed to secure 5.38 percent (after the well-known Oct. 14 meeting), but funding gaps remain, and some planned acquisitions will have to be canceled,” she said.
Politics
Conflict
Defense
Rights
Security
Nigel Farage’s party is trying to step out of his shadow. Can it?
BIRMINGHAM — It had suits, wonks, outriders, sponsors, lobbyists, receptions, and a rapidly-growing party flock. But Reform UK’s conference remained in many ways the Nigel Farage show. From the scrum around the populist leader to the teal “No. 10” football shirts in his name, Farage — a 30-year veteran of right-wing insurgency — dominated. He filled most of the hall at Birmingham’s National Exhibition Centre for his Friday speech, despite a last-minute timing change. Much of Reform’s runaway lead in U.K. opinion polls is down to one man’s charisma. “It’s like going on tour with the Pope,” said one party figure, granted anonymity (like other officials and politicians quoted in this piece) to speak candidly. But to survive in government, Reform will need more. And Farage, who turns 65 in 2029, knows it. He and his allies are now conspicuously trying to emphasize that Reform is not just about him. Attendees could barely move for talk of new party structures and policy fringes. Farage tries to farm out media interviews and visits to his allies, particularly his deputy Richard Tice and new Head of Policy Zia Yusuf (neither of whom have ruled out eyeing the job of chancellor). Yet Farage’s word is still gospel. The leader personally pushed to have Aseem Malhotra, an adviser to Trump’s Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr, on the conference’s main stage due to his links with the U.S. administration, one party figure said. Malhotra then used the platform to suggest Covid vaccinations may have caused King Charles’ cancer (Reform distanced itself from his comments). Like the MAGA movement — reflected in the conference’s “Make Britain Great Again” caps, stage pyrotechnics and talk of the death of the old right — Reform is still vested in an ultra-high-profile figurehead. But Britain does not have presidents, and Downing Street has far fewer political appointees than the White House. Reform must prepare for a system that is bigger than the principal. That begins, for now, with policy. THE SMALL TENT Reform now has three fully-fledged paid policy officials, said a party figure, including Simon Marcus, a former Tory councilor in London. This is a small number for a party hoping to reach government, though soon he will have more backup. Reform is recruiting at least four more paid policy officials, several officials told POLITICO, including two on central policy and one each for Scotland and Wales ahead of devolved elections in May 2026. There are unpaid officials too, such as Yusuf, and the party relies on enthusiastic volunteers. In Scotland, where the party does not yet have a paid policy official, party figures pointed to an unpaid activist as the main backroom thinker on policy (as part of a committee). Neil Hall/EPA Broadly speaking, though, the circle of people in the room for key decisions is small. As well as key elected representatives and Yusuf, Reform figures who were asked by POLITICO pointed to Farage’s Director of Communications and effectively his chief of staff Dan Jukes; long-time Farage ally and strategist Chris Bruni-Lowe; Director of Operations Aaron Lobo; and Reform Director of Communications Ed Sumner. A second Reform figure described Farage’s core team as “very tight.” A third Reform figure suggested four people plus Farage were in the room at key moments, adding: “Ultimately Nigel is the leader and he makes the decisions.” Yusuf told a conference event that Reform’s recent immigration policy — a sprawling pledge that would lead to around 600,000 deportations — was drawn up “entirely in-house.” On policy, though, Reform figures are keen to show that they know they’ll need a wider pool of thinkers. “Our biggest weakness is we have no experience in government,” said a fourth Reform figure. “We have no one that knows the ropes.” Sometimes it seems to show. Farage’s big announcement in his Friday speech, to stop migrant boat crossings in the English Channel “within two weeks of winning government,” became “within two weeks of legislation being passed” by the time he gave press interviews Saturday. Tory strategists are separately keen to pick at what they paint as fiscal incoherence in Farage’s call to ease a two-child limit on benefits — a pledge that emerged from his desire for more British babies — at the same time as “serious cuts” to the welfare budget. A fifth Reform figure argued the leader is a factor: “Nigel’s not a huge policy guy,” they said. “Nigel’s role is to drive the party forward, to inspire the ranks.” AND SO, ENTER THE WONKS Reform’s nine-member party board met for the first time last week. It consists of Farage, Yusuf, chairman David Bull, racehorse trainer Andrew Reid, the former leader of UKIP (Reform’s predecessor party) Paul Nuttall, ex-GB News presenter Darren Grimes, regional mayor Andrea Jenkyns, former Tory Greater Manchester mayoral candidate Dan Barker, and Farage’s former press chief Gawain Towler. Yusuf, who Farage named as head of policy on Friday, told a fringe event that board will have a “subordinate committee” that essentially “rubber-stamps” party policy. Then there is a nascent ecosystem of think tanks including the Reform-friendly Centre for a Better Britain (referred to verbally by supporters as CFABB). Its chief executive Jonathan Brown — Reform’s former chief operating officer — meets Tice roughly every couple of weeks, said a person with knowledge of the meetings. While the group declined to say who funds it, a document leaked to the Sunday Times suggested it wanted to raise more than £25 million by 2029 — much of it from the U.S. (A CFABB official insisted to POLITICO that all current donors are either British or reside in Britain.) The chair of its advisory board, James Orr, has been a friend of U.S. Vice President JD Vance since 2019. Neill Hall/EPA But CFABB also has a British flavor — as a home for Brexit warriors of old. Veteran Tory Euroskeptic John Redwood is helping with some of its work. Christopher Howarth, the former fixer for the Tory European Research Group, is one of its seven or so current staff. Brown is in a WhatsApp group with right-wing Conservative peers, including Boris Johnson’s former Brexit negotiator David Frost. And his fellow CBB director David Lilley — who has donated more than £250,000 to Reform — previously funded Johnson and the Vote Leave campaign. A CAST OF THOUSANDS Yusuf told members he will take the “best ideas” from right-wing think tanks — others include the Prosperity Institute (formerly known as Legatum) and the Taxpayers’ Alliance — at the same time as building out internal policy. But at other times they will disagree. Brown has also met Robert Jenrick, the ambitious Conservative shadow minister who is pushing on law and order. Reform is keen to stress that CFABB is independent of the party. Reform is involving its own MPs (Richard Tice, Lee Anderson and Sarah Pochin) in policy development, while Farage is also leaning on outsiders with real-world experience such as detective Colin Sutton and prison governor Vanessa Frake. Yusuf told a fringe event: “We have draughtsmen working on legislation. We will have thousands of pages of legislation ready to go.” Reform can rely too on its growing pool of elected officials in councils and mayoralties across England — expected to increase dramatically after May 2026 elections in Scotland and Wales. Yet this growing cast leaves some of Reform’s own foot soldiers in the dark. Helen Manson, interim chair of the South Cambridgeshire branch, told Yusuf — who focuses both on red meat policies such as migration and his personal interests like cryptocurrency — that she receives many questions on the doorstep about whether the party is ready for government. “We don’t know what Reform is doing. We can’t respond to that,” she said. Lobbyists at the conference for the first time felt similarly. One industry figure complained that Tice, when holding private business round tables, tends to lay out his “talking points” but does not respond well to challenge. A second said: “It was obvious that a small group of think tanks are currently the only engine room for ideas beyond Reform’s pet interests.” Speaking to POLITICO, Brown said: “You can’t really judge them on the policy for the next election because it’s early days. I think the idea is to build out a full and integrated policy platform and an implementation strategy before the next election.” But some senior Reform-linked figures resist opening the conversation too widely — as the center would lose control. Orr told a fringe event: “Don’t underestimate how much effect a small band of dedicated people in the cockpit of the nation can do.” Orr looked to an unlikely comparison — what he called Tony Blair’s “catastrophic and extremely consequential” Labour government in 1997. That, argued Orr, was run by “a gang of six … [and] they completely overturned the constitutional, legal, political and cultural landscape of the U.K. for 25 years. In fact, we’re going to spend the best part of the next 15 years trying to unravel it.” NO SUCCESSION PLAN? Small team or not, the importance of elevating the background players out of Farage’s shadow isn’t just desirable for Reform — it’s existential. When Farage denied on stage that his party is a “one-man band,” he used the example of the branded football shirts in the conference shop — pointing out that several other party figures had their names on shirts as well. Tellingly, when POLITICO visited the shop, only the “Farage” shirts were filling the shelves. An announcement that Farage was to sign shirts for 45 minutes (price for a signed shirt: £100) caused a jolt of excitement in the venue. More importantly, it was Farage’s return to the party last year that turbocharged its (already healthy) poll rating, and has senior Reform figures beginning to eye up which Whitehall department they would like to lead. Contrary to protestations by Farage’s allies, aides and the man himself, the party is still tied closely to him — to the point where some in Reform darkly wonder how the party would survive if he suddenly wasn’t on the scene. “If something happens [to Nigel] now, we’re fucked,” a Reform candidate in the last election said. In four years “maybe we’d be fine,” they said, but right now “there’s no one else with the charisma or the ability to pull people together.” Towler, his longtime former aide, has a more nuanced view. “There is nobody else in Britain who can do what he does,” he said, but “there is a bunch of driven people who want to change the country and I think they would still do it without him. It would be awful and it would be harder, but I really think the mood of the country is so febrile and so anti-the last two, that we need change. Nigel is a vector for that change — he’s not the only vector.” Farage is keen for the public to agree. He closed the conference by inviting all the main speakers for an on-stage singalong of the U.K’s national anthem led by the Greater Lincolnshire Mayor Andrea Jenkyns — who had earlier surprised attendees with a solo musical performance of her own-self written song Insomniac. The hope in Reform circles is that by boosting those around him, Farage will create figures substantial enough to be major players in a future government, while also reducing the party’s reliance on his oratory and leadership skills. “I think Reform is coming out of Nigel’s shadow to some extent,” said Brown. “All of a sudden there’s a raft of elected officials who are there. Are any of them Nigel yet? No, of course not. But Nigel has had 30 years so it’s very unfair to pick the consummate performer of his generation and say ‘why aren’t you like him?’ Nigel wasn’t like that in 2005.” Others point out that Farage, despite being electoral dynamite, remains a Marmite figure with harder-to-reach sections of the electorate. “Yes he’s a brilliant communicator and no one’s doubting that, but he’s a known quantity and a lot of voters don’t like him,” said one Labour Party official. Then there is the question of whether Farage — who spent years in lucrative TV work — really wants the grim responsibilities of being prime minister at all. His allies insist he does. Towler said: “He made a decision last year to get back involved. Is it his want, is it his ambition? Really, I don’t think it is. But does he think he’s the only person to break the duopoly of failure in this country? Yes. And he takes that responsibility deeply seriously.” Wherever things go from here, though, Farage remains a godhead for now — sometimes quite literally. “His body is stronger than anybody else’s,” said a sixth Reform figure, when asked about what the party would be without him. “He’s survived a plane crash and everything.” Some Reform figures are daring to dream of the party’s fortunes as similarly immortal. But things don’t always work out that way. John Johnston and Abby Wallace contributed reporting.
UK
Elections
Department
Media
opinion
Britain’s universities feel the heat of its migration culture war
LONDON — Thought writing a 10,000-word dissertation was tricky? Try managing Britain’s embattled university sector.  As students pack their bags, sort their kitchenware and prepare for the time of their lives at campuses across the U.K., university officials face the headache of keeping their struggling institutions economically viable — all while politicians take potshots at them. “The underlying financial settlement for universities is not really sustainable,” warned Universities UK International Director Jamie Arrowsmith, an organization representing 141 universities.  International students provide significant income to the sector by paying considerably higher tuition fees than domestic students. However, Labour’s bid to slash migration levels means international students are in the firing line. It’s a stark contrast from Tony Blair’s New Labour government in the 2000s, which was “actively encouraging the growth of the international student population,” according to Labour peer and former Universities Minister Margaret Hodge. She recalled writing to Blair espousing how this expansion would increase the U.K.’s soft power: “If you wanted to create good diplomatic connections and promote peace across the world, those student relationships paid off fantastically.” A string of policy changes has left institutions searching elsewhere for cash, as Prime Minister Keir Starmer focuses on disadvantaged British youngsters. A white paper due this fall will outline specific higher education reforms, including calls for universities to contribute more to economic growth. The sector warns it could all be undermined if the government keeps discouraging overseas students from coming to Britain. PULLING UP THE LADDER  Britain’s universities have an enviable reputation. The QS World University Rankings in June put 17 U.K. universities in the top 100, while a London Economics report calculated higher education contributed more than £265 billion in the 2021/22 academic year. It’s little wonder students across the globe want to study here. Anxious about populist parties like Reform UK, Tory and Labour governments have seen fewer foreign students as a way to get numbers down. | Richard Baker / In Pictures via Getty Images But while international students starting in 2021/22 brought net economic benefits of £37.4 billion, they’re also counted in immigration figures — and that’s a headache for the government. Anxious about populist parties like Reform UK, Tory and Labour administration have seen fewer foreign students as a way to get numbers down.  They were banned from bringing family members on all but post-graduate research routes back in January 2024. That decision by then-Conservative PM Rishi Sunak followed 135,788 visas being granted to dependents of foreign students in 2022, nearly nine times the 2019 figure. Arrowsmith said he understood why the policy was introduced, but warned it had hit “the U.K.’s attractiveness” to prospective foreign students, particularly when “other countries have had more open and welcoming policies over the last three to four years.” Home Office figures in October 2024 showed the effect — with an 89 percent drop in visa applications for dependents between July to September 2023 and the same period in 2024. Tory peer and former Universities Minister, David Willetts, said he understood concerns about dependents, but thought it should be made clearer to voters that students are only temporary migrants. “My constituents, when I was an MP, who worried about migration, were worried about [people] coming to Britain to settle, to use the NHS,” he said. “They weren’t worried about a Chinese student doing physics for a couple of years.” Fellow Tory peer and former Universities Minister Jo Johnson concurred, saying people were more concerned with illegal immigration. “They’re a very special category of immigration that’s more akin to tourism or temporary visitors.”  Now, Labour is wearing Conservative clothing.  The Home Office marked the new academic term this week by directly contacting tens of thousands of foreign students, warning them not to outstay their visas and telling them they “must leave”  if they have “no legal right to remain.”  The immigration white paper published this May also planned to reduce the graduate visa — where international students can remain in the U.K. after finishing their qualification — from two years to 18 months in most cases. Ministers have also mooted a levy on fees universities receive from foreign students to reinvest in domestic training. A graduation student sits outside Senate House at Cambridge University. | Joe Giddens/PA Images via Getty Images Johnson, however, said the Treasury didn’t like raising money for a specific purpose, meaning the Department for Education “may be being rather optimistic” in assuming revenue would go towards skills.  Hodge was similarly sceptical: “If it were linked to encouraging international students, but recognizing there might be a cost to public services, I think I’d feel more comfortable,” she said. “At the moment, I’m not sure that it’s anything else other than raising more money.” The moves have also upset the main higher education union. “Unfortunately, the government remains wedded to a funding model that leaves international students propping up U.K. higher education,” said University and College Union (UCU) General Secretary Jo Grady in a statement to POLITICO. She added: “Their fees are essential to the financial stability of the sector, so it is economically illiterate that Labour has refused to lift the Tories’ visa restrictions.”  STRAPPED FOR CASH Though Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson insisted the government will “always welcome international students where they meet the requirements to study,” some have taken the hint — and given the U.K. a pass.  In 2023/24, 732,285 overseas students studied at U.K. higher education providers, a 4 percent drop from the 2022/23 record high and the first fall since 2012/13. The number of student visas granted also fell from its record in 2022 of 484,000 by 5 percent in 2023 and 14 percent in 2024. The drop-off was particularly acute among EU students. After Brexit, European students weren’t eligible for home student status, meaning they paid international fees and couldn’t acquire a student loan.  This led to a 50 percent drop in accepted applicants for U.K. undergraduate study from EU countries in 2021/22, which continued to fall the following two years.  Universities still need to pay their bills.  In 2022/23, U.K. higher education providers had an income of £50 billion, of which 52 percent came from tuition fees — international students paid 43 percent of that figure.  The decline “has … been increasingly difficult,” said Arrowsmith, stressing “one of the main sources of funding that was helping to mitigate the reduction in resource is … no longer quite as stable.”  Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson insisted the government will “always welcome international students where they meet the requirements to study.” | Andy Rain/EPA While international fees rose without any cap, domestic tuition fees were frozen from 2017 until this fall at £9,250. Despite rising to £9,535, the hike in employers’ national insurance contributions hampered extra savings — forcing universities to tighten their purse strings. A Universities UK survey of 60 institutions in May found 49 percent closed courses to reduce costs, up from 24 percent in spring 2024. In the same month, the Office for Students, which regulates higher education, forecast a third consecutive year of financial decline in 2024/25.  “Inflation has been particularly high,” argued Arrowsmith, “That really exacerbated the situation,” particularly when there were “increased expectations” on academic research. It’s little surprise the House of Commons’ Education Committee is investigating potential insolvency within higher education institutions.  The Department for Education reiterated that the independence of universities meant they must ensure sustainable business models. But Willetts and Hodge disagreed on whether increasing domestic fees would improve the situation. Willetts “would love to see a healthy, proper increase in the fees” to put universities “in a stronger position” rather than relying on overseas students. However, Hodge said the “incredibly expensive” university experience was “almost getting to the cost of going to bloody Eton” and the debt was “putting working-class kids off.” OUT OF THE IVORY TOWERS  To show young people university isn’t their only option, the government launched Skills England and funded a growth and skills levy supporting apprenticeships.  But universities don’t think this should come at the expense of international students. And it seems the public agrees. British Future research found 54 percent of people thought international students enhanced the reputation of U.K. universities overseas, while 61 percent thought the government should increase or keep the amount of overseas students the same. Domestic students were supportive, too. “British students appreciated the opportunity of studying with students from other countries,” said Willetts. “It enriched the experience.” Education wonks believe focusing too much on domestic skills could come back to bite ministers — and excessive policy changes prevents what international students, and employers, want most of all: clarity. “They need certainty and stability if they’re going to make decisions,” argued Arrowsmith, stressing frequent alterations under different administrations made “prospective students think twice [about Britain] as a destination.”  The UCU echoed this and felt Britain should be open for business.  “We are also calling on universities to join us in the fight for a more open border policy that will protect the sector, help contribute tens of billions of pounds to the economy, enrich our society and bolster the U.K.’s global standing,” said Grady. A government spokesperson said: “We recognize the valuable contributions which genuine international students make to the economy and the university sector and we want them to continue to come to the U.K.” But they argued: “We are simply tightening the rules so those wishing to stay in the U.K. must find a graduate-level job within 18 months, which is fair for both students and to British workers and taxpayers.”
UK
Politics
Borders
Department
Skills
Germans spent 80 years reluctant to build a military. Trump and Putin are changing that.
BERLIN — It was a beating hot summer day and Gregor was dressed in the formal uniform of the German army: a sky-blue shirt and navy trousers, which he had received that week, the fabric still stiff. The 39-year-old office manager had never been patriotic, and like many liberal-leaning Germans his feelings toward the military for most of his life had been ambivalent at best. When he was 18 he’d even turned down the option of doing a year of military service, believing it was a waste of time. Now, two decades later, life had taken an unexpected turn. As a steel band played, he marched in time alongside 17 others dressed in the same freshly pressed outfits into an open square at Germany’s Ministry of Defense, a towering grey neoclassical building in western Berlin, following the commands they had learned just a few days earlier. They were all there to do the same thing: take the oath required of all new recruits to the German armed forces. Afterward, they would begin their official training as reserve officers, learning the basic skills needed to defend against a military invasion. Everything had changed for Gregor on Feb. 24, 2022, when news broke that Russia had invaded Ukraine. Suddenly, the peace he had always taken for granted in Europe didn’t seem so guaranteed. “I was watching videos of Ukrainian civilians joining soldiers to fight off Russian tanks as they rolled toward their towns,” he said. “I thought to myself: ‘If something like that happened here, I wouldn’t have any practical skills to help.’” It was a fitting day to take the oath: July 20, 2024, the 80th anniversary of the so-called Operation Valkyrie, when a group of German soldiers plotted, and failed, to assassinate Adolf Hitler. Usually oath ceremonies are low-key affairs, carried out at barracks with a few family members present — the close associations between the military and Germany’s dark history means servicemen are not celebrated with the pomp and pageantry they are in other countries. But in honor of the special date, around 400 other recruits from various divisions from all over Germany were gathered in the same square, ready to take their pledge. The country’s defense minister, Boris Pistorius from the center-left Social Democrats (SPD), gave a short speech, telling the recruits that the prospect of defending Germany’s democracy had “become more real after Putin’s attack on Ukraine.” Then a lieutenant colonel shouted out the words of the oath, as the group repeated them back: “I pledge to loyally serve the Federal Republic of Germany and to courageously defend the right and liberty of the German people.” As he repeated the words of the oath, Gregor felt an unexpected swell of emotion. “I realized this is going to be a big part of my life now,” he said. “I’m going to be dedicating a lot of my time to it, and I’m going to have to explain to people why I’m doing it.” His mother remarked afterward that she also experienced surprising feelings while watching from the benches. “That was the first time I ever heard the national anthem being sung and felt like I actually wanted to join in,” she told him. Across Germany, both politicians and members of the public have been going through a similar transformation. The country’s army, officially named the Bundeswehr — which translates as “federal defense” — was established by the United States during the Cold War. It was designed to support NATO rather than ever lead a conflict, for fear that a German military could be misused as it was during World War II. This supporting role suited Germany’s leaders: Throughout the latter half of the 20th century, the country’s politicians carefully shaped an image of a peaceful nation that prefers influencing global politics through trade and diplomacy. After the end of the Cold War the Bundeswehr began scaling down, with military spending falling from a high of 4.9 percent of GDP in 1963 to just 1.1 percent in 2005. But in the months following the Russian invasion, then-chancellor Olaf Scholz surprised the world by announcing a radical change in German foreign policy, including a €100 billion ($116 billion) plan to beef up its army. Then in early 2025, five days after the February election of new chancellor Friedrich Merz of the conservative Christian Democrats (CDU), Donald Trump invited Ukrainian President Volodymir Zelensky into the Oval Office for a browbeating broadcast around the world that signaled his lack of interest in standing up to Russia. A shocked Merz, who had campaigned on a platform of low taxes and low spending, immediately agreed with Scholz to work together to reform the country’s strict borrowing laws — which were embedded in the constitution — and build up its defense capabilities as quickly as possible with a €1 trillion loan, which amounts to about 25 percent of the country’s GDP. According to Lorenzo Scarazzato, a researcher at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), this type of defense spending was previously unheard of during peacetime. “Countries that spend this much are usually those at war, or autocratic states that don’t have democratic oversight,” he said. The following month, Germany’s lawmakers voted to back the plan, setting the country’s military on track to be the best-funded in Europe and the fourth-biggest in the world. In Merz’s view, Europe didn’t just need to arm itself against Russian aggression, but also “achieve independence from the USA.” Later in the year, NATO members would agree to raise their defense spending to 5 percent of GDP, at Trump’s behest. It marks a huge shift not just from how Germany manages its finances but how it perceives both itself and its place in the world. “After World War II, the allies did a tremendous job of re-educating the German population,” said Carsten Breuer, the Bundeswehr’s highest serving general. “This led to a society which I would say is peace-minded, and of course there’s nothing wrong with that. But it is also non-military.” So far, committing resources to the military has been fairly easy for the German government. But now it needs to convince thousands of people to do the same as Gregor and dedicate themselves to military service. After the end of the Cold War in the early 1990s, the government began scaling down the Bundeswehr from 500,000 soldiers to the current 180,000. The country’s national service, in which young men had to choose between serving in the army or undertaking another type of civil service, was scrapped in 2011. Now, General Breuer estimates the total personnel needs to rise to 460,000, including both full-time staff and reservists. Bundeswehr applications are up 20 percent this year, though not everyone will make it through the physical and security tests. Even then, that still isn’t enough to plug the gaps, and it is likely that conscription of some kind will return. Breuer believes the German public is softening up to the military after decades of standoffishness. The war on Ukraine, as well as the Covid-19 pandemic and the disaster response to devastating floods, have put many people in closer touch with the Bundeswehr, he says. “When I was talking to my soldiers in the early 2000s, they would always ask, ‘Why isn’t it like the U.S. here, where people thank you for your service?’” he said. “Nowadays, we’re starting to see this in Germany.” He recounted a recent moment when he was waiting for a flight in the city of Dusseldorf and an elderly man tapped him on the shoulder to offer his thanks. However, for many people, any glorification of the German military will always have uncomfortable associations with the country’s dark history: Neo-Nazi groups still use German military symbols and history as part of their recruitment propaganda, and the Bundeswehr has been plagued by far-right scandals in recent years. For some, the government’s push to embrace the army is one more sign of a dangerous transformation in the country’s political sentiments: The far-right AfD is currently second in the polls, and the ruling CDU has shed former leader Angela Merkel’s liberal image in favor of a harsh anti-immigration stance. And as welfare, social services and climate protection face possible cuts to support military spending, Germany’s politicians face a challenge in seeing how long they can keep the newfound support going. “When you have a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail, and you forget the rest of the toolkit, which includes diplomacy and cooperation,” said Scarazzato from SIPRI. “Military gives some level of deterrence, but engaging with the other side is perhaps what prevents escalation.” He warns that a beefed-up army “is not necessarily a panacea for whatever issue you are facing.” The Heuberg training ground in Baden-Württemberg has a long and dark history. Nestled in the southwestern part of Germany near the Swiss border, it was originally built as a base for the German Imperial Army, which existed from 1871 to 1919 and fought in World War I. Some timber-framed buildings and stables from this time still exist, many crumbling and disused. In early 1933 it became one of the country’s first concentration camps, housing 2,000 political opponents, before it was used as a base for the SS, the Nazis’ violent paramilitary group. Now, it is where the next generation of German military reserves come to train. This past June, I watched 18 people struggling through the same type of training Gregor undertook a year earlier. Heuberg serves as the anchor for recruits hailing from Baden-Württemberg, with each region of the country playing host to its own reserves trainings. The one I observed at Heuberg takes 17 days in total, spread out over long weekends throughout the summer. None of the recruits, including Gregor, can share their surnames for security reasons — the Bundeswehr says its soldiers have been targeted by foreign intelligence and been subject to identify theft. The lieutenant colonel leading the training, Stefan, told me that the sessions cover the most basic skills, meaning these recruits will know how to defend a barracks if Germany were attacked by a foreign power. They can then continue regular training as part of local defense units, learning how to secure critical infrastructure. The recruits range in age from their 20s to 60s, with most in their 30s and 40s, and work a variety of jobs. There’s a forester, a teacher, a chemical engineer and even an ex-journalist, although only three of them are women. Everyone mentioned the war on Ukraine as the catalyst that got them interested in the military. A German army spokesperson said a total of 3,000 untrained citizens have expressed interest in joining the reserve over the past five years, with a major peak just after the invasion of Ukraine and another in early 2025 following the U.S. election. The training is not for the faint-hearted. Recruits must learn to fire an 11-pound rifle, hike around the base in the soaring heat while carrying their 33-pound backpacks, and practice running and doing push-ups in their gas masks and protective clothing, which restricts their breathing. They will also learn orienteering and radio communication, with the 17 days eventually culminating in a simulation of a Russian attack, during which recruits will be fed information through their radios and organize themselves to defend the barracks. Stefan, who served in NATO missions in the former Yugoslavia, Mali and Afghanistan, explained that several people had dropped out already. “That’s normal, it’s not for everyone,” he said. As well as the physical strain, recruits often struggle with the emotional aspect of learning to fire guns. “I tell them, at the end of the day, you’re a soldier — it’s part of your job.” Kevin, 29, works as a banker. “In school, my best friend wanted to join the army, and I remember telling him he would be wasting his life,” he said. His father also had to do compulsory military service, “and he told me no one wanted to be there, it was so uncomfortable because you were reminded of history the whole time.” After the invasion of Ukraine, he remembers sitting in his office watching the price of commodities skyrocket. “We all watched Biden’s speech about the start of the war, and it really felt like a turning point in history,” he said. After many hours of running, shooting and hastily learning new commands, the recruits — many slightly red-faced — finish the day by learning to clean their guns, pushing strings down the barrel and out the other end. Some get stuck, prompting some awkward tugging. The commando deputy, Col. Markus Vollmann, looked on admiringly. “They are all quite extraordinary, how motivated they are,” he said. “They’re only a minority though.” So far, 45 percent of Germans say they are in favor of the country’s new 5 percent defense spending target, with 37 percent against and 18 percent undecided. It’s a marked difference from the days of the Afghan war, when two-thirds of the country wanted German troops to be withdrawn. Military sociologist Timo Graf says this fits with how most Germans have consistently viewed the Bundeswehr: The majority say its main role should be defense of the country rather than interventionist missions abroad. At Heuberg, Vollmann is nervous about how long support for military spending will be maintained once people see other services being cut around them. Germany is able to borrow much more than its European neighbors due to its low debt levels, but Merz is sticking to his low-tax-low-spend ideology with planned cuts to welfare spending. “We need to communicate better with the public about what we are doing and why it is necessary, but without scaring them,” he said, adding that debt-averse Germany needs better investment in all industry and infrastructure. “There’s no point having the most expensive tanks if, once you drive them out of the barracks, the roads are all potholed and the bridges are crumbling.” Stefan, the training manager, believes the many years of peace have left Germany ill-prepared to potentially face Russian aggression head-on. “We have too many soldiers who have never seen war,” he said. “If you have never smelt burning flesh or seen spilled blood everywhere, then you cannot understand how to make decisions in that environment. You can’t train adequately.” Just one week after the NATO conference sparked headlines around the world in July, I arrived at Germany’s Ministry of Defense to speak to Breuer, the highest serving general in the Bundeswehr. The building in western Berlin, also known as the Bendlerblock, was the home of the Nazi’s supreme military command and their intelligence agency, as well as the headquarters of the resistance soldiers who carried out the failed July 20 coup attempt. Breuer became a familiar face to Germans during the pandemic, as the head of the military’s Covid-19 task force. When we met, he was warm and jovial in his everyday combat uniform, rather than the formal jacket adorned with medals that he sports in his TV appearances. He is beaming about the budget increases, which he believes are long overdue. Following Germany’s post-Cold War disarmament, spending on everything from clothing to ammunition to helicopters was reduced — some argue by too much, leaving soldiers with out-of-date helmets and 30-year-old radio equipment. Breuer is particularly critical of how German troops were sent to support NATO missions abroad — most notably in Afghanistan — without adequate equipment. “It was clear to me that if you are sending soldiers on operations, risking their life and their health, then you have to give them everything they need,” he said. A total of 59 German soldiers were killed in the conflict. “We are now moving from a war of choice to a war of necessity,” he explained. From security analysis he believes Russia will be capable of attacking NATO territory by 2029, with the caveat that this depends on the outcome in Ukraine and whether the war exhausts the Kremlin. “Russia is producing around 1,500 battle tanks every year,” he said. In comparison, Germany currently produces 300. “And it is also building up its military structures facing West.” He says his main priorities are ramping up air defense, procuring battle tanks and drones, expanding homeland security, and beefing up the personnel that enables combat missions, such as engineers and logisticians. But tanks and drones don’t amount to much if the country can’t enlist and train to its goal of 460,000 personnel. German media is currently full of near-daily headlines about how this personnel target might be reached. Defense Minister Pistorius has proposed a hybrid voluntary draft, inspired by Sweden’s new model, in which all 18-year-old men will be sent a questionnaire. Only the most physically able will then be invited for service. However, if that fails to get the numbers needed, he has warned some kind of compulsory draft will be created. The country is already facing a massive skilled labor shortage and the Bundeswehr struggles to offer competitive salaries in fields such as IT. Business leaders such as Steffen Kampeter of the Confederation of German Employers’ Associations have claimed the German economy cannot cope with young people delaying their careers through serving in the army. One solution would be for service to be combined with vocational training, and Pistorius also wants to increase Bundeswehr salaries to make them more attractive. Breuer says he has no opinion on what system would be preferable for meeting the recruitment goals, explaining this is an issue for politicians to decide. “My military advice is: This is the number we need,” he said. At the same time as equipment and staff need to be beefed up, Breuer says administration and bureaucracy must be scaled down. Germany’s procurement offices have become so bloated over the past 30 years that multiple reports of their comical inefficiency can be found, such as parachutists having to wait over a decade for new, safer helmets that U.S. soldiers have already worn for years. Germany is also entering its third consecutive year of recession, and its heavy industries that are struggling to stay competitive are now hoping the defense spending will give them a boost: Shares in the steel sector have shot up since the announcements. However, the years of restricted budgets mean the country is starting the sudden ramp-up on the back foot. It is unlikely that industry can meet the targets in such a short space of time, meaning a large amount of equipment is likely to be purchased from U.S. companies, perhaps undermining the goal of European independence. “The fact is, once you buy the more complex weapons from the U.S., you become somewhat dependent on their systems,” said Scarazzato, the SIPRI researcher. “It would make more sense to be very deliberate in how the money is spent in order to avoid finding ourselves in the same position in 10 years’ time.” “For me it’s not about companies, it’s about capabilities,” confirmed Breuer. “This means that in a lot of cases we will have to buy off the shelf. We can’t afford the time you need to develop new items, new systems and new platforms.” With the rush across Europe to procure weapons and soldiers, Scarazzato warns that leaders should be careful not to “put all their eggs in one basket, which is the military.” Arms races also lead to issues such as price gouging and oversight processes potentially being circumvented. “You risk a race to the bottom,” he said. I asked Breuer if he had anything to say to people who are still skeptical about the need for rearmament. “I would like to take them with me on one of my visits to Ukraine.” How powerful the Bundeswehr should be, and even whether it should exist at all, has been fiercely debated ever since it was founded. As an institution, it has only existed since 1955 and was preceded by the Nazi-era Wehrmacht (1935 to 1945), the Weimar Republic’s Reichswehr (1919 to 1935) and, before that, the Imperial German Army. When the United States and its allies took control of Germany after the end of World War II, they dissolved the Wehrmacht and banned German military uniforms and symbols. As part of a larger “denazification” process, the country was prohibited from having an army in case it could be misused in the same way as the Wehrmacht. This changed as the Cold War intensified. After the 1950 North Korea invasion of South Korea, the United States urged its NATO partners to rearm Germany and admit it to the alliance. The country’s first Chancellor, Konrad Adenauer, believed it could be an opportunity for the young democracy to regain its sovereignty and establish itself as an equal partner amongst allies, and on Nov. 12, 1955, the first 100 volunteers joined the Bundeswehr. “The country had to answer the question of how to create an army that could integrate into a democracy and could follow the constitution,” said Thorsten Loch, a Bundeswehr officer and military historian. The founding officers decided to construct the new army around a concept known as “Innere Führung,” or “inner leadership,” meaning soldiers must think for themselves and not follow orders blindly. They decided soldiers should be “citizens in uniform,” with national conscription designed to keep the forces rooted within society. Parliament wields huge powers over the army, and its stated mission is supporting other NATO forces rather than leading battles itself. Germany’s constitution has strict rules about how and when the military can be deployed — for example, reserves can only be called up if another nation declares war on Germany. When it came to staffing the new army, however, making a complete break from the Wehrmacht was more complicated. As Loch points out, any army that needed to pose a serious threat to the Soviet Union couldn’t be staffed by 12-year-olds. Chancellor Adenauer declared in 1952 that anyone who had fought “honorably” in the Wehrmacht — that is, those who had not committed any war crimes — would be welcome in the new army. “The officers ‘cleaned’ themselves,” explained Loch. “I believe they knew amongst themselves who had committed crimes.” They are likely to have also had input from the British, French and American intelligence services. In comparison, communist East Germany opted to staff its Volksarmee (people’s army) with younger, inexperienced soldiers in order to avoid former Nazis. Whether this “self-cleaning” was effective is a point of contention. Only a tiny number of Wehrmacht officers were ever tried for war crimes, and the concept of “honorable” soldiers has led to what many perceive as a whitewashing of the Nazi-era army, often referred to as “the myth of the clean Wehrmacht.” “The narrative was born that it was the Nazi Party who committed the atrocities, not the Wehrmacht soldiers,” said Loch. “And of course this isn’t true, as things are more complicated in reality.” Some of those early Bundeswehr officers still have questions over their heads as to what they did in World War II. The first director of operations was Lt. Col. Karl-Theodor Molinari, who resigned in 1970 after it became public that he might have been involved in the shooting of 105 French resistance soldiers, although the allegations were never proven. And while care was taken to strip away the most obvious signs, symbols and rituals of the Wehrmacht, some remain, such as military music, which also pre-dates the Nazi era. Barracks were renamed after resistance figures but were not demolished. This is one of the reasons that German rearmament was unpopular with the public at the time, and the purpose — and even existence — of an army remains a divisive topic. There continues to be a push-pull between those who say the Bundeswehr must do more to fully break with its past, and those who argue the Wehrmacht is a part of military history that cannot just be ignored. On Sunday, June 15, around 1,000 people had decided to forgo summer picnics in the park to gather outside Germany’s Reichstag for the country’s first-ever Veterans’ Day celebration. After many years of campaigning by the Association of German Deployment Veterans the government finally decided to make the celebration official in 2025, symbolizing a major shift in how politicians seek to position the Bundeswehr in society. A German language EDM band blared loudly over speakers next to stalls selling beers and bratwursts, while children petted a military donkey. The turn-out was not huge: There was no line to enter, and the dancefloor in front of the stage was largely empty. All attendees I spoke to were from military families, rather than curious civilians. “We would like to build up a veterans’ culture like they have in the USA,” said Ralph Bartsch, who runs a veterans’ motorcycle club. “It’s an absolutely overdue event,” agreed another soldier, who was dressed in civilian clothes and did not want to give his name. “It makes the Bundeswehr stronger in our society.” Not everyone is so eager to see societal norms change. The day before, in the Berlin neighborhood of Kreuzberg, I watched as Kai Krieger, 40, and his companion demonstrated how they switch out bus stop posters for those of their own design. After unscrewing the case at the bottom, rolling up the existing poster and tucking it behind the frame — essential for ensuring they are not committing any crimes — they then unrolled a doctored Bundeswehr recruitment advertisement in its place. “German mix: Nazis, cartridges, isolated cases” it reads, alongside a banner, “No to veterans’ day.” It’s a reference to a series of scandals from recent years. In 2022, Franco Albrecht, a 33-year-old first lieutenant with far-right views, was found guilty of plotting terror attacks that he hoped would be blamed on refugees. Several members of the elite KSK — Germany’s equivalent of the Navy SEALs — were found to have been stockpiling weapons and Nazi memorabilia, and members were reported to have made Hitler salutes and played extremist music at gatherings. This led a parliamentary panel to determine in 2020 that “networks” of far-right extremists had established themselves in the Bundeswehr. Ex-military personnel were also involved in a bizarre 2022 foiled plot to overthrow the German state and replace it with a far-right monarchy. “I do think it’s possible for armies to not be fascist or far-right influenced, but the German army is so toxic to the country’s history that I don’t see how that can happen here,” Kai said. He would go as far as saying that Germany should not have an army at all, because “the history is just too heavy. … They say all these nice-sounding things about defending democracy, but then the nasty things always seem to come to the surface.” Despite the Bundeswehr’s efforts to emphasize its historical connections to resistance fighters and position itself as a defender of liberal values, Germany’s far-right groups continue to view the country’s military as their own. In 2019, the German office for the protection of the constitution reported that neo-Nazi groups were organizing lectures with former Wehrmacht soldiers around the country, in which speakers would praise the SS and deny or trivialize the Holocaust. Kai’s group posted around 100 of their posters across the city that weekend, but anti-military activism doesn’t currently have much momentum behind it. Outside the Veteran’s Day celebrations, only a mere cluster of protesters were holding signs and singing anti-war songs. It’s a far cry from the 1980s when the German peace movement was a major civic force, with four million people signing a petition that the West German government withdraw its promise to allow medium-range ballistic missiles to be stationed in the country. Kai doesn’t hold back on the reasons for the movement’s unpopularity. “Our organizations talk a lot of bullshit,” he said. According to him, many of his fellow peace activists “don’t agree that Vladimir Putin is conducting an illegal war in Ukraine. … They’ll say it’s NATO’s fault,” he added, rolling his eyes. While pacifism was long associated with the left, this has shifted in recent years as various far-right movements aligned themselves with Russia. The AfD opposed military aid for Ukraine and expanding the Bundeswehr, and peace marches have become associated with cranks and conspiracy theorists. The Bundeswehr’s recent far-right scandals give potential reserve volunteers pause for thought. Burak, 38, opted out of military service back when he was 18, but in February 2025 he withdrew his conscientious-objector status. “It took me two whole years to decide if I really wanted to do that,” he said. As someone of Turkish heritage, he is still worried about whether it will be “a safe environment” for him. Burak has been involved with the country’s Green Party for many years, and during the Covid-19 pandemic he began looking into the possibility of training in disaster relief. Then when the invasion of Ukraine happened, he considered the military for the first time in two decades. “I feel like this is going to be another burden on younger people, along with things like climate change,” he said. “My generation had the privilege to say that we didn’t want to do this.” Michael, who is 50, spent his youth in Berlin’s left-wing punk scene, putting on anti-fascist gigs in abandoned buildings, and still sports the tattoos and gauged ear piercings. The invasion of Ukraine “shocked me to my core,” he said. “I am an anti-fascist, and to me, the biggest fascist project in Europe right now is Russia,” he explained. “The whole symbol of Europe is under attack.” He added that he also wants “to know where I stand” if tanks ever did roll into Germany one day. “I don’t want to be sitting there thinking, ‘Do I flee or not?’” he said. “I don’t think we should allow the Bundeswehr to just be staffed by nationalists,” he continued, when I ask how it fits with his leftist politics. “We need to think: What brought the Third Reich down? What brought liberty to Europe? It wasn’t talking with Hitler for 10 years.” A year after Gregor completed his basic training, his life looks quite different. At home, he has three huge boxes of uniforms, gas masks and helmets that his girlfriend begrudgingly agreed could be stored in their apartment, as long as he kept them tidy. Other hobbies have had to make way for his continued service, which he now dedicates around 50 days a year to. With his defense unit he practices handling weapons and understanding the logistics of how to protect Berlin’s critical infrastructure and clear paths for military transport. “We learn about the motorways and railway network, and how troops can move through them without the risk of sabotage,” he said. As a major urban center, his Berlin unit would probably be one of the first to be called up if an invasion ever happened. His company, a Berlin-based tech startup, has been understanding of his time off: “My bosses said a war would be bad for business, so they’re happy I’m doing this.” Some of his closest friends are now those he went through training with. “You’re paired with everyone in the platoon for exercises at some point,” he said, which enables deep bonds. Whenever people struggled, the others rallied around them, invested in getting the whole team past the finish line. If someone got nervous learning how to handle rifles, the others were there to calm them down. Even when he’s not training, he’ll often spend his evenings mentoring others who want to join the reserves, talking them through the process. He wears his military uniform travelling to and from training, sometimes encountering people who thank him, other times being pestered by kids who want to try on his backpack. He often has conversations with friends who don’t understand why he is doing this, or who are politically opposed to the idea of a German military. “I have realized since I joined that people in the German military do tend to be more on the conservative side,” he said. “I would like to see more left-leaning people, to balance it out and make it more reflective of society.” He thinks some form of conscription would be a good idea, to help people understand what the army involves, and that there’s much more to it than frontline conflict. “But you need to make it meaningful to their lives. There’s no point in people feeling like they’ve been forced, or that they’ve wasted a year.” The idea of serving his country still makes him feel uncomfortable. “I don’t really like the term patriotism as it’s too closely associated with nationalism for me,” he said. “But I think about the things in my country that I like, such as free education and affordable health care, and how I want kids in the future to enjoy those, too. And I think that is worth defending.”
Politics
Elections
Environment
Borders
Conflict
Tech leaders and MoD Minister Maria Eagle tackle UK defense innovation
Blockages in the technology innovation pipeline and digital skills shortages were just some of the topics discussed by industry stakeholders during a DSEI-hosted roundtable held in July. Chaired by the UK minister for defense procurement, Maria Eagle, attendees included the likes of KX, Forcys, Dell and Amazon Web Services, all of which are attending DSEI UK 2025. The theme of the roundtable was ‘developing defense technology at pace to meet modern battlefield requirements’, a key theme at this year’s DSEI UK. Under the banner of this overarching theme, four sub-themes were discussed by the group as company representatives directed questions and suggestions toward the minister. The minister opened the proceedings by outlining the priorities of the UK’s Ministry of Defence (MoD), calling the current moment a “pivotal” one for UK defense as the country looks to return to warfighting readiness. Technology will be central to this move and the UK is set on becoming a leading “tech-enabled defense superpower by 2035,” she said, with priorities based on the lessons learned in Ukraine. Changes like these will require some changes in the government’s approach to technology, though. “We’ve got to innovate at the speed of technology … there’s no point taking six years to get to contract on a drone — you’d just be contracting to put it in the museum,” she added. > We’ve got to innovate at the speed of technology … there’s no point taking six > years to get to contract on a drone — you’d just be contracting to put it in > the museum. Changing the way the UK government acquires and utilizes innovative defense technology at speed and scale will require stronger collaboration between government and industry, however, and there is still some way to go to ensure this relationship works, according to industry stakeholders at the roundtable. Bolstering the innovation pipeline A major hurdle for defense firms is navigating the ‘valley of death’ — the time between developing an initial concept and the point at which the company starts to see returns on its investment. Businesses need considerable support to stay liquid and avoid bankruptcy in this period. “I think part of the challenge that we’ve identified is taking an operational concept demonstrator, which we’ve been involved with in defense, and bringing that into core [military programs],” a representative from KX, a software company based in Northern Ireland, said. “[It’s] the valley of death or the cup of opportunity, as I call it — and nobody seems to be drinking from that cup,” the representative said. “A lot of attention goes to the SMEs [small and medium-sized enterprises] and the concept demonstration, and the primes get a huge amount of attention at the other end of the scale, but dragging those concept demonstrators into a core program, that seems to be a key challenge, and it would be great to understand how that can be accelerated so that concepts don’t just wither on the vine.” Eagle recognized that concept demonstrators are sometimes shelved with “no follow up,” noting that the “valley of death has been a big problem.” To address this, the UK is “establishing UK innovation,” with the goal of getting “new ideas and concepts, and new ways of doing things to the warfighter.” Company representatives and moderator gathered at DSEI UK roundtable.  Is there enough support for SMEs? Another portion of the roundtable focused on how SMEs position in the defense ecosystem can be further supported, particularly by other key stakeholders such as the UK MoD and DSEI UK. Eagle noted the UK government’s plans to establish an SME hub in the “not too [distant] future” to provide smaller defense tech companies with assistance for working in the sector and with the MoD. A representative from Forcys welcomed plans to establish an SME hub but did push back against the minister, arguing that many of these initiatives designed to fund innovation do not come with “sufficient money.” “The average DASA [Defence and Security Accelerator] award is £50,000 to £100,000 — its buttons to what’s actually required to develop something at pace and really develop it properly, rather than just playing into it,” the representative argued. The representative also rallied against the problems faced by Forcys due to its size, given it is defined neither as an SME nor a prime. This means it doesn’t get the support infrastructure afforded to smaller firms or the advantages that come with having the scale of a prime.   The future of dual use and next-gen skills issues Looking ahead, stakeholders at the roundtable also discussed what the future might look like for the defense industry, given the changing nature of dual-use technology and the concerning digital skills gaps in the sector. > Stakeholders at the roundtable also discussed what the future might look like > for the defense industry, given the changing nature of dual-use technology and > the concerning digital skills gaps. Understanding the defense supply chain is crucial on the dual-use front, according to a representative from PQShield. They pointed to the untapped potential in dual-use, explaining that many companies don’t know how to sell to the defense industry. “We’re struggling to pitch it to defense right now because we don’t know the best place to go,” the representative said, speaking about PQShield’s cryptography products and solutions. Discussion also turned to the difficulties the defense industry faces in acquiring workers with the right skills or having access to graduates and those early in their careers. “We’re being outgunned by gaming, by fintech, by the finance industry — we’re not getting the best people. We say we do, we don’t because we just simply can’t pay for them,” said Rob Taylor, founder of training technology firm 4GD. Adding to this point, the representative from KX said that they would like to see schools doing more to incentivize students to seek out technology jobs. A good approach would be to start from year seven or even younger, they said. Eagle agreed that the skills issue is “tremendously important,” adding that the UK’s skills system has not worked as well as it could for some time and that many industries are suffering the same skills shortages. “As we’ve had the last few years, where you’ve got a war on our doorstep and things like that going on, there’s been a shift back towards understanding the value of defense. But there’s some ways still to go, so we’ve got more work to do on that,” Eagle said.
UK
Defense
Security
Skills
War
Ukraine’s strongest asset isn’t abroad — it’s at home
Sanna Marin is a Tony Blair Institute’s strategic counselor. She’s the former prime minister of Finland. As the world’s leaders gather in Rome for this year’s Ukraine Recovery Conference, there is no illusion as to what’s at stake. Ending Russia’s war of aggression remains Ukraine’s overriding priority. But the truth is, even that won’t secure lasting stability. True recovery will demand more than reconstruction funds or military deterrence. It will require deep, sustained investment in the systems that underpin a strong sovereign state. One of the most vital — and most overlooked — of those systems is Ukraine’s own people. Too often, the conversation surrounding Ukraine’s workforce begins and ends with refugee return. But recovery cannot be deferred until people come home. Nor can it depend entirely on external support. Ukraine’s greatest untapped asset is already within its borders: millions of citizens ready to work, retrain and rebuild, if allowed the opportunity. This isn’t a soft-side issue — it’s a strategic imperative. And new research from the Tony Blair Institute shows that taking bold action now could expand Ukraine’s workforce by 25 percent, even while war continues. There are more than 3 million people inside Ukraine today who, with the right policies and support, could be brought into the workforce. Unlocking this potential isn’t just the most realistic way to stimulate economic growth and power Ukraine’s recovery, it’s also the smartest and fastest way to build long-term resilience in the face of ongoing war. This isn’t about abstractions. It’s about mothers who can’t find childcare; displaced people struggling to rebuild their lives after being forced to flee; job seekers struggling to find work that matches their skills and offers the stability that formal employment should provide. It’s also about veterans and individuals with disabilities who are ready to contribute but often encounter barriers due to limited workplace accommodation. Ukraine’s workforce is motivated, but it’s constrained by systems that haven’t kept up. Today, 83 percent of Ukrainians with disabilities are out of work. Women face a 15-point participation gap compared to men. And over one-third of internally displaced people are unemployed. Meanwhile, 40 percent of businesses say they can’t find the skilled talent they need. This mismatch is more than a missed opportunity — it’s a risk to Ukraine’s recovery and long-term sovereignty. Ukraine’s greatest untapped asset is already within its borders: millions of citizens ready to work, retrain and rebuild, if allowed the opportunity. | Sergey Kozlov/EPA The good news is, Ukraine has the tools to change this, and the country has momentum on its side: billions in donor support, a nearly finalized new labor code and real political will. It has digital infrastructure that’s the envy of governments across Europe. It also has a population ready to adapt, with almost 40 percent of Ukraine’s unemployed saying they’re willing to retrain and a quarter of them willing relocate for the right job. That’s an extraordinary national resource. And Ukraine’s partners can help turn this potential into progress by acting on four fronts: First, bring Ukraine’s job market into the 21st century. The country is already a world leader in digital ID. It has ambitious plans to build platforms that would match workers with jobs and training opportunities — especially in regions where the disconnect between supply and demand is stark. It needs international funding and expertise to do this.  Second, put employers in the driver’s seat by tying every reskilling program to a real job opportunity. Even though there are hundreds of available courses, many teach skills that businesses don’t need, or they target workers who already have jobs instead of those seeking work. Reskilling support should be contingent upon employers co-designing curriculums and committing to hire successful graduates. Third, finalize the new labor code. The current one dates back to 1971. Reform is essential — not just for EU accession but for unlocking flexibility, formality and fairness in the workplace. Technical assistance and public advocacy from international partners can help here. Finally, break down the systemic barriers to participation. This means scaling up access to childcare, improving workplace accessibility for those with disabilities and supporting underrepresented groups, from women and young people to the elderly and displaced. These changes are morally right, economically vital and should align with donor priorities. I’m proud to join that conversation, and urge us all to keep people — not just infrastructure — at the heart of recovery. Of course, the return of refugees will be critical to Ukraine’s long-term recovery. But with only half of them currently planning on returning, and most of them uncertain exactly when, this cannot be the cornerstone of today’s strategy. Ukraine cannot afford to wait. The focus must be on unlocking the potential of those already inside the country’s borders. And that starts with modernizing the job market, removing the barriers that prevent people from working, and investing in the skills that will power Ukraine’s reconstruction from the ground up. Recovery doesn’t begin with return, it begins with reform. Ukraine has already proven its courage. Now its people can build a workforce ready to win the peace. But the country needs partners to expedite this task and help its people scale with what they have. With the right investment, Ukrainians won’t just rebuild — they’ll lead.
Aid and development
Skills
War
War in Ukraine
Growth
The Spanish upstart who wants to shock the eurozone back to life
BRUSSELS ― Carlos Cuerpo wants eurozone members to wake up and lead Europe to financial union. The 44-year-old Spanish economy minister — who on Friday entered the race to head up the powerful group of eurozone countries known as the Eurogroup — is calling for a major shake-up of a body he says has become all talk and no action. “Going forward, the Eurogroup should be more about decisions,” Cuerpo, a socialist, said in an interview with POLITICO, where he outlined his proposal for sweeping changes to the body. Cuerpo argued that groups of countries ― as opposed to all the EU’s 27 states ― should lead the way to integrate Europe’s financial markets, a long-held ambition in Brussels that has repeatedly struggled to get off the ground. “If you cannot go in terms of reducing fragmentation from 27 to one, you might have to go in different steps and reduce the fragmentation by putting groups of countries together.” This is a major rupture from the incumbent Eurogroup President Paschal Donohoe, whom critics accuse of prioritizing broad consensus over actual decisions in his two terms in office. To everyone’s surprise, in October, Cuerpo launched a “coalition of the willing” ― known as the European Competitiveness Lab ― to finally make progress on a decades-old project to create U.S.-style financial markets in Europe. The EU’s biggest countries ― Germany, France, Italy, Poland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Spain ― have signed up to the initiative, boosting Cuerpo’s leadership credentials. He said he will empower this scheme if he’s elected as Eurogroup president. “I expect that all 27 member states would be members of the competitiveness lab at some point.” The Spaniard, however, faces an uphill battle to defeat Donohoe in next Monday’s secret vote by the eurozone’s 20 finance ministers. While many officials praised Cuerpo’s soft skills and “encyclopedic knowledge” of the European economy, others feel alienated by his more radical ideas, such as doubling the size of the EU budget or issuing common debt for defense. Donohoe is the odds-on favorite to secure a third term as he hails from the powerful center-right European People’s Party and appeals to small countries who will tip the balance of the election. Lithuanian socialist Finance Minister Rimantas Šadžius, is unlikely to make it past the first round of voting, according to several officials. | Oliver Hoslet/EPA The third candidate, Lithuanian socialist Finance Minister Rimantas Šadžius, is unlikely to make it past the first round of voting, according to several officials with knowledge of the voting procedures. A simple majority — 11 votes — is necessary to be elected as president. THE EUROGROUP’S MIDLIFE CRISIS The Eurogroup is a club of 20 eurozone ministers who meet every month to coordinate economic policy. During its heyday, it steered the eurozone through the rumble-tumble of the sovereign debt crisis, but lost influence as the euro area stabilized and a more inclusive EU-wide group of 27 finance ministers gained power. The Eurogroup has become a “bland working group” or a “think tank,” according to two EU diplomats, who, like others in the story, were granted anonymity to speak freely. A group of countries — including Spain — have questioned the usefulness of holding monthly meetings in Brussels in an informal report that was seen as mildly critical toward Donohoe’s presidency. Faced with this criticism, Cuerpo said he wants to breathe new life into stalled Eurogroup projects such as creating an EU-wide financial and banking union and strengthening the role of the euro. “We need to be very efficient in coming up with deliverables, otherwise we might be late to the party,” compared to other foreign countries. “Eurogroup needs to have a voice for these new times that actually requires us to face new challenges and call for a revamped Eurogroup.” THE ITALIAN VETO One of the thorniest issues is Italy’s veto over a plan to use money from the European Stability Mechanism — a bailout fund for countries introduced during the eurozone crisis — to rescue failing banks. Populist parties in Italy oppose ratifying the reform over the ESM’s lingering association with strict bailout conditions during the eurozone meltdown. Rome, however, is open to using these funds to provide cheap loans for defense — something that Cuerpo has endorsed in the past. In a sign of détente, Cuerpo said that “we have to help Italy help us on this [ratifying the ESM],” although he shied away from questions on using these funds for defense. “[We need] to provide the right narrative, which is sometimes also an important element around how the ESM can help us going forward in these new challenges as well.” This story has been updated to reflect Carlos Cuerpo’s formal job title as minister of economy, trade and business.
Elections
Defense
Rights
Skills
Policy