The Washington Examiner
"Europe tried it green and failed"
Opinion by Bill Wirtz
28 NOVEMBER 2023
Nearly 300 votes against, only 207 in favor: Those were the final results of a vote in the European Parliament on the "Sustainable Use of Pesticides" directive, the landmark legislation of the European Union's agriculture reforms.
The plans would have cut back on pesticide and fertilizer use, as well as shifted a major part of Europe's farmland use to organic.
Now, the plans are all but dead, the architect of the European Green Deal has resigned, and next year's EU elections are announcing a shift away from environmentalist ideas.
The name "European Green Deal" was modeled after Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's (D-NY) Green New Deal, and it promises cuts in greenhouse gas emissions and healthier lifestyles for consumers.
But it does so at a significant expense to taxpayers and the economy.
With an implementation price tag of $285 billion, the EU did not account for the ripple effects of the policy, ignoring its impact assessments.
In the majority of models presented in the assessment, it is anticipated that GDP will contract.
This contraction is closely linked to the decline in employment, consumption, and exports.
The impact on countries heavily dependent on export industries will be especially severe, as these industries employ people who have limited options for reemployment.
While service sectors such as the financial industry will experience less impact, this will result in a widening disparity of opportunities within the labor market.
Another weight on existing inequalities will be rising energy prices for consumers.
As the German energy shift has shown already, a quick change to renewable energy sources, arrived through subsidization programs, sharply increases consumer energy prices.
Prices of energy, housing, and water are all projected to rise.
Some energy sources could see price rises of over 70%.
Employment in key energy sectors, including gas and coal, could drop by more than 15%, affecting hundreds of thousands of jobs.
As cuts to greenhouse gas emissions have become mandatory, the Dutch government sought to buy out livestock farmers from their professions, causing the now famous Dutch farmer protests last year.
These protests not only caused a farmer's party to win the Senate elections in the Netherlands, but they also contributed to the resignation of the government this year.
The pushback against Brussels's green policies has many parliamentarians in fear for their reelection for next year's European Parliament vote in June 2024.
Overall, polls show that the EU's legislative body is expected to see a right-wing shift, with losses for social democrats and environmentalists alike.
The architect of the European Green Deal, Dutch politician Frans Timmermans, resigned recently to try his luck at national politics; French President Emmanuel Macron believes that agricultural reform should not be on the table as the war continues in Ukraine; and Central and Eastern European countries consider many of the planned reforms as discriminatory feel-good policy for the sake of the West's good conscience.
The EU's green reforms have been driven into a ditch because voters have woken up to the reality of dwindling purchasing power and the real costs of the green policies, which sounded better on paper than in practice.
Bill Wirtz is the senior policy analyst at the Consumer Choice Center, where he focuses on agriculture and trade policy.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets ... 6a39&ei=21
THE EUROPEANS
Re: THE EUROPEANS
REUTERS
"EV charging growth plans slowed by EU's power grid problems"
By Julia Payne
December 4, 2023
BRUSSELS, Dec 4 (Reuters) - Electric vehicle drivers hoping to top up their batteries at one of Repsol's 1,600 Spanish charging stations might well be disappointed, with nearly half lying dormant because they have no power connection.
Such gaps are evident across the European Union, where last week the European Commission announced plans to upgrade the bloc's power grids.
These are due to be implemented in 18 months and include addressing EV charging station power shortages.
But despite the declarations of its leaders, red tape preventing progress towards greener transport in the EU is on the rise, industry groups and energy companies told Reuters, with permitting one of the major roadblocks.
The ease of building an EV charging hub varies considerably country by country.
One industry source said that in Germany a hub was held up for months over rules protecting a single tree, while another located on a busy highway had to wait 10 months for a noise evaluation before it gained approval.
"Although the work of installing a fast and ultra-fast charging point requires only two to three weeks of work, due to different administrative requirements in Spain, the complete process ... can last from one to two years," Repsol said.
Industry group ChargeUp Europe said that while the Commission recognised permitting was a problem, it had not proposed any concrete tools or actions.
Specific guidelines for member states to accelerate permitting are only expected at some point over the next two years, the plan's timeline shows.
This is slowing down the rollout of charging hubs across the 27-member bloc, putting EU targets to phase out petrol and diesel vehicles, as well as its broader climate goals, in peril.
"The time needed for connecting the EV recharging points to the grid can indeed be seen as a barrier to accelerate the uptake of EVs and needs to be tackled," a Commission spokesperson said in an emailed response.
The process for setting up a fast EV station has risen to an average of two years from six months in the last few years, four EV charging companies and the industry's representative said, as firms wade through myriad rules from federal to municipal level.
"It's Kafka meets the energy transition."
"We have so many things working against Europe but we could fix this," Lucie Mattera, secretary general of ChargeUp Europe, told Reuters.
Mattera said the number of EVs will grow faster than the total number of public charging stations which ChargeUp Europe estimates will rise by nine times by 2030, with EVs by ten.
The electrification of transport is one of the key pillars underpinning the EU's goal of reaching carbon neutrality by 2050.
To do so, it will ban sales of CO2-emitting vehicles from 2035 and wants to develop a network of EV charging stations.
That ambition has created bottlenecks for power companies and regulators unprepared for the surge in demand in the EU, where so far only 5.4% of passenger cars run on alternative fuels, including electric, out of a total 286 million.
"It's up to the member states now to really step up," Miguel Stilwell de Andrade, CEO of Portuguese energy firm EDP, said, adding: "There's just an avalanche of projects".
GRIDLOCK
This year, the EU adopted a law to install fast chargers by 2030 every 60 kilometres along designated road networks for passenger cars and every 100 km for heavy-duty vehicles.
But charging developers say obtaining basic data about potential hubs is a major challenge, making investments hard.
This involves finding out whether an average roadside rest stop has a single lamppost or enough cabling that connects to the broader grid.
Hubs often require an extra electricity sub-station, which converts high voltage power into smaller units.
The process then involves requests to power distribution companies (DSOs) to install more capacity.
"Sometimes we have to send physical mail," said Peter Badik, co-founder of EV charging firm Greenway Network, which has set up 1,300 EV chargers in Slovakia, Croatia and Poland.
"Even when they say yes, you don't know when they will do the upgrade," Batik said, adding there was so far no way to track how quickly a power company was building up capacity.
Industry executives said the EU targets were set low and were therefore likely to be met, but might not meet demand for the growing EV fleet of cars and especially trucks.
There is a strong industry impetus to build hubs for electric cars, but not yet for long-haul trucks and buses.
These account for more than 25% of greenhouse gas emissions from EU road transport, which as a whole is responsible for a fifth of the bloc's emissions.
BP, which expects to roll out more than 100,000 car and truck charging stations globally by 2030, said that in Germany alone, it has to deal with around 800 grid companies to set up fast hubs for both cars and trucks.
"Many have individual requirements which can significantly hinder progress," Stefan van Dobschuetz, vice president of BP Pulse Europe, said, adding that was before other types of permits concerning noise and archaeology are applied for.
"There is a clear need for more standardisation (of requirements for charging hubs)," BP's van Dobschuetz added.
That call was echoed by ChargeUp Europe's Mattera who said guidelines from the Commission would likely help EU members align as the rate of new projects varies across the region.
Reporting by Julia Payne; Editing by Alexander Smith
https://www.reuters.com/business/autos- ... 023-12-04/
"EV charging growth plans slowed by EU's power grid problems"
By Julia Payne
December 4, 2023
BRUSSELS, Dec 4 (Reuters) - Electric vehicle drivers hoping to top up their batteries at one of Repsol's 1,600 Spanish charging stations might well be disappointed, with nearly half lying dormant because they have no power connection.
Such gaps are evident across the European Union, where last week the European Commission announced plans to upgrade the bloc's power grids.
These are due to be implemented in 18 months and include addressing EV charging station power shortages.
But despite the declarations of its leaders, red tape preventing progress towards greener transport in the EU is on the rise, industry groups and energy companies told Reuters, with permitting one of the major roadblocks.
The ease of building an EV charging hub varies considerably country by country.
One industry source said that in Germany a hub was held up for months over rules protecting a single tree, while another located on a busy highway had to wait 10 months for a noise evaluation before it gained approval.
"Although the work of installing a fast and ultra-fast charging point requires only two to three weeks of work, due to different administrative requirements in Spain, the complete process ... can last from one to two years," Repsol said.
Industry group ChargeUp Europe said that while the Commission recognised permitting was a problem, it had not proposed any concrete tools or actions.
Specific guidelines for member states to accelerate permitting are only expected at some point over the next two years, the plan's timeline shows.
This is slowing down the rollout of charging hubs across the 27-member bloc, putting EU targets to phase out petrol and diesel vehicles, as well as its broader climate goals, in peril.
"The time needed for connecting the EV recharging points to the grid can indeed be seen as a barrier to accelerate the uptake of EVs and needs to be tackled," a Commission spokesperson said in an emailed response.
The process for setting up a fast EV station has risen to an average of two years from six months in the last few years, four EV charging companies and the industry's representative said, as firms wade through myriad rules from federal to municipal level.
"It's Kafka meets the energy transition."
"We have so many things working against Europe but we could fix this," Lucie Mattera, secretary general of ChargeUp Europe, told Reuters.
Mattera said the number of EVs will grow faster than the total number of public charging stations which ChargeUp Europe estimates will rise by nine times by 2030, with EVs by ten.
The electrification of transport is one of the key pillars underpinning the EU's goal of reaching carbon neutrality by 2050.
To do so, it will ban sales of CO2-emitting vehicles from 2035 and wants to develop a network of EV charging stations.
That ambition has created bottlenecks for power companies and regulators unprepared for the surge in demand in the EU, where so far only 5.4% of passenger cars run on alternative fuels, including electric, out of a total 286 million.
"It's up to the member states now to really step up," Miguel Stilwell de Andrade, CEO of Portuguese energy firm EDP, said, adding: "There's just an avalanche of projects".
GRIDLOCK
This year, the EU adopted a law to install fast chargers by 2030 every 60 kilometres along designated road networks for passenger cars and every 100 km for heavy-duty vehicles.
But charging developers say obtaining basic data about potential hubs is a major challenge, making investments hard.
This involves finding out whether an average roadside rest stop has a single lamppost or enough cabling that connects to the broader grid.
Hubs often require an extra electricity sub-station, which converts high voltage power into smaller units.
The process then involves requests to power distribution companies (DSOs) to install more capacity.
"Sometimes we have to send physical mail," said Peter Badik, co-founder of EV charging firm Greenway Network, which has set up 1,300 EV chargers in Slovakia, Croatia and Poland.
"Even when they say yes, you don't know when they will do the upgrade," Batik said, adding there was so far no way to track how quickly a power company was building up capacity.
Industry executives said the EU targets were set low and were therefore likely to be met, but might not meet demand for the growing EV fleet of cars and especially trucks.
There is a strong industry impetus to build hubs for electric cars, but not yet for long-haul trucks and buses.
These account for more than 25% of greenhouse gas emissions from EU road transport, which as a whole is responsible for a fifth of the bloc's emissions.
BP, which expects to roll out more than 100,000 car and truck charging stations globally by 2030, said that in Germany alone, it has to deal with around 800 grid companies to set up fast hubs for both cars and trucks.
"Many have individual requirements which can significantly hinder progress," Stefan van Dobschuetz, vice president of BP Pulse Europe, said, adding that was before other types of permits concerning noise and archaeology are applied for.
"There is a clear need for more standardisation (of requirements for charging hubs)," BP's van Dobschuetz added.
That call was echoed by ChargeUp Europe's Mattera who said guidelines from the Commission would likely help EU members align as the rate of new projects varies across the region.
Reporting by Julia Payne; Editing by Alexander Smith
https://www.reuters.com/business/autos- ... 023-12-04/
Re: THE EUROPEANS
Newsweek
"NATO Ally Suddenly Blocks Weapons for Ukraine"
Story by Kaitlin Lewis
5 DECEMBER 2023
Bulgarian President Rumen Radev vetoed the transfer of 100 decommissioned armored vehicles from Sofia to Ukraine on Monday just weeks after Bulgaria's parliament approved the agreement.
According to Bulgarian broadcaster NOVA, Radev sent the agreement back to parliament for a new discussion, stating that the representatives who signed off on the deal were not "familiar" enough with the issue.
The Bulgarian National Assembly ratified the agreement between its country's Interior Ministry and Ukraine's Ministry of Defense on November 22, and Sofia officials said that the transport vehicles were no longer needed by Sofia's military.
NATO members including Bulgaria have been steadfast in their support for Ukraine's fight against Russia's aggression.
But as tensions rise between Russia and members of the military alliance, some European countries have begun taking steps to secure their own borders in case the fighting spreads beyond Ukraine.
In his motion published by NOVA Monday, Radev said he does not think that representatives of Bulgarian's National Assembly "sufficiently investigated" whether the vehicles in question were no longer needed by Sofia's Ministry of Internal Affairs.
"From the discussions during the adoption of the draft law in the National Assembly, it is clear that a large part of them were not familiar with the specific list of the equipment provided at the time of the vote, which makes it impossible for them to assess whether it is actually no longer necessary," Radev wrote.
The Bulgarian president added that his Ministry of the Interior's "wartime tasks" were not taken into account when lawmakers approved the transfer, saying there were no plans to replace the ministry's armored vehicles after donating them to Ukraine.
"Moreover, even at the moment, the Border Police General Directorate does not have a sufficient amount of the high-terrain equipment it needs," Radev continued.
"Currently, this deficit is being compensated with transport equipment from the Bulgarian Army."
"The armored high-terrain transport equipment provided to Ukraine with this Agreement could be used in the protection of the Bulgarian border — a matter of essential importance, both for internal security and for the implementation of the country's foreign policy priority for the full accession of Bulgaria to the Schengen area."
Newsweek on Monday reached out to Radev's office and Ukraine's Ministry of Defense via email for comment.
Other NATO members, including the United States, have also promised to send tanks to Ukraine's front lines.
According to a report from the BBC in September, Washington has signed off on providing 31 of its Abrams tanks to Kyiv.
Ukraine is also poised to receive armored vehicles from the United Kingdom (14 Challenger 2 tanks), Germany (14 Leopard 2 tanks) and Spain (six Leopard 2 tanks).
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/na ... 9a54&ei=34
"NATO Ally Suddenly Blocks Weapons for Ukraine"
Story by Kaitlin Lewis
5 DECEMBER 2023
Bulgarian President Rumen Radev vetoed the transfer of 100 decommissioned armored vehicles from Sofia to Ukraine on Monday just weeks after Bulgaria's parliament approved the agreement.
According to Bulgarian broadcaster NOVA, Radev sent the agreement back to parliament for a new discussion, stating that the representatives who signed off on the deal were not "familiar" enough with the issue.
The Bulgarian National Assembly ratified the agreement between its country's Interior Ministry and Ukraine's Ministry of Defense on November 22, and Sofia officials said that the transport vehicles were no longer needed by Sofia's military.
NATO members including Bulgaria have been steadfast in their support for Ukraine's fight against Russia's aggression.
But as tensions rise between Russia and members of the military alliance, some European countries have begun taking steps to secure their own borders in case the fighting spreads beyond Ukraine.
In his motion published by NOVA Monday, Radev said he does not think that representatives of Bulgarian's National Assembly "sufficiently investigated" whether the vehicles in question were no longer needed by Sofia's Ministry of Internal Affairs.
"From the discussions during the adoption of the draft law in the National Assembly, it is clear that a large part of them were not familiar with the specific list of the equipment provided at the time of the vote, which makes it impossible for them to assess whether it is actually no longer necessary," Radev wrote.
The Bulgarian president added that his Ministry of the Interior's "wartime tasks" were not taken into account when lawmakers approved the transfer, saying there were no plans to replace the ministry's armored vehicles after donating them to Ukraine.
"Moreover, even at the moment, the Border Police General Directorate does not have a sufficient amount of the high-terrain equipment it needs," Radev continued.
"Currently, this deficit is being compensated with transport equipment from the Bulgarian Army."
"The armored high-terrain transport equipment provided to Ukraine with this Agreement could be used in the protection of the Bulgarian border — a matter of essential importance, both for internal security and for the implementation of the country's foreign policy priority for the full accession of Bulgaria to the Schengen area."
Newsweek on Monday reached out to Radev's office and Ukraine's Ministry of Defense via email for comment.
Other NATO members, including the United States, have also promised to send tanks to Ukraine's front lines.
According to a report from the BBC in September, Washington has signed off on providing 31 of its Abrams tanks to Kyiv.
Ukraine is also poised to receive armored vehicles from the United Kingdom (14 Challenger 2 tanks), Germany (14 Leopard 2 tanks) and Spain (six Leopard 2 tanks).
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/na ... 9a54&ei=34
Re: THE EUROPEANS
Dagens.Com
"U.S. close to strike a big blow on Russia"
Story by Jeppe W
18 DECEMBER 2023
The United States is reportedly exploring new avenues to seize frozen Russian assets and transfer them to Ukraine, as per recent developments shared by the Financial Times.
Amidst ongoing private negotiations, the U.S. has presented a more assertive approach in G7 meetings, suggesting that it has identified a method to carry out asset confiscation while adhering to international law.
This initiative by the U.S. comes at a time when Western countries are revisiting the idea of redirecting frozen Russian assets to assist Ukraine.
An anonymous official indicated to the Financial Times that the U.S. is optimistic about reaching a decision on this matter swiftly.
The topic is likely to be on the agenda at a potential G7 leaders' meeting, which would coincide with the second anniversary of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
The renewed focus on asset confiscation emerges amidst political frictions within the European Union and the United States.
These internal disagreements have hindered the process of allocating substantial financial aid to Ukraine, estimated to be in the tens of billions of dollars.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets ... 1a0c&ei=23
"U.S. close to strike a big blow on Russia"
Story by Jeppe W
18 DECEMBER 2023
The United States is reportedly exploring new avenues to seize frozen Russian assets and transfer them to Ukraine, as per recent developments shared by the Financial Times.
Amidst ongoing private negotiations, the U.S. has presented a more assertive approach in G7 meetings, suggesting that it has identified a method to carry out asset confiscation while adhering to international law.
This initiative by the U.S. comes at a time when Western countries are revisiting the idea of redirecting frozen Russian assets to assist Ukraine.
An anonymous official indicated to the Financial Times that the U.S. is optimistic about reaching a decision on this matter swiftly.
The topic is likely to be on the agenda at a potential G7 leaders' meeting, which would coincide with the second anniversary of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
The renewed focus on asset confiscation emerges amidst political frictions within the European Union and the United States.
These internal disagreements have hindered the process of allocating substantial financial aid to Ukraine, estimated to be in the tens of billions of dollars.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets ... 1a0c&ei=23
Re: THE EUROPEANS
essanews.com
"Facing the music: Germany and France shift gears on electric car subsidies, leaving EV market in uncertainty"
Story by TBU
18 DECEMBER 2023
Currently, the German government is finalizing next year's budget, a task proving to be more challenging than expected.
Proposed cutbacks notably target the Climate and Transformation Fund.
Initially, €160 billion was set to be disbursed by 2027.
Now, this sum has been reduced by €12 billion.
As a result, Germans considering buying an electric car will be adversely affected.
"Subsidies for buying electric cars and developing solar energy will reduce."
"The expiration of electric car purchase subsidies will happen sooner than projected," stated Vice Chancellor and Minister of Economy, Robert Habeck, on Wednesday, December 13, as quoted by Deutsche Welle.
However, he did not provide a specific date for when these changes will commence.
Thus, those seeking assistance from the government to buy electric vehicles are uncertain how much time they have.
On Saturday, December 16, Robert Habeck announced that applications for electric car purchase subsidies can be submitted until December 17.
The program which previously offered up to €6 thousand ($7,203) towards purchasing a zero-emission car was abruptly and unexpectedly discontinued.
This abrupt change could lead to a significant decline in the popularity of electric cars in Germany, a country already lagging behind in this area.
In November, Volkswagen declared a reduction in the production of electric models in Zwickau due to lower-than-expected interest in electric cars.
In September, the company declared that a previously planned electric car factory would not be built.
The issue was resolved by altering the production location of some models.
This decision might also stem from insufficient demand for electric cars, a hurdle other German brands may encounter.
Subsidy regulations are set to change in France as well.
Those models with excessive CO2 emissions will no longer qualify for government support upon purchase.
As a result, subsidies will no longer be available for the purchase of the Dacia Spring, Tesla Model 3, and MG4, presently the three most popular electric cars in France.
The new French regulation aims to cease state funding for cars produced in China.
However, such a move threatens to disrupt the subsidy system in France, since many electric vehicles manufactured in Europe are too costly to qualify for subsidies under current French regulations.
It seems the meticulously constructed house of cards is beginning to tremble.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/news/fa ... 1a0c&ei=65
"Facing the music: Germany and France shift gears on electric car subsidies, leaving EV market in uncertainty"
Story by TBU
18 DECEMBER 2023
Currently, the German government is finalizing next year's budget, a task proving to be more challenging than expected.
Proposed cutbacks notably target the Climate and Transformation Fund.
Initially, €160 billion was set to be disbursed by 2027.
Now, this sum has been reduced by €12 billion.
As a result, Germans considering buying an electric car will be adversely affected.
"Subsidies for buying electric cars and developing solar energy will reduce."
"The expiration of electric car purchase subsidies will happen sooner than projected," stated Vice Chancellor and Minister of Economy, Robert Habeck, on Wednesday, December 13, as quoted by Deutsche Welle.
However, he did not provide a specific date for when these changes will commence.
Thus, those seeking assistance from the government to buy electric vehicles are uncertain how much time they have.
On Saturday, December 16, Robert Habeck announced that applications for electric car purchase subsidies can be submitted until December 17.
The program which previously offered up to €6 thousand ($7,203) towards purchasing a zero-emission car was abruptly and unexpectedly discontinued.
This abrupt change could lead to a significant decline in the popularity of electric cars in Germany, a country already lagging behind in this area.
In November, Volkswagen declared a reduction in the production of electric models in Zwickau due to lower-than-expected interest in electric cars.
In September, the company declared that a previously planned electric car factory would not be built.
The issue was resolved by altering the production location of some models.
This decision might also stem from insufficient demand for electric cars, a hurdle other German brands may encounter.
Subsidy regulations are set to change in France as well.
Those models with excessive CO2 emissions will no longer qualify for government support upon purchase.
As a result, subsidies will no longer be available for the purchase of the Dacia Spring, Tesla Model 3, and MG4, presently the three most popular electric cars in France.
The new French regulation aims to cease state funding for cars produced in China.
However, such a move threatens to disrupt the subsidy system in France, since many electric vehicles manufactured in Europe are too costly to qualify for subsidies under current French regulations.
It seems the meticulously constructed house of cards is beginning to tremble.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/news/fa ... 1a0c&ei=65
Re: THE EUROPEANS
Newsweek
"Russia Responds to Report About War With NATO"
Story by Brendan Cole
16 JANUARY 2024
Moscow has mocked an article in a German newspaper which says Berlin is preparing for an armed conflict between NATO and Russia.
Bild said a classified document it had seen showed how the German armed forces, the Bundeswehr, were preparing for an attack by Moscow on the alliance's eastern flank and outlined a "path to conflict" between Russia and NATO, according to a translation.
The document seen by the mass-circulation tabloid, which appears to be a training scenario, has not been independently verified.
Newsweek has contacted the German Defense Ministry and NATO for comment.
Russian foreign affairs spokeswoman Maria Zakharova dismissed the predictions as the kind you would find in a "horoscope."
Central to the case for continued military support among Ukraine's allies to fight Russian aggression is the argument that it is fighting for all the West.
In December 2023, President Joe Biden said that if Vladimir Putin won in Ukraine, Russia would attack an alliance member, a claim dismissed by the Russian president as "complete nonsense."
Zakharova derided the reported scenario in a post on Telegram.
"I read the German 'secret plan' leaked into the Bild information gutter."
"It's like a mighty horoscope from last year for Pisces in Cancer," she said.
"I suppose that the analysis was undertaken by the German Foreign Ministry headed by [Annalena] Baerbock."
Under Article 5 of NATO's treaty, an armed attack on an alliance member is considered an attack on all and would force a collective response.
Kyiv's allies have tried to provide aid without getting directly involved in the war.
Bild said the document "Alliance Defense 2025" outlined a scenario in which escalation could start as early as February, when Russia would launch another wave of mobilization.
The article said that the report it had seen outlined a scenario where, emboldened by faltering Western support for Kyiv, Moscow would launch a spring offensive that could push back the Ukrainian army.
By July, Russia could start conducting cyberattacks and other forms of hybrid warfare, mainly in the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, where they would incite ethnic Russian minorities.
Russia could use these clashes as a pretext to deploy troops to the region via its Zapad 2024 exercise involving 50,000 troops in western Russia and Belarus from September.
Medium-range missile systems deployed to its exclave of Kaliningrad could allow Russia to exploit the interim period after the U.S. election and repeat its 2014 invasion of Crimea, but this time on NATO territory.
Border conflicts" and "unrests with numerous casualties" were possible in the "Suwalki corridor" between Belarus and Kaliningrad along the Polish-Lithuanian border by December and Russia, according to the report which predicted the deployment of hundreds of thousands of NATO troops and an "outbreak of war in the summer of 2025."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/ru ... 2b5a&ei=18
"Russia Responds to Report About War With NATO"
Story by Brendan Cole
16 JANUARY 2024
Moscow has mocked an article in a German newspaper which says Berlin is preparing for an armed conflict between NATO and Russia.
Bild said a classified document it had seen showed how the German armed forces, the Bundeswehr, were preparing for an attack by Moscow on the alliance's eastern flank and outlined a "path to conflict" between Russia and NATO, according to a translation.
The document seen by the mass-circulation tabloid, which appears to be a training scenario, has not been independently verified.
Newsweek has contacted the German Defense Ministry and NATO for comment.
Russian foreign affairs spokeswoman Maria Zakharova dismissed the predictions as the kind you would find in a "horoscope."
Central to the case for continued military support among Ukraine's allies to fight Russian aggression is the argument that it is fighting for all the West.
In December 2023, President Joe Biden said that if Vladimir Putin won in Ukraine, Russia would attack an alliance member, a claim dismissed by the Russian president as "complete nonsense."
Zakharova derided the reported scenario in a post on Telegram.
"I read the German 'secret plan' leaked into the Bild information gutter."
"It's like a mighty horoscope from last year for Pisces in Cancer," she said.
"I suppose that the analysis was undertaken by the German Foreign Ministry headed by [Annalena] Baerbock."
Under Article 5 of NATO's treaty, an armed attack on an alliance member is considered an attack on all and would force a collective response.
Kyiv's allies have tried to provide aid without getting directly involved in the war.
Bild said the document "Alliance Defense 2025" outlined a scenario in which escalation could start as early as February, when Russia would launch another wave of mobilization.
The article said that the report it had seen outlined a scenario where, emboldened by faltering Western support for Kyiv, Moscow would launch a spring offensive that could push back the Ukrainian army.
By July, Russia could start conducting cyberattacks and other forms of hybrid warfare, mainly in the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, where they would incite ethnic Russian minorities.
Russia could use these clashes as a pretext to deploy troops to the region via its Zapad 2024 exercise involving 50,000 troops in western Russia and Belarus from September.
Medium-range missile systems deployed to its exclave of Kaliningrad could allow Russia to exploit the interim period after the U.S. election and repeat its 2014 invasion of Crimea, but this time on NATO territory.
Border conflicts" and "unrests with numerous casualties" were possible in the "Suwalki corridor" between Belarus and Kaliningrad along the Polish-Lithuanian border by December and Russia, according to the report which predicted the deployment of hundreds of thousands of NATO troops and an "outbreak of war in the summer of 2025."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/ru ... 2b5a&ei=18
Re: THE EUROPEANS
The Associated Press“Therefore I say that it is a narrow policy to suppose that this country or that is to be marked out as the eternal ally or the perpetual enemy of England."
"We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies."
"Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow.”
― Lord Palmerston
"American allies worry the US is growing less dependable, whether Trump or Biden wins"
Story by JILL LAWLESS, Associated Press
11 FEBRUARY 2024
LONDON (AP) — As chances rise of a Joe Biden-Donald Trump rematch in the U.S. presidential election race, America’s allies are bracing for a bumpy ride.
Many worry that a second term for Trump would be an earthquake, but tremors already abound — and concerns are rising that the U.S. could grow less dependable regardless of who wins.
With a divided electorate and gridlock in Congress, the next American president could easily become consumed by manifold challenges at home — before even beginning to address flashpoints around the world from Ukraine to the Middle East.
French President Emmanuel Macron’s recent verdict was blunt: America’s “first priority is itself.”
The first Trump administration stress-tested the bonds between the U.S. and its allies, particularly in Europe.
Trump derided the leaders of some friendly nations, including Germany’s Angela Merkel and Britain’s Theresa May, while praising authoritarians such as Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Russian leader Vladimir Putin.
He has called China’s Xi Jinping “brilliant” and Hungary’s Viktor Orbán “a great leader.”
In campaign speeches, Trump remains skeptical of organizations such as NATO, often lamenting the billions the U.S. spends on the military alliance whose support has been critical to Ukraine’s fight against Russia's invasion.
Biden, in contrast, has made support for Ukraine a key priority and moral imperative.
But Biden’s assertion after his election in 2020 that “America is back” on the global stage has not been entirely borne out.
Congressional Republicans have stalled more military aid for Ukraine, while America's influence has been unable to contain conflict in the Middle East
Thomas Gift, director of the Centre on U.S. Politics at University College London, said that whoever wins the presidential race, the direction of travel will be the same – toward a multipolar planet in which the United States is no longer “the indisputable world superpower.”
Most allied leaders refrain from commenting directly on the U.S. election, sticking to the line that it’s for Americans to pick their leader.
They are conscious that they will have to work with the eventual winner, whoever it is — and behind the scenes, governments will be doing the “backroom work” of quietly establishing links with the contenders’ political teams, said Richard Dalton, a former senior British diplomat.
But many of America's European NATO allies are worried that with or without Trump, the U.S. is becoming less reliable.
Some have started to talk openly about the need for members to ramp up military spending, and to plan for an alliance without the United States.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said he was “currently on the phone a lot with my colleagues and asking them to do more” to support Ukraine.
Germany is the second-largest donor of military aid to Kyiv, behind the U.S., but Scholz recently told Die Zeit that the country couldn’t fill any gap on its own if “the U.S.A. ceased to be a supporter.”
Russia, meanwhile, is busy bolstering ties with China, Iran and North Korea and trying to chip away at Ukraine’s international support.
Macron also suggested American attention was focused far from Europe.
If Washington's top priority is the U.S., he said its second is China.
“This is also why I want a stronger Europe, that knows how to protect itself and isn’t dependent on others,” Macron said at a January news conference.
Trump does have supporters in Europe, notably pro-Russia populists such as Hungary's Orbán.
But former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson raised some eyebrows when he argued recently that “a Trump presidency could be just what the world needs.”
Johnson is a strong supporter of Ukraine in its struggle against Russian invasion, whereas Trump has frequently praised Putin and said he’d end the war within 24 hours.
However, Johnson said in a Daily Mail column that he didn’t believe Trump would “ditch the Ukrainians,” but instead would help Ukraine win the war, leaving the West stronger “and the world more stable.”
Bronwen Maddox, director of the international affairs think tank Chatham House, said arguments like that underestimate “how destabilizing” Trump has been, and likely would continue to be if reelected.
“For those who say his first term did not do much damage to international order, one answer is that he took the U.S. out of the JCPOA, the deal to curb Iran’s nuclear program."
"Iran’s acceleration of its work since then has left it a threshold nuclear weapon state,” she said during a recent speech on the year ahead.
Biden was a critic of Trump's Iran policy but hasn't managed to rebuild bridges with Tehran, which continues to flex its muscles across the region.
Dalton, a former U.K. ambassador to Iran, said prospects for the Middle East would be “slightly worse” under Trump than Biden.
But he said divergence on the region’s main tensions — the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and Iran's ambitions — would be limited.
“No U.S. administration is going to make a serious effort to resolve differences with Iran through diplomacy," Dalton told The Associated Press.
"That ship sailed quite some time ago.”
Palestinians and their supporters, meanwhile, implore Biden to temper U.S. support for Israel as the civilian death toll from the war in Gaza climbs.
But hard-liners in Israel argue the U.S. is already restraining the offensive against Hamas too much.
Itamar Ben-Gvir, Israel’s far-right national security minister, recently said Biden was not giving Israel his “full backing” and that “if Trump was in power, the U.S. conduct would be completely different.”
Much like its allies, America's rivals are not openly expressing a preference for the election outcome.
Trump developed a strong rapport with Turkey’s Erdogan, calling them “very good friends” during a 2019 meeting at the White House.
Yet Turkey-U.S. relations were fraught during his tenure.
The Trump administration removed Turkey from its F-35 fighter jet project over Ankara’s decision to purchase Russian-made missile defense systems, while Trump himself threatened to ruin Turkey’s economy.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told CBS in January that he doesn't “believe there will be any difference” between a Trump and a Biden presidency.
He argued that Russia-U.S. relations have been going downhill since George W. Bush's administration.
China, where leaders’ initial warmth toward Trump soured into tit-for-tat tariffs and rising tensions, little changed under Biden, who continued his predecessor’s tough stance toward the United States’ strategic rival.
Zhao Minghao, a professor of international relations at Fudan University in Shanghai, said that for China, the two candidates were like “two ‘bowls of poison.’”
Gift, from University College London, said the move to a more fractured world is "going to happen regardless of whether Donald Trump or Joe Biden is elected.”
“It’s just sort of a reality," he said.
___
Associated Press writers Jiwon Song in Seoul, South Korea, Kirsten Grieshaber in Berlin, Dasha Litvinova in Tallinn, Estonia, Suzan Fraser in Ankara, Turkey, and Nomaan Merchant in Washington contributed to this story.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... r-BB1i6f9O
Re: THE EUROPEANS
Reuters
"French recycling plant on fire housing 900 tonnes of lithium batteries"
Story by Reuters
18 FEBRUARY 2024
PARIS (Reuters) - Some 900 tonnes of lithium batteries were on fire at a battery recycling plant in southern France, authorities said on Sunday, sending a cloud of thick black smoke into the sky above the site.
The fire broke out on Saturday in a warehouse owned by French recycling group SNAM in Viviez, north of Toulouse, local councillor Pascal Mazet said in a statement on X.
Lithium batteries are vital in electrical devices from phones to electric cars, but contain combustible materials which, combined with the energy they store, can make them vulnerable to catching fire when exposed to heat - a potential danger given the toxic materials their burning can emit.
In January 2023, a large fire broke out in a Normandy warehouse storing car components and thousands of lithium batteries, which was brought under control without causing any casualties.
Firefighters said there were no indications of the release of dangerous air pollution.
French media showed thick smoke over the Viviez site and newspaper Le Monde reported that up to 70 firefighters were battling to get the fire under control.
Charles Giusti, a local official in the Aveyron prefecture which includes Viviez, said on BFM television there was no danger to people living nearby.
The prefecture said in a statement overnight that while the fire was under control, it was burning slowly and was expected to last for several hours.
SNAM did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
A security note for the site warns that in case of a major fire, products present there were likely to result in the emission of cadmium through fumes.
Cadmium is highly toxic and dangerous to the environment, but the note said that considering the environment of the factory and the behaviour of toxic fumes, these should not pose an immediate health risk to residents.
(Reporting by Geert De Clercq; Editing by David Holmes)
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/fr ... ae03&ei=21
"French recycling plant on fire housing 900 tonnes of lithium batteries"
Story by Reuters
18 FEBRUARY 2024
PARIS (Reuters) - Some 900 tonnes of lithium batteries were on fire at a battery recycling plant in southern France, authorities said on Sunday, sending a cloud of thick black smoke into the sky above the site.
The fire broke out on Saturday in a warehouse owned by French recycling group SNAM in Viviez, north of Toulouse, local councillor Pascal Mazet said in a statement on X.
Lithium batteries are vital in electrical devices from phones to electric cars, but contain combustible materials which, combined with the energy they store, can make them vulnerable to catching fire when exposed to heat - a potential danger given the toxic materials their burning can emit.
In January 2023, a large fire broke out in a Normandy warehouse storing car components and thousands of lithium batteries, which was brought under control without causing any casualties.
Firefighters said there were no indications of the release of dangerous air pollution.
French media showed thick smoke over the Viviez site and newspaper Le Monde reported that up to 70 firefighters were battling to get the fire under control.
Charles Giusti, a local official in the Aveyron prefecture which includes Viviez, said on BFM television there was no danger to people living nearby.
The prefecture said in a statement overnight that while the fire was under control, it was burning slowly and was expected to last for several hours.
SNAM did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
A security note for the site warns that in case of a major fire, products present there were likely to result in the emission of cadmium through fumes.
Cadmium is highly toxic and dangerous to the environment, but the note said that considering the environment of the factory and the behaviour of toxic fumes, these should not pose an immediate health risk to residents.
(Reporting by Geert De Clercq; Editing by David Holmes)
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/fr ... ae03&ei=21
Re: THE EUROPEANS
CNBC
"NATO countries scramble to deny ground troops will go into Ukraine after Moscow warns of ‘inevitable’ conflict"
Holly Ellyatt @HOLLYELLYATT
PUBLISHED TUE, FEB 27 2024
KEY POINTS
* France’s suggestion that Ukraine’s allies have not “ruled out” sending ground troops into Ukraine has caused indignation and outrage in Russia.
* Moscow officials warned that it could provoke a direct conflict between Russia and NATO member states.
* Eyebrows were raised Monday when French President Emmanuel Macron suggested that European heads of state and Western officials had discussed the possibility of sending their ground troops into the war.
* Several European nations rowed back on Macron’s comments, saying they had no plans to send troops into Ukraine.
France’s suggestion that Ukraine’s allies could potentially send ground troops into Ukraine has caused indignation and outrage in Russia, with officials warning it could provoke a direct conflict between Russia and NATO member states.
Eyebrows were raised Monday when French President Emmanuel Macron suggested that European heads of state and Western officials, who met in Paris on Monday, had talked about the possibility of sending ground troops into Ukraine.
“There is no consensus today to officially, openly, and with endorsement, send troops on the ground."
"But in terms of dynamics, nothing should be ruled out."
"We will do everything necessary to ensure that Russia cannot win this war,” Macron said at a news conference Monday evening.
Moscow was quick to seize on the comments, with the Kremlin’s press secretary, Dmitry Peskov, telling reporters Tuesday that if European NATO members sent troops to fight in Ukraine it would make a conflict between Russia and NATO inevitable.
“In this case, we need to talk not about probability, but about inevitability, and that’s how we evaluate it,” he said, news agency Tass reported, when asked about the likelihood of a direct conflict between Russia and the Western military alliance if its troops crossed the border.
Peskov added that NATO countries “must also evaluate” the consequences of such actions and “ask the question whether this corresponds to their interests, and most importantly, to the interests of the citizens of their countries.”
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov also weighed in, advising any countries considering sending troops to Ukraine to “use their heads,” news agency Tass added.
“It seems to me that those who not only express such thoughts, but even admit them in their heads, should still use that head for more rational thoughts, [as it’s] safer for Europe,” Lavrov said at a news conference Tuesday.
European allies row back on the idea
European allies have been quick to play down the comments, with Germany issuing a hasty denial Tuesday that it had any plans to put “German troops on Ukrainian soil.”
The U.K. and Spain also publicly rejected the idea, which would see troops from NATO member states in direct conflict with longtime nemesis and nuclear power Russia.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz insisted there was no consensus on deploying ground troops among European leaders and officials from the U.K., Canada and U.S. who met in Paris on Monday.
“Once again, in a very good debate, it was discussed that what was agreed from the outset among ourselves and with each other also applies to the future, namely that there will be no ground troops, no soldiers on Ukrainian soil sent there by European countries or NATO states,” Scholz said on the sidelines of an event.
Germany’s vice chancellor, Robert Habeck, also commented with “advice” for France, saying it would be more helpful for the country to send weaponry and tanks to Ukraine, Reuters reported.
He likewise said that there would be “no German soldiers on Ukrainian soil.”
A spokesman for the U.K. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak said the country had no plans for a “large-scale” deployment of troops to Ukraine, separate from the small number of personnel that were already in the country to support Ukraine’s armed forces.
Madrid has also publicly refuted the notion, with government spokesperson Pilar Alegria saying Spain does not agree with a French proposal to send European ground troops to Ukraine.
She added that Spain wanted to limit aid to sending more weapons and other materials to Kyiv.
“Unity has been and is the most effective weapon Europe has to face up against [Russian President Vladimir] Putin’s attack,” Alegria said, according to comments translated by Reuters.
Later Tuesday, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg told The Associated Press news agency that NATO has no plans to send combat troops into Ukraine.
Stoltenberg said that “NATO allies are providing unprecedented support to Ukraine."
"We have done that since 2014 and stepped up after the full-scale invasion."
"But there are no plans for NATO combat troops on the ground in Ukraine.”
NATO membership obliges member states to commit to protect each other if any one of them is attacked.
“Article 5 provides that if a NATO Ally is the victim of an armed attack, each and every other member of the Alliance will consider this act of violence as an armed attack against all members and will take the actions it deems necessary to assist the Ally attacked,” the group states.
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/02/27/moscow- ... -idea.html
"NATO countries scramble to deny ground troops will go into Ukraine after Moscow warns of ‘inevitable’ conflict"
Holly Ellyatt @HOLLYELLYATT
PUBLISHED TUE, FEB 27 2024
KEY POINTS
* France’s suggestion that Ukraine’s allies have not “ruled out” sending ground troops into Ukraine has caused indignation and outrage in Russia.
* Moscow officials warned that it could provoke a direct conflict between Russia and NATO member states.
* Eyebrows were raised Monday when French President Emmanuel Macron suggested that European heads of state and Western officials had discussed the possibility of sending their ground troops into the war.
* Several European nations rowed back on Macron’s comments, saying they had no plans to send troops into Ukraine.
France’s suggestion that Ukraine’s allies could potentially send ground troops into Ukraine has caused indignation and outrage in Russia, with officials warning it could provoke a direct conflict between Russia and NATO member states.
Eyebrows were raised Monday when French President Emmanuel Macron suggested that European heads of state and Western officials, who met in Paris on Monday, had talked about the possibility of sending ground troops into Ukraine.
“There is no consensus today to officially, openly, and with endorsement, send troops on the ground."
"But in terms of dynamics, nothing should be ruled out."
"We will do everything necessary to ensure that Russia cannot win this war,” Macron said at a news conference Monday evening.
Moscow was quick to seize on the comments, with the Kremlin’s press secretary, Dmitry Peskov, telling reporters Tuesday that if European NATO members sent troops to fight in Ukraine it would make a conflict between Russia and NATO inevitable.
“In this case, we need to talk not about probability, but about inevitability, and that’s how we evaluate it,” he said, news agency Tass reported, when asked about the likelihood of a direct conflict between Russia and the Western military alliance if its troops crossed the border.
Peskov added that NATO countries “must also evaluate” the consequences of such actions and “ask the question whether this corresponds to their interests, and most importantly, to the interests of the citizens of their countries.”
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov also weighed in, advising any countries considering sending troops to Ukraine to “use their heads,” news agency Tass added.
“It seems to me that those who not only express such thoughts, but even admit them in their heads, should still use that head for more rational thoughts, [as it’s] safer for Europe,” Lavrov said at a news conference Tuesday.
European allies row back on the idea
European allies have been quick to play down the comments, with Germany issuing a hasty denial Tuesday that it had any plans to put “German troops on Ukrainian soil.”
The U.K. and Spain also publicly rejected the idea, which would see troops from NATO member states in direct conflict with longtime nemesis and nuclear power Russia.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz insisted there was no consensus on deploying ground troops among European leaders and officials from the U.K., Canada and U.S. who met in Paris on Monday.
“Once again, in a very good debate, it was discussed that what was agreed from the outset among ourselves and with each other also applies to the future, namely that there will be no ground troops, no soldiers on Ukrainian soil sent there by European countries or NATO states,” Scholz said on the sidelines of an event.
Germany’s vice chancellor, Robert Habeck, also commented with “advice” for France, saying it would be more helpful for the country to send weaponry and tanks to Ukraine, Reuters reported.
He likewise said that there would be “no German soldiers on Ukrainian soil.”
A spokesman for the U.K. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak said the country had no plans for a “large-scale” deployment of troops to Ukraine, separate from the small number of personnel that were already in the country to support Ukraine’s armed forces.
Madrid has also publicly refuted the notion, with government spokesperson Pilar Alegria saying Spain does not agree with a French proposal to send European ground troops to Ukraine.
She added that Spain wanted to limit aid to sending more weapons and other materials to Kyiv.
“Unity has been and is the most effective weapon Europe has to face up against [Russian President Vladimir] Putin’s attack,” Alegria said, according to comments translated by Reuters.
Later Tuesday, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg told The Associated Press news agency that NATO has no plans to send combat troops into Ukraine.
Stoltenberg said that “NATO allies are providing unprecedented support to Ukraine."
"We have done that since 2014 and stepped up after the full-scale invasion."
"But there are no plans for NATO combat troops on the ground in Ukraine.”
NATO membership obliges member states to commit to protect each other if any one of them is attacked.
“Article 5 provides that if a NATO Ally is the victim of an armed attack, each and every other member of the Alliance will consider this act of violence as an armed attack against all members and will take the actions it deems necessary to assist the Ally attacked,” the group states.
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/02/27/moscow- ... -idea.html
Re: THE EUROPEANS
RBC Ukraine
"Zelenskyy responds to Macron's statement on sending Western troops to Ukraine"
Story by Daria Shekina
29 FEBRUARY 2024
President Volodymyr Zelenskyy reacted to the statement of his French counterpart Emmanuel Macron regarding the deployment of troops from Western countries to Ukraine.
However, the head of state could not provide a detailed comment, as he is not aware of all the details of this issue, according to a statement of Volodymyr Zelenskyy at a joint press conference with Albanian Prime Minister Edi Rama.
"I wasn't at that summit (in Paris - Ed.)."
"He (French President Emmanuel Macron - Ed.) said he would talk about certain new ideas on how to strengthen Ukraine."
"And he said he would share information with me when he arrives in Ukraine."
"He will be here in mid-March," Zelenskyy said.
The president noted that he would be happy to respond to such questions when he personally discusses the matter with Macron.
After all, he will then be "deep into the details."
"But the most important thing to understand is that when we share different initiatives, they are all like the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th step."
"And the first step is to protect and remain strong."
"This is important."
"Because now we have questions about aid packages with our European partners and the USA," Zelenskyy added.
Background
On February 26, a working meeting of about 20 European leaders took place at the Élysée Palace in Paris.
Conference participants discussed ways to counter Russia and possible ways to help Ukraine confront the aggressor in the context of the escalation on the front lines in recent weeks.
During the summit, French President Emmanuel Macron did not rule out NATO deploying troops to assist Ukraine.
According to him, the main problem lies in the absence of consensus on this issue at the moment.
Several NATO countries have already spoken out against this idea, including the United States, Germany, Czechia, Bulgaria, Spain, and Italy.
At the same time, there are countries willing to consider such a possibility, such as Lithuania.
NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg was categorical, stating that "there are no plans for NATO combat troops on the ground in Ukraine."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/ze ... 2652&ei=64
"Zelenskyy responds to Macron's statement on sending Western troops to Ukraine"
Story by Daria Shekina
29 FEBRUARY 2024
President Volodymyr Zelenskyy reacted to the statement of his French counterpart Emmanuel Macron regarding the deployment of troops from Western countries to Ukraine.
However, the head of state could not provide a detailed comment, as he is not aware of all the details of this issue, according to a statement of Volodymyr Zelenskyy at a joint press conference with Albanian Prime Minister Edi Rama.
"I wasn't at that summit (in Paris - Ed.)."
"He (French President Emmanuel Macron - Ed.) said he would talk about certain new ideas on how to strengthen Ukraine."
"And he said he would share information with me when he arrives in Ukraine."
"He will be here in mid-March," Zelenskyy said.
The president noted that he would be happy to respond to such questions when he personally discusses the matter with Macron.
After all, he will then be "deep into the details."
"But the most important thing to understand is that when we share different initiatives, they are all like the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th step."
"And the first step is to protect and remain strong."
"This is important."
"Because now we have questions about aid packages with our European partners and the USA," Zelenskyy added.
Background
On February 26, a working meeting of about 20 European leaders took place at the Élysée Palace in Paris.
Conference participants discussed ways to counter Russia and possible ways to help Ukraine confront the aggressor in the context of the escalation on the front lines in recent weeks.
During the summit, French President Emmanuel Macron did not rule out NATO deploying troops to assist Ukraine.
According to him, the main problem lies in the absence of consensus on this issue at the moment.
Several NATO countries have already spoken out against this idea, including the United States, Germany, Czechia, Bulgaria, Spain, and Italy.
At the same time, there are countries willing to consider such a possibility, such as Lithuania.
NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg was categorical, stating that "there are no plans for NATO combat troops on the ground in Ukraine."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/ze ... 2652&ei=64