President Donald Trump paused a 50 percent tariff on Canadian goods hours before it was scheduled to kick in, saying the two countries had reached a preliminary deal.

In a post on social media late Tuesday, Trump announced that he would delay the duties, set to go into effect at midnight on Wednesday, for three days “based on the fact that Canada and the U.S.A., subject to the finalization of documents, have a DEAL!”

The president teased that the agreement could include resurrecting the Keystone XL Pipeline, a long-stalled pipeline extension intended to pump crude oil from Alberta, Canada to the Midwest of the United States.

Paul Dallison writes Declassified, a weekly satirical column.

It’s official: Members of the European Parliament are not the most dangerous creatures in Europe!

French MEP Manon Aubry wrote on social media on Monday that she was in hospital after being bitten by a viper. Aubry didn’t say where the snake attack took place, but she was smiling in her post, despite what she said were “complications related to the poisoning.”

The leftist MEP is far from the only politician to have been attacked by an animal, however. Here are a few more (no animals were harmed in the writing of this article):

Snakebitten

The chances of being bitten by a snake in Europe are slim — there are “fewer than 300 such cases in France each year,” according to Aubry — but it’s more common when you venture further afield.

Last year, Inna Gardiner, a politician from Jersey — the largest of the Channel Islands — was bitten by a Malayan Pit Viper during a holiday in Thailand. And West Virginia politician Doug Skaff was bitten twice by venomous snakes in 2024 while removing campaign signs (and he hadn’t even won the election he was competing in).

In a rare case of “man attacks snake,” U.S. Health Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr. was filmed earlier this year picking up a pair of snakes in the home of Mehmet Oz, a former TV doctor who now heads up the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. “Cheryl cheerleads the removal of a pair of Black Racers from Dr Oz’s patio,” Kennedy captioned a social media post of the incident, referencing his wife, actress Cheryl Hines. A woman in the footage can be heard speaking for all of us by simply saying: “Why?”

This is the same RFK Jr. who cut the head off a dead whale and strapped it to the roof of the family minivan; who dumped a dead bear cub carcass in Central Park; and who cut off the penis of a road-killed raccoon.

Something to sink your teeth into

During a visit to Chişinău in 2023, Austrian President Alexander Van der Bellen was bitten by a rescue dog belonging to Moldovan President Maia Sandu. Sandu had brought her dog, named Codruț, to a photo op with Van der Bellen and Slovenian President Nataša Pirc Musar. Van der Bellen reached down to pet Codruț, but the dog lunged at him and snapped at his right hand. Sandu apologized and explained Codruț had become overwhelmed (presumably as it’s such a big fan of Austrian politics).

Sandro Garibaldi, a member of the regional council in Liguria for the League, was bitten on the hand by a wolf earlier this year. Garibaldi had interrupted the wolf in the process of killing some sheep. It’s not clear if the wolf in question was the same one that killed European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s pet pony, Dolly.

Former German Chancellor Angela Merkel wasn’t bitten by Russian President Vladimir Putin’s dog when she visited his home in Sochi back in 2007; she was just scared by it. However, she was pecked by an Australian rainbow lorikeet during a visit to a bird park in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania in 2021, causing her to scream in a similar fashion to when she used to see Silvio Berlusconi at European Council summits.

Back in Covid times, Brazil’s President Jair Bolsonaro — who had dismissed the seriousness of the epidemic and criticized containment measures ordered by local governors, but also tested positive for the disease — was taking a walk while under quarantine at the presidential palace when he was bitten on the hand by a rhea. “This rhea represents us,” posted Margarida Salomão of the Workers’ Party.

In 2009, then-New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg was bitten on the hand by a groundhog. Rumors that Bloomberg is being bitten on the hand continuously were unconfirmed at the time of going to press.

Former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson was attacked by an ostrich at a safari park in Texas last year. Johnson’s wife, Carrie, posted a clip of the incident on Instagram in which he can be heard saying: “Cripes! Oh, fucking hell.”

On a more serious note, Greece’s King Alexander died after a monkey attacked him back in 1920. The king was walking in the grounds of a castle outside Athens when a Barbary macaque attacked his dog. Another monkey then bit the king, and the wounds soon became infected and turned septic. Three weeks later, he died aged 27.

In the White Ouch

It’s almost mandatory to be attacked by an animal if you are the president of the United States. In 1979, Jimmy Carter was out fishing when he came across a swamp rabbit. The story went that the rabbit was “berserk,” “enraged,” “making strange hissing noises and gnashing its teeth.” Then-Press Secretary Jody Powell said it was “intent upon climbing into the presidential boat.”

Every year at Thanksgiving, the president pardons a turkey, and in 2001, the turkey thanked George W. Bush by lunging toward his crotch — attacking him below the 49th parallel, if you will.

In 2015, when still a presidential candidate, Donald Trump was photographed by Time magazine with a bald eagle called Uncle Sam, which clearly did not care for the billionaire and tried to bite him. Trump has yet to start a war with eagles.

Andrew Jackson, the seventh U.S. president, was not attacked by an animal, as far as we know. But he did have a parrot called Poll that was rather foulmouthed and was removed from Jackson’s funeral service for spouting profanities at the mourners.

BRUSSELS — Europe’s seas are overheating and climate change is to blame, researchers said Wednesday, warning that marine heat waves are threatening ecosystems and coastal communities. 

The Atlantic and the Mediterranean are far hotter than normal, with some parts of the oceans around Europe reaching 6 degrees Celsius above average this week.

The culprit is climate change, scientists from the World Weather Attribution consortium said in a study released Wednesday. They found global warming is the driver behind this year’s high ocean temperatures.

The report lands during a summer marked by record-breaking heat waves on land, droughts and fires — all worsened by climate change, according to the same scientists. In the sea, the soaring temperatures harm marine species, boost jellyfish populations and increase the risk of destructive storms later in the year.

“This summer, we’ve seen some really exceptional ocean temperatures around Europe,” said Catherine Gregory, a climate scientist at the University of Bern who contributed to the study.

“By July, the average temperature of the entire Mediterranean Sea was just over 27C, which was the highest July value on record,” she added. “We’ve had a buoy reading to the west of Mallorca measuring more than 33C in open water … and we’ve seen similarly extreme conditions in the North Atlantic.” 

The scientists used peer-reviewed methods to analyze four regions: The Eastern and Western Mediterranean; the Atlantic around the Bay of Biscay and Iberian Peninsula; and the seas around Ireland and western Britain. 

“We find it’s the most extreme July marine heat wave conditions in the record for the Western Mediterranean, the Celtic region, and for the Bay of Biscay-Iberian Peninsula region,” said Gregory. 

The scientists concluded climate change made both Mediterranean regions 2C warmer while heating the Iberian waters by 1.4C and the Irish seas by 1.3C. 

Global warming has also vastly expanded marine heat waves, the researchers found when comparing this year’s conditions to a simulated world without climate change. This year, 90 percent of the Bay of Biscay experienced hot temperatures and 80 percent of the Western Mediterranean; without global warming, only 40 percent of each region would have been affected.

The difference is even more dramatic in the Eastern Mediterranean, where 70 percent of the seas experienced marine heat waves this year, a figure plunging to 9 percent in a world without climate change. Around Ireland, the extent drops from 80 percent to 30 percent. 

Oceans absorb the vast majority of the excess heat produced by burning fossil fuels. The warming waters push some species to relocate in search of cooler seas, while those that cannot move — such as corals or seagrasses — are at risk of mass die-offs. 

“We have what we call winners and losers. So a lot of species wane in abundance or completely disappear while others bloom and proliferate,” said John Bruno, an ecologist from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and one of the study’s co-authors. 

In the United Kingdom, for example, fishermen have found octopuses spreading north in the warming waters, decimating the shellfish catch with their voracious appetite for crabs. In France, jellyfish — which thrive in warmer waters — are clogging up nuclear power stations. 

Beyond the impact on ecosystems and the fishing industry, marine heat waves increase the extreme weather threat to coastal communities. The scientists noted that warm oceans supercharge the dangerous combination of heat and humidity along the shores, while also building up moisture that can fuel storms, such as the deadly 2024 floods in Valencia. 

“We find that when we have very warm sea surface temperatures, they provide added energy to storms,” said Gregory. “And then we also have the added impact of additional stress during land heat waves as well.”

Like this content? Consider signing up for POLITICO’s Canberra Playbook newsletter.

ESSENTIALS

• One Nation is framing our next big debates (echoes of Trump)
• The major parties are chalking up legislative wins (echoes of Biden)
• Sen. James Paterson swings big in our Playbook Interview
• Can Canberra find an Australian way on AI and data centers?

DRIVING THE DAY

One Nation is setting the terms for the next round of polarizing debates, as the major parties close in on major legislative achievements: gambling ad reform and NDIS cost reform.

Consider this: Pauline Hanson’s dig at Labor’s rigid superannuation access rules, and a claim that Labor plans to raid super funds, has created endless on-air and coffee line chat — and a wedge into housing policy debates. Razor-sharp communications are getting the sort of cut-through Tim Wilson has been dreaming of on those two issues.

Barnaby Joyce then used a Radio National interview Tuesday to cast all government politicians as liars and used his assertion as proof that voters will be fleeced in new ways by Labor.

Joyce was already dominating the attention of non-Canberrans at that point by promising to cut cigarette packet prices from $46 to $21. That tees up a debate on the massive unintended consequences of government tobacco policy: a huge illegal market.

To sideline the Coalition, Labor made One Nation the focus of its House Question Time on Monday, and then Tyron Whitten teamed up with the Coalition in Senate Question Time to pile onto Labor’s handling of veterans.

Whether it was Labor and Liberal squeezed on the airwaves, the Coalition squeezed in the chamber, or the Nationals just forgotten about: One Nation has been hogging the attention and and deciding what comes next.

LABOR’S PR DISASTER: With gambling and NDIS legislation now agreed, that opens the way for more Coalition and One Nation attacks on Veterans’ Affairs Minister Matt Keogh.

Taylor’s tactics team is this morning focusing on how to press that advantage against Labor.

Keogh’s vulnerability here: After Keogh initially argued he didn’t have time to meet visiting veterans angry that Labor’s new price cap on health support ($5,000 annually) discriminated against those with long travel distances for care, he did meet them. But former pilot Tim Nelson said of the eventual meeting: “He walked into the room, refused to shake our hand, sat down with his arms crossed and rolled his eyes.” Keogh rejected that characterization.

THREE CHEERS: Anthony Albanese has a trio of problems off his plate, after his first leader-to-leader negotiations with Angus Taylor. NDIS has passed the Senate, and contentious gambling reforms and news media bargaining updates will pass the Senate by tonight with support from the Coalition. Press Gallery veteran Michelle Grattan has you covered.

GOOD ENOUGH: Liberal MP Simon Kennedy pushed his party to go further on restricting gambling ads but is satisfied with the dealmaking. “Is it perfect? No. Is it far better than what the PM wanted three weeks ago? Yes,” he told Playbook.

Kennedy said the Coalition and Greens forcing a Senate inquiry, which heard gambling companies were offering cocaine and sex workers as inducements, was key. “The PM capitulated to the gambling lobby, but misread the room and had to capitulate to the Australian public,” Kennedy said.

LESS TO GIVE: Labor didn’t have to bend as much for a win on its NDIS reforms, fast-tracking a fix to its budget’s so-called widow’s tax — which it was going to do anyway. “It took me a millisecond to say: ‘Yup, we’re up for that’,” the PM said. Big win for Jenny McAllister.

WHAT THE HELL IS HAPPENING ON IMMIGRATION? The Cabinet is silent. The Minister’s office only wants to give off-record non-answers. And it wasn’t raised in Labor caucus, according to our sources in the room.

What if? A figure from One Nation or the Coalition self-destructs on immigration because Labor is leaving them the space to do it this week? It worked last week: Sen. Andrew Bragg blew up his colleagues at the Press Club, and we all would have paid much less attention if Tony Burke had just given his own Press Club speech on the topic, as planned.

BY THE NUMBERS

AUSTRALIA’S ILLEGAL TOBACCO MARKET 

Pauline Hanson wants cheaper legal cigarettes to stamp out black market trade, and she upped the ante this week, moving from a 50 percent excise cut to a 75 percent cut.

PUFF SITUATION: More than 50 percent of nicotine consumed in Australia is now illegal, and the black market is burning a $3.3 billion hole in tax revenue every year. Everyone (except Labor) agrees we’re in our own Prohibition-era. As Barnaby put it to ABC: “If you keep on putting up the price of cigarettes, you’re gonna get more mafia.”

The illegal market is now so entrenched, a simple price cut might not nudge people back to legal safety. After all, no one’s come for them so far.

Fiddling while your primary vote burns: While One Nation throws out new numbers at the drop of a press release, the Coalition is doing a monthslong policy review. A separate Senate inquiry will hand down its report on Aug. 28.

I said it first: The Coalition’s point person on tobacco, Mary Aldred, told Playbook it’s her idea. “I’ll always welcome new support for my long-term calls on sharp cuts.”

THE PLAYBOOK INTERVIEW

JAMES PATERSON — SHADOW MINISTER FOR DEFENSE

Do you feel Senate Estimates is working institutionally?

So many officials either came ill-prepared to answer questions [in July] — which I find very hard to believe — or would deliberately try not to answer questions. I have zero tolerance for that.

If they continually obstruct the Senate’s scrutiny function, then it will become a very unpleasant, uncomfortable environment for everyone.

Pat Conroy says AUKUS is on track and that Britain is scaling up. The House of Commons is worried. Which assessments do you trust? 

We should be optimistic and positive, but realistic. What I don’t want to see is fatalism. These are solvable problems. We’ve got time to get this right: as long as we are honest and realistic about it now.

The U.K. is designing and then building its own AUKUS-class subs before we build ours, so the risk in the project is front-loaded onto them.

They have a very powerful incentive to get this right because it’s their own national security. The prime minister has appointed John Healey — the former defense secretary — as the chancellor. That shows to me that they’re putting defense and national security at the heart of their economic agenda.

What contingencies do we need to be thinking about?

Two windows of capability gaps: Between the Collins-class submarines and the Virginia-class submarines in the early 2030s; between Virginias and SSN AUKUS [in the early 2040s].

For the first capability gap we really need to investigate alternatives. I put the B-21 stealth bomber on the agenda for examination.

We also don’t know what capabilities drones will have in 15 years. 

That’s right. It’s rapidly evolving, even in the course of weeks and months.

If you became defense minister, is there anything you’d want to subject to an independent review? Anything now?

The new statutory defense committee which has been established; I think the core business of that community should be review of delivery of AUKUS.

Where do you see the most promise in Australia’s defense industries? 

[AUKUS] Pillar 2 is a military technology free trade agreement. It is supposed to get rid of, if not all, then at least most of the barriers to intellectual property, capital and humans moving between the three AUKUS nations. If Australia and the United States and the U.K. can’t work together in a single spot on this, then no other group of countries in the world can.

The government is working to be the Pacific’s partner of choice. Do you have any red lines or limits? 

[Solomon Islands] Prime Minister Wale, in his [push for a] Pacific-wide multilateral agreement on security and policing, I think if that window of opportunity opens, we must seize it.

We need to remember that for Australia’s national interest to succeed we have to succeed in blocking the PRC from establishing military or policing arrangements every time they try. For the PRC’s national interest to succeed, they only have to succeed once.

Read the full interview with Paterson here.

CANBERRA MEETS WORLD

AI, THE AUSTRALIAN WAY

Canberra doesn’t want to be your AI landlord, Ryan Heath writes in a piece also featured today in POLITICO Forecast.

Instead, it’s trying to pull off a feat that’s eluding national and local governments around the world: Attract AI investment, but on its own terms.

That includes investors paying their own way on energy, training the locals, providing compute access and not hogging all the very precious water.

To avoid the nasty data center debate unfolding in the United States, the vibe is: move quickly while resisting the idea that speed should settle every question.

Ahead of 2027 legislation this middle road has an overarching goal: protect household electricity prices, and bring Australia into more of the AI supply chain.

The hope is that social license buys more time to deal with the labor market disruptions that AI use accelerates.

Nicolette Boele’s research among 750 constituents found “over 80 per cent were not confident the government will effectively regulate data centers.” The biggest concerns: water and energy impacts.

South Australia’s Labor premier, Peter Malinauskas, is alert to the danger: that’s why he announced a Royal Commission into the impacts of AI, Aug. 11.

Andrew Charlton, Albo’s AI whisperer, wants more than data centers, and is taking lessons from Australia’s mining boom missed opportunities.

The TL;DR: Unlike in mining, we don’t own a choke point. And if we just supply the land, power and buildings while foreign firms retain ownership of the intellectual property, models and customer relationships, much of the value will flow offshore.

As Charlton put it in an ANU speech Aug. 18: “Unless we take timely action, Australia is on course to be a large and permanent importer of intelligence.”

TOKYO-CANBERRA DEAL: Japan is set to test hypersonic missiles and other advanced weapons on Australian soil as both nations push to increase military cooperation, amid China competitive threat, reported Andrew Greene.

QUESTION TIME

RED CARD: Incensed by the gambling deal, Greens Sen. Sarah Hanson-Young lost her questions in QT. Hanson-Young asked Penny Wong what her late colleague Peta Murphy would say about the deal — Murphy chaired an inquiry calling for a total gambling ad ban.

Clippable content: Hanson-Young’s question violated Senate rules, but with politics now dominated by viral moments, she got what she came for.

QUESTION WITHOUT NOTICE: The Hanson-Young incident brings into focus an important question: What should QT be for?

Hanson-Young asked a pertinent question, and was penalized for it. That sits in a world where fake questions that we euphemistically call Dorothy Dixers are allowed. Ministers routinely get away with dodging reasonable questions, and others think it’s OK to deliver outbursts designed with the intention of getting kicked out.

That’s a form of QT which isn’t going to survive contact with an angry public that’s already telling politicians the two-party system is over.

Does QT need reform to avoid being written out of the national conversation?

Send us your thoughts: WhatsApp on 0494 380 487 or email canberraplaybook@politico.com.

Dutch Foreign Minister Tom Berendsen lashed out at the Trump administration on Tuesday after Washington sanctioned two senior officials at the International Criminal Court over probes targeting alleged Israeli crimes in Gaza.

Earlier in the day, Washington had upped the ante in its campaign against the international tribunal by sanctioning ICC President Tomoko Akane and senior trial lawyer Abdoulaye Seye.

“The Netherlands disapproves of the latest sanctions against officials and staff of the International Criminal Court,” Berendsen wrote on X. “International courts and tribunals must be able to freely carry out their mandates.” He added that the Netherlands “fully” backed the court and had invited Akane for talks to discuss its continued support.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio accused the court of threatening American sovereignty, saying the administration was acting to protect its citizens from a “sham” institution and would never allow Americans to be “transported beyond seas to be tried for pretend offenses.”

Tuesday’s sanctions are part of a campaign Washington launched last month to cripple the ICC. The U.S. has already sanctioned at least 11 ICC officials and has urged the court’s 125 member states to withdraw from the organization.

The Hague-based ICC, established in 2002, prosecutes genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. Its pursuit of charges against senior Israeli politicians on such grounds, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, against whom it has issued an arrest warrant, has been a particular sore point for the U.S.

The court issued a statement on Tuesday pushing back against Washington, warning that measures punishing judges, prosecutors and staff for carrying out their mandate “undermine the rule of law” and put the international legal order at risk.

Netanyahu, who is wanted by the court for allegedly using starvation as a method of warfare and intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population of Gaza, applauded Washington’s move, branding the ICC a “kangaroo court” and praising Rubio for making clear that its officials would “face consequences.”

President Donald Trump dropped a political bombshell on the Korean peninsula this week.

But security officials say the president’s threats to curtail a major military exercise with South Korea will do little to undermine the detente between Seoul and Pyongyang.

Trump’s declaration Sunday that he would instruct the Pentagon to cut back on annual drills sent Seoul’s leaders scrambling to repair the damage. But the president appears more focused on pushing for investment from the country than trying to upend defenses against North Korea’s nuclear threat. And that means security on the world’s most militarized border hasn’t significantly changed.

The U.S. has more than 28,000 troops stationed on the peninsula, along with thick layers of air defenses. It has worked hand in glove with the Korean military for decades, a powerful joint force that works closely at every level. The border between a nuclear-armed North Korea and the U.S. ally to its south is a case study in mutually assured destruction. And top commanders in Seoul and Washington remain in tight contact.

“I don’t think this is cataclysmic,” said Sydney Seiler, former national intelligence officer for North Korea at the National Intelligence Council.

Defense officials were tight-lipped about what Trump’s announcement would mean in terms of concrete changes to military exercises. The Pentagon would only say that it is “is actively working on executing the commander-in-chief’s directive.”

Trump’s order, and his praise of dictator North Korean leader Kim Jong Un’s “unthreatening and respectful” behavior, came days after the secretive nation launched its second ballistic missile test in a week. It flew over 430 miles before landing just outside Japan’s exclusive economic zone.

Some American lawmakers said the optics were horrible, particularly Trump’s seeming desire to appease a totalitarian regime.

“Kim Jong Un has won a propaganda victory and South Korea, one of our strongest allies, has been punished for no reason beyond Trump’s ego,” said Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island, the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee. “China and Russia are watching how easily this president abandons America’s allies, and they will remember it the next time they test us.”

The order affects a major exercise, Ulchi Freedom Shield, a staple of the alliance since it was first held in 1976. The drills this year were scheduled to begin Monday and encompass 14 different exercises over 11 days, ranging from cyber warfare to defending against drone attacks and GPS jamming. Officials are especially worried that North Korea received Russian technologies and know-how about electronic jamming after it sent tens of thousands of troops to help Russia’s war against Ukraine.

“The alliance will manage through, [although] this is clearly a rough patch,” said Victor Cha, a former National Security Council official during the George W. Bush administration and now Korea chair at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Trump’s criticism of South Korea is particularly surprising because it’s a departure from comments by top Pentagon officials, who have repeatedly praised Seoul for increasing defense spending.

Pentagon policy chief Elbridge Colby called South Korea “a model ally” in a January speech in Seoul, and lauded its commitment to the alliance. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth also praised the relationship several times this year, including when his South Korean counterpart visited the Pentagon in May.

South Korean President Lee Jae Myung on Tuesday sought to soothe concerns over a rift. He said in a Cabinet meeting that “a strong alliance makes the foundation of security stronger, and strengthening our own capabilities increases our value and necessity as an ally.”

Many officials remain puzzled about why Trump would abruptly curtail an annual exercise that has taken place reliably for 50 years. There’s some precedent. He had railed against expensive exercises in South Korea during his first term and the Pentagon did scale back some large joint operations. But Ulchi Freedom Shield is a cornerstone of the military-to-military relationship.

The effort — a combination of a tabletop, virtual event and physical exercises — will continue in some form. But U.S. officials indicated that military leadership is trying to find ways to modify the event to meet the president’s demands. And the announcement underscores that American support remains at the whim of an unpredictable president.

Some of the president’s motivation is likely financial. South Korea pledged last year to invest $350 billion in the U.S., but Trump officials believe its government is slow-walking its commitment, POLITICO has reported.

“The thing about Trump is it’s all very transactional,” said Cha. “So if they announce a first tranche of investments, he’ll be fine, right?”

But Asian allies are closely watching whether the distancing from traditional backers will continue, particularly movement of some critical American military assets out of the Pacific region. The USS George Washington aircraft carrier left port in Tokyo this month and is heading west. It will presumably go to the Middle East and replace the beleaguered USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier, which is on the ninth month of an extended deployment.

The Pentagon relocated some elements of the THAAD missile defense system earlier this year from South Korea as part of a wider shift to the Middle East.

Lawmakers are also watching warily. Congress voted last year to restrict the Pentagon from reducing troop levels on the Korean peninsula below 28,500 unless the Pentagon certifies doing so is in the national interest and conducted after consultation with South Korea and other allies.

Lawmakers appear poised to extend those restrictions again in the 2027 National Defense Authorization Act.

“Reduced training hurts American preparedness too,” said Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.). “If we have moral clarity, then we’d treat [South Korea] as our ally and know North Korea is a dictatorship and slave labor state. … The president is wrong here.”

Conor O’Brien and Leo Shane contributed to this report.

Mykhailo Fedorov has called for elections in Ukraine despite Russia’s ongoing invasion, after his firing as defense minister sparked nationwide protests against President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

The president has been under increasing pressure at home following the controversial government reshuffle last month in which he pushed out Fedorov, a popular minister credited with inspiring battlefield innovations.

“People cannot endlessly live in a state where they do not understand why certain decisions are made,” Fedorov said in a video address Tuesday night, alluding to the reshuffle.

“We must not let [Russian President Vladimir] Putin decide when Ukrainians can choose their government,” he said.

Ukraine’s constitution does not allow for it to hold elections while it is under martial law, the state of play since Russia’s full-scale invasion began in February 2022.

Election challenges

Even if Ukraine can find a legal route to new elections, they would likely take place under the specter of war.

Russia is bombarding Kyiv almost daily with missiles and drones, grinding out gains on the battlefield in eastern and southern Ukraine and preparing for a winter onslaught to seize more territory.

Holding elections in these circumstances would be “complex,” Fedorov said. He spoke about the importance of securing voting rights for members of the military, Ukrainians abroad and people in frontline regions.

Russia looms over Ukraine not just militarily but electorally. Moscow has a long record of trying to influence democratic outcomes around the world and would likely view elections in Ukraine as a potential avenue to victory in the war of aggression Putin escalated in 2022.

Putin and Russia-friendly politicians have long sought to portray Zelenskyy’s rule as illegitimate. The Ukrainian president was elected by a landslide in 2019 but has not faced a public vote since Russian tanks rolled into Ukraine more than four years ago.

Although Zelenskyy has faced pressure from international leaders to hold elections — including U.S. President Donald Trump — he has steadfastly maintained that they cannot take place during wartime. In February, he offered elections in exchange for a ceasefire. Putin, however, kept the war going.

The Ukrainian leader has been a figurehead for his country since the full-scale invasion, but his initial popularity has begun to visibly wane in the past year, amid allegations of corruption and complaints about the transparency of his government.

“People do not demand that the state never make mistakes,” Fedorov said. “But they have a right to the truth.”

Even before the controversial reshuffle, Zelenskyy was beginning to seem more isolated, having lost members of his inner circle including his trusted chief of staff Andriy Yermak, who was arrested on corruption charges in May, which he has denied.

The president — who has received near-unconditional backing from establishment politicians in Europe — would be able to point toward the progress he has made toward EU membership if he is pushed into an election campaign. Membership of the bloc is seen as crucial to Ukraine’s postwar future.

But whether Zelenskyy would even contest an election is another matter.  

This article has been updated.

President Donald Trump is waiting for Iran to cave to his economic pressure. Tehran may be willing to wait even longer.

Even as Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent promises a level of economic isolation “never seen before,” former Trump administration officials, U.S. ambassadors and other Middle East experts are skeptical that tightening the economic vise will force Iran to relinquish its desire to toll ships passing through the State of Hormuz and make the other concessions Trump is demanding to bring an end to the war.

“It’s an attrition campaign, and I am sure Treasury tweaks this or that to fill gaps or expand coverage of sanctions,” said James Jeffrey, a former ambassador who served in the Middle East during three presidential administrations, including Trump’s first term. “But, it’s hard to believe [there will be] something decisive after 20 years of U.S. sanctions and Iranian experience of going around them.”

It’s an acknowledgement that underscores the asymmetry of the situation. The Trump administration is staring down a consequential midterm election amid an unpopular war that has sent oil prices back up to roughly $90 a barrel and helped push long-term borrowing costs to their highest level in nearly two decades as hope dims that a peace deal is near.

Iran’s leaders, meanwhile, see the conflict as existential, giving Tehran reason to absorb the extraordinary economic pain rather than accept terms it believes could imperil the regime — especially as U.S. inflation remains elevated and treasuries sell off.

The yield on 30-year U.S. government bonds, a figure Trump has in the past been attuned to, jumped on Tuesday to its highest level since just before the global financial crisis.

The increase in the yield to its highest level in nearly two decades isn’t solely because of the six-month war; global fuel shortages and broader instability have kept energy prices higher for longer, increasing the threat of persistent inflation. And that’s heaped even more risk on global bond markets that have repeatedly blanched at Trump-related shocks.

“We are in a situation where we’re spending more and more to finance more and more,” said Julia Coronado, founder of MacroPolicy Perspectives. And the war has created “a riskier world full of more frictions, full of more supply shocks.”

Iran’s outsized incentive to muscle through the pain is partly why some former administration officials doubt that the naval blockade, while unprecedented in its scale in the modern era or whatever new strategies Bessent may unveil, will change Iran’s calculus.

“I think the economic pressure would need to hit them in new ways we haven’t seen so far to change the mindset of the regime,” said one former Trump administration official, granted anonymity to candidly assess the impact of the U.S.’s economic pressure campaign.

The administration has yet to indicate what further action it plans to take, but options include going after major Chinese banks that facilitate Iran’s oil trade, expand secondary sanctions on countries doing business with Iran and confiscating Iranian assets under U.S. jurisdiction instead of just freezing them.

Iranian leaders publicly mocked U.S. efforts to sanction them into submission.

“Americans think squeezing Iran harder will win concessions that were never part of the agreement,” Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, the speaker of Iran’s parliament, posted on X Tuesday.

“Bessent and [Defense Secretary Pete] Hegseth are way out of their league,” he wrote. “Stop waiting for the clown crew to pull a rabbit out of their hat and clean up the mess you made.”

White House aides, however, continue to contend that the leverage is on its side.

“The crushing sanctions and one of the most successful blockades that have crippled Iran’s economy and has left Iran completely broke,” said one administration official, granted anonymity to share the U.S.’s thinking. “There are many levers the president can crank harder in the weeks and months ahead.”

In the half-year since the Iran war began, the president has deployed an array of pressure tactics to choke Iran economically, including physically preventing the country from selling its most important export — oil — as part of an ongoing naval blockade of Iranian ports. The administration has also sanctioned foreign buyers of Iranian oil, targeted the country’s shadow fleet of ships that ferries it and sought to cut the country off from the financial networks it uses to move money.

That economic pressure has sent Iran’s economy, which was already troubled before the war, into a deeper tailspin. Now, Iran is grappling with year-over-year inflation of 88 percent, long lines and rationing at gas pumps and food prices that have more than doubled.

But those who have worked on previous Iran negotiations say that’s far from enough to get the regime to cave, especially after six months of U.S. bombing that has killed, by Tehran’s own measure, more than 3,000 Iranians.

“It’s undeniable that there is economic pressure. The question is whether there is a breaking point, and I would say for a regime that is fighting for its life and has never hesitated to transfer economic pain to its population, there is no breaking point,” said Ali Vaez, the International Crisis Group’s Iran project director, who helped work to bridge differences between Iran and world powers during negotiations over the 2015 nuclear agreement.

Yet Trump continued to project patience on Tuesday, signaling that he was prepared to let the pressure campaign play out.

“There are no talks or conversations going on, or scheduled, with the Islamic Republic of Iran. The Naval Blockade remains in full force and effect. The Hormuz Strait is open and operating. All water mines have been removed or detonated. Thank you for your attention to this matter!” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

A senior White House official, granted anonymity to discuss the situation in Iran, insisted that Iran will cave long before the pain in the U.S. or world markets become intolerable.

“Ultimately we want a deal, but in the interim, the Iranian economy is tanking … people are lining up for gas, just for a half gallon of gas. And there’s a lot of civil unrest going on in Iran, that’s not being played on the news for whatever reason,” the official said late last week. “We’re fine if that’s the route they want to take.”

Still, there are signs inside the White House that the economic impacts are a growing concern. Vice President JD Vance last week said on Fox News that the administration’s first goal in the Iran war was to “keep oil and gas cheap for Americans all over the country.” The president, meanwhile, has repeatedly insisted voters will bear the pain of higher gas prices for an end to Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

The voters have a more dyspeptic view. A Reuters/Ipsos survey released this week showed Trump’s approval rating at 33 percent, the lowest level of his presidency. Roughly 80 percent of Americans — 87 percent of Democrats and 71 percent of Republicans — think U.S. involvement in Iran “will go on for an extended period of time,” the poll found.

But some former Trump administration officials, however, are holding out hope that patience will be rewarded and that the administration’s economic pressure campaign will work, in part because they see the other options on the table, including putting U.S. boots on the ground in Iran, as politically untenable.

Fred Fleitz, Trump’s former National Security Council chief of staff and vice chair of the American First Policy Institute’s American Security, predicted that the U.S. could be “dealing with a different Iran” in 30 to 60 days.

“I think patience is the best approach,” Fleitz said. “I don’t believe that a large-scale military attack right now is going to make a difference in changing the regime’s position, and I strongly oppose the idea of seizing Kharg Island or sending in American troops. The American people don’t want that. That would really bog us down in a quagmire.”

Several independent U.S. oil producers are expected to sign production contracts with Venezuela’s state-run oil company in the coming days, according to three industry representatives familiar with the plans — a step forward for the Trump administration’s efforts to boost production in the beleaguered South American nation.

A signing ceremony involving several smaller U.S. producers and the Petróleos de Venezuela had been set for Tuesday evening in Houston, according to the people, who were granted anonymity because details of the event have not been made public. Venezuela’s oil minister is scheduled to attend, as is the head of exploration for PDVSA, one of the people said. The ceremony could be pushed back until Wednesday morning, another of the people added.

The White House, which did not immediately respond to a request for comment, is not expected to be formally involved with Tuesday’s ceremony, but it comes after top administration officials traveled to Caracas in late April to secure memorandums of understanding that laid the groundwork for formal production deals in the country that holds some of the world’s largest oil reserves.

It marks a sign of progress after the Trump administration’s effort to push new oil development in Venezuela, which began after the U.S. raid that captured former leader Nicolás Maduro in January, had slowed in recent months. Despite a boost from higher crude prices, negotiations have bogged down around key details like dispute resolution, while authorities in Caracas dealt with a devastating pair of June earthquakes that killed thousands.

Venezuela’s interim president Delcy Rodríguez last month unveiled new regulations offering more favorable fiscal terms to international oil companies.

The signings come after the Trump administration renewed pressure on Rodríguez to have PDVSA sign contracts with American companies, an industry source familiar with the negotiations. Those efforts included outreach from Secretary of State Marco Rubio to discuss how increased oil revenue could help the country after a devastating earthquake earlier this summer, this person said.

“There’s a renewed acknowledgement from Delcy that increased oil production is the pathway to rebuilding after the earthquakes and accomplishing what her government wants to do for the people who are suffering because of the earthquakes,” this person said.

David Goldwyn, head of the international energy consulting firm Goldwyn Global Strategies, said investment from independent oil producers and expanded production from existing fields are likely to be Venezuela’s “primary source of new oil growth for the next couple of years.”

“While the supermajors bide their time until they see how the politics sort out, and whether they can cherry pick the best assets, independents can derisk their projects in a short period of time,” Goldwyn said.

But those investments are only likely to add up to 300,000 barrels a day to the country’s oil production over the next year, far from the increase of millions of barrels the authorities in Caracas and Washington would like to see, Goldwyn said.

“Incremental production is all we will see until the framework improves, electricity is restored, and the political picture becomes clearer,” he said.

A deal between the U.S. and Canada to stave off new tariffs on Canadian goods is now on President Donald Trump’s desk, according to three people familiar with the discussions who were granted anonymity because of the sensitivity of the talks.

Now it’s up to Trump whether the 50 percent duty goes into effect, as scheduled, at midnight.

U.S. and Canadian officials have been in wall-to-wall talks for several days, with the administration pressing Canada to drop retaliatory measures it took against Trump’s tariffs last year — including provincial bans on U.S. liquor and tariffs on U.S. automobiles — and Ottawa looking to lower U.S. duties on autos, among other goods. The potential deal taking shape also includes Canadian concessions on its tariff-rate quota on dairy — an issue that has frequently come up in Trump’s missives against Canadian trade policy, according to two of the three people.

Negotiators hope a small deal on these issues can unlock broader talks between the two countries on a North American trade agreement that is up for review this year. But automobiles remained a major sticking point in negotiations Monday as U.S. and Canadian officials huddled in the afternoon, according to three other people familiar with the status of the talks, granted anonymity to discuss them. While the duties set to go into effect Wednesday only hit a small percentage of trade between the two countries, they could poison the broader negotiation on nearly $1 trillion worth of goods and services trade between the two countries.

“You can think of it as effectively trying to come up with an early harvest, an interim deal, a smaller package of what ultimately will land as part of the USMCA talks,” said Kelly Ann Shaw, who served as deputy assistant for international economic affairs during Trump’s first term.

The political stakes are high on both sides of the border. After repurposing a hockey fighting slogan to describe his approach to the U.S. during last year’s campaign, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney is now confronted with U.S. officials who are adamant that Canada will have to drop longstanding trade protections, like loosening its supply management program that protects the dairy and lumber industries.

“There’s going to be a political cost for Carney on any type of concession with some portion of the public,” said an industry figure, granted anonymity to speak candidly about the trade discussions. “I cannot understate how upset the average Canadian is with the United States, and really specifically with Trump.”

If the tariffs go into effect, the Trump administration risks creating more economic pain ahead of midterm elections — particularly in Maine and Michigan, two states that could help determine the control of the Senate.

“At the end of the day, [U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson] Greer cannot bring something to the president that doesn’t address some of the president’s personal core concerns,” Shaw said. “And I think Carney recognizes he’s got to bring something back where he can say, ‘Look, not only are we just at the table, but we actually got something for it.’”

The White House did not respond to a request for comment. Gabriel Brunet, the spokesman for Canada-U.S. Trade Minister Dominic LeBlanc, said the Canadians were “in a holding pattern at this time.”

Trump sparked the frenzied negotiations last month after he used a Great Depression-era tariff law to impose tariffs on a wide swath of Canadian goods, like hockey equipment and Canadian bacon, if Canada did not remove its tariffs on U.S. automobiles, eliminate provincial bans on U.S. alcohol and make changes to its dairy supply management laws. But his proclamation included a one-month lag before the duties to kick in, to allow more more talks. The tariffs officially take effect at midnight Aug. 19.

At the time, trade experts saw the tariffs as a way for Trump to force Canada to the negotiating table after struggling for months to make progress — to U.S. officials’ growing frustration.

“I think these three issues must be resolved before Canada can get into the room on USMCA with the United States,” said a former USTR official, shortly after Trump unveiled the new tariffs on Canada last month. “And the U.S. side is wanting a situation where Canada is in the room and so they’re trying to help prompt fixes to these three.”

Of the three issues, auto tariffs have emerged as a key sticking point. Canada is looking for reductions in the 25 percent auto tariffs Trump imposed last year on countries around the world and wants the duty to apply only to vehicle content produced outside North America, according to one of the people.

Automobiles could also be key to unlocking progress on U.S. demands. The United States has made clear that getting American wine and spirits back on Canadian shelves is a red line in the negotiations. But that issue is up to the individual provinces maintaining the bans, which will mean winning over premiers like Doug Ford of Ontario — a car-making hub.

Whether Ford caves will “come down to where we land on autos,” one of the people said, calling the automobile piece of the talks a “domino” in the discussions.

Ford exerted his control over his province’s liquor stores in March 2025, removing U.S. alcohol from shelves in the country’s most populous province. Other premieres soon followed, delivering a nearly $150 million blow to the U.S. distilled spirits industry, alone. While Alberta and Saskatchewan lifted their bans after just a few months, the two provinces account for less than 20 percent of the Canadian population.

Even if the premieres do end their boycott, there’s no guarantee that Canadians — who are also upset by Trump’s jabs that Canada should become the 51st U.S. state — will be quick to resume purchases.

“I would be surprised, even if the liquor goes back on the shelves, if Canadians buy it,” said the industry figure.

While Trump officials have repeatedly faulted Canada for being one of two countries that retaliated against the president’s tariffs — along with China — Trump is also attempting to get the country to drop longstanding protectionist measures for its dairy industry, a source of tension between the two neighbors for decades.

On the Canadian side, negotiators LeBlanc and Janice Charette have been pushing for reductions to U.S. national security tariffs imposed on automobiles and steel and aluminum. But the Trump administration has held firm on the 50 percent steel tariffs, according to three people familiar with the status of the metals discussions.

“That’s probably going to be something that is much more of a longer term” discussion, one of the people said, “if at all.”

Greer stressed to reporters last week that he has been satisfied with the steel tariffs and their impact on the domestic steel industry.

“This is working,” he argued, pointing to rising domestic steel production. Through mid-August, U.S. steelmaking was up more than 5 percent year-to-date on the same period last year, according to the American Iron and Steel Institute, and capacity utilization was up two percentage points.

“We’re seeing huge success in the American steel industry, which is exactly what President Trump wanted,” Greer said during a trip to Iowa Thursday.

Mike Blanchfield contributed to this report from Ottawa.

Der Raketenterror gegen Kiew und andere Teile der Ukraine bringt Wladimir Putin militärisch keine Geländegewinne, zielt aber auf die Zermürbung der Zivilbevölkerung. Rixa Fürsen bespricht mit dem Sicherheits- und Verteidigungsexperten Nico Lange die Lage nach der russischen Frühjahrsoffensive 2026.

Lange kritisiert die zögerliche europäische Militärhilfe und das Fehlen strategischer Luftverteidigung scharf. Um Angriffe nachhaltig zu stoppen, müsse die Ukraine russische Rüstungsfabriken und Lieferketten mit Waffen wie dem Taurus gezielt ausschalten können.

Auch bei Rufen nach Diplomatie warnt er vor Naivität: Erfolgreiche Verhandlungen seien nur durch harten wirtschaftlichen und militärischen Druck möglich. Wirksame Hebel wären etwa ein umfassender Stopp für Schengen-Visa für Russen oder das konsequente Blockieren der Schattenflotte.

Das Berlin Playbook als Podcast gibt es jeden Morgen ab 5 Uhr. Gordon Repinski und das POLITICO-Team liefern Politik zum Hören – kompakt, international, hintergründig.

Für alle Hauptstadt-Profis: Der Berlin Playbook-Newsletter bietet jeden Morgen die wichtigsten Themen und Einordnungen. Jetzt kostenlos abonnieren.

Mehr von Rixa Fürsen gibt es auch hier:
Instagram: @rixafu | X: @rixa_fursen.

POLITICO Deutschland – ein Angebot der Axel Springer Deutschland GmbH
Axel-Springer-Straße 65, 10888 Berlin
Tel: +49 (30) 2591 0
information@axelspringer.de
Sitz: Amtsgericht Berlin-Charlottenburg, HRB 196159 B
USt-IdNr: DE 214 852 390
Geschäftsführer: Carolin Hulshoff Pol, Mathias Sanchez Luna

The top U.S. envoy to Syria on Tuesday accused Israel of striking an airbase in the country, less than a day after White House envoy Jared Kushner met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for high-profile talks on disarmament in Gaza.

“We are deeply concerned that the confirmed Israeli airstrikes on Abu al-Duhur Airbase constitute an unnecessary escalation that does not advance regional stability,” wrote Tom Barrack, the special presidential envoy for Syria who is also the U.S. ambassador to Turkey, in a post on X.

BERLIN —Senior conservative and social-democrat lawmakers in Germany’s governing coalition are urging the EU to sanction Israel’s Minister of National Security Itamar Ben-Gvir after he called for nightly targeted killings in Gaza.

“I think targeted killings should be carried out in Gaza, remove 30, 40 [people] every night,” said Ben-Gvir, leader of the far-right Jewish Power party, in a podcast episode released last Saturday. “Not just those who pose an immediate threat. No, there are people there who are not worthy of life. They shouldn’t live. They’re not even people.”

The comments drew an unusually sharp response from German Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s conservatives.

“Ben-Gvir’s inhumane remarks can only be condemned,” Jürgen Hardt, foreign policy spokesperson for the Christian Democratic Union/Christian Social Union parliamentary group, told POLITICO. “The EU should sanction him as a sign of the universal validity of human dignity and human rights.”

Hardt went further, saying he was convinced an Israeli government without Ben-Gvir or fellow far-right Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich would bring Europe and Israel closer together.

Germany’s Social Democrats struck a similar tone. Adis Ahmetović, the party’s foreign policy spokesperson, said the two ministers had shocked international opinion well before their latest statements, and urged the German government to support sanctions against both.

The criticism extended across the political spectrum.

The Left’s Dietmar Bartsch called Ben-Gvir’s remarks “deeply inhumane,” and urged Berlin and Brussels to consider sanctions, including an entry ban. Markus Frohnmaier, the far-right Alternative for Germany party’s foreign policy spokesperson, said calling for the indiscriminate killing of people who posed no immediate threat crossed “a clear line.” Green Member of Parliament Marlene Schönberger branded Ben-Gvir a “far-right extremist” and said his comments were “deeply inhumane,” adding that they had “nothing whatsoever” to do with Israel’s right to defend itself and its citizens.

The statements mark a significant shift in Berlin. Germany has repeatedly pushed back against EU measures targeting Israel, including proposed sanctions on Ben-Gvir in June and, as recently as last month, restrictions on trade with illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank.

EU sanctions require unanimity, giving Berlin considerable sway over whether the bloc can move.

Merz’s government has not yet followed the lawmakers’ lead. The Foreign Ministry declined to take a position Monday, while some in government fear sanctioning Ben-Gvir just weeks before Israel’s Oct. 27 election could play into his hands.

German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul will meet his EU counterparts in Ireland on Sept. 1 and 2, where Ben-Gvir’s remarks and the war in Gaza are likely to loom over discussions.

Maximilian Heimerzheim contributed to reporting.

The Axel Springer Global Reporters Network harnesses the resources of the company’s newsrooms to publish ambitious scoops, investigations, interviews, opinion pieces and analysis. It allows journalists — including those from POLITICO, Business Insider, WELT, BILD, Onet and Fakt — to collaborate on major stories for an international audience of hundreds of millions across platforms: online, print, TV and audio.

LONDON — British Prime Minister Andy Burnham insisted on Tuesday he handled a message back-and-forth with someone impersonating Donald Trump’s chief of staff in the “right way.”

He told broadcasters he is not embarrassed by the incident, reiterating that “nothing of consequence” was discussed.

POLITICO first reported Monday that the U.K. prime minister had engaged with messages from somebody pretending to be Susie Wiles, a top adviser to the U.S. president. The key aide has previously been the victim of a phone hack, although the White House said the two incidents were not connected.

“All politicians are, you know, receiving these pressures and these challenges, but I did everything right,” Burnham said during a visit to Wolverhampton. “There was a minimal exchange of information of zero consequence, and it was quickly reported,” he added.

“I realized that this needed to be reported, and I did so. So I handled it in the right way,” he also said.

The incident has raised questions about potential national security vulnerabilities when it comes to the communications of senior politicians.

Defence Secretary Wes Streeting was among three Cabinet ministers whose numbers were found online by POLITICO on Monday.

Liberal Democrat MP James MacCleary on Tuesday called for an inquiry into the Burnham message exchange, which he described as a “dangerous security breach.”

In a letter to the chair of the Intelligence and Security Committee, he wrote: “This is an unacceptable breach. The security of the Prime Ministers’ communications ought to be absolute priority — and yet it appears, in this case, that routine measures to guard against these kinds of breaches were not followed.”

Burnham would not say whether the government planned to change procedures in response to the dupe, but insisted that “the correct action has been taken here and in the U.S.”

PARIS — The Paris prosecutor’s office has launched an investigation into disinformation efforts targeting two prominent candidates in France’s upcoming presidential election, according to Agence France-Presse.

Edouard Philippe and Gabriel Attal, two former prime ministers who are high-profile contenders for the 2027 race, were reportedly the subject earlier this summer of fake news reports posted on social media aimed at undermining their campaigns.

Fabricated videos posted on X that used branding from leading French news platforms claimed Philippe, who suffers from alopecia, was diagnosed with a neurodegenerative disease, while fake reports on X and TikTok alleged Attal had Parkinson’s disease and was using drugs.

Attal denounced the reports as fake and filed a complaint. Philippe has refrained from publicly commenting on the posts, though his top allies have framed them as likely Russian interference.

Two networks that Western authorities say have links with Russia, Storm-1516 and Matriochka, were involved in the disinformation operations targeting Philippe and Attal, respectively, according to a French official with knowledge of the technical investigation led by Viginum, the French agency responsible for combating digital interference.

Storm-1516, which the French government says is tied to Russian military intelligence, was also involved in a similar disinformation operation targeting center-left MEP and likely presidential contender Raphaël Glucksmann. The prosecutor’s office announced the launch of a separate probe into that case earlier this month.

Viginum alerted the candidates and recommended that they not publicize these operations in order to avoid giving them visibility, according to the same official.

Some battleground candidates are going viral for shooting from the hip. Jon Ossoff is doing it from a carefully controlled script.

Ossoff drew attention Sunday for calling out a little-known aide to President Donald Trump by first name on a Midtown Atlanta rally stage. It was part of a larger prepared speech that hammered Trump over the war in Iran — and part of a larger strategy to raise his profile in a critical Senate race, all while some national Democrats openly question whether he will mount a 2028 presidential run.

“He doesn’t want to do the job. He wants to build his ballroom and travel with Natalie on their apparently defenseless flying palace, gifted by the Emir of Qatar,” Ossoff said, referencing Natalie Harp, the president’s executive assistant. The comment, though just a brief remark in a 30-minute speech, drew over 5 million views on X and swift backlash from Republicans — including the president himself, who shot back Monday calling Ossoff a “Pee Wee Herman lookalike.”

It was just the latest time footage from an Ossoff campaign speech went viral.

Ossoff’s campaign appearances are marked by pithy stump lines that are prone to catch fire online and aggressive jabs at Trump and his Republican opponent that appeal to Democrats’ desire for fighter candidates. But behind his bold persona on the trail is a senator who is hands-on in all aspects of his campaign, including messaging.

Democrats in Georgia and beyond who have worked with Ossoff or seen him behind-the-scenes say he is meticulous about how he communicates and the details of his campaign’s work.

“He’s very, very involved in almost anything that kind of has his name on it or comes out of him,” said Seth Clark, a Georgia Democrat who has worked with Ossoff on statewide legislative priorities.

Clark recalled working with Ossoff on a letter to the Department of Interior last Congress, and “when it came back, you could tell he’d gone through every word himself.” That cautiousness has become a common part of his approach to politics, one that has carried through to his 2026 reelection battle.

Georgia’s is one of the most consequential Senate races in the country, and a misstep could carry enormous consequences. Democrats must defend a state that Trump won by just over two percentage points in 2024 in their uphill battle to flip the Senate.

“There are no decisions that get made that he doesn’t sign off on,” said a Georgia Democratic operative close to the Ossoff campaign, who like others in this article was granted anonymity to speak candidly about their private interactions. “He’s very focused, very intentional, always on message but always on the right message. He doesn’t want complacency because this could slip away from us. He’s seen Georgia’s Democrats lose elections they should have won.”

Ossoff’s campaign declined to comment. In an interview with MS NOW on Monday evening, when asked why he chose to invoke the president’s aide Harp by name, Ossoff said that Trump has “mired” the country in a “geopolitical disaster” and “retreats into this bubble of West Wing aides who are his security blanket to make him feel good about himself.”

Public polling shows Ossoff ahead of his Republican opponent, Rep. Mike Collins. But his profile has extended far beyond Georgia, fueled in large part by the series of viral clips and moments — even if he and his allies privately and publicly insist his focus is strictly on winning reelection and has no White House ambitions.

“The moment the national political organization gets a whiff that Jon Ossoff is thinking about running for president is the moment that [the] Senate campaign falls from under him,” said a longtime Democratic strategist.

However: “That doesn’t take away from the fact that … national leaders, national supporters are paying close attention to a guy who should be ahead by, you know, by one point at the most in a state like Georgia.”

Ossoff, for his part, has repeatedly dismissed the idea that he is entertaining a 2028 presidential bid, and is instead focused on the Senate race before him.

Ossoff’s team has also placed national ad buys in an effort to capture more attention and money: His campaign has spent over $1 million for ads on streaming platforms in New York City’s market, and has hit nearly $20 million in spending on digital advertisements according to an AdImpact analysis.

And while Ossoff’s viral moments can appear off-the-cuff, people who have worked with him describe a candidate who is anything but casual in his public presentation.

A national Democratic pollster who has worked with Ossoff on a prior campaign said his “team understands how to put him and clip him … but I also think that he’s the type of guy, from knowing him, who’s in control of his message.”

“His speeches are just really optimized for clipping,” said Michael Vainisi, a content strategist who has worked with a number of past Democratic presidents and senators. “Really any speech should be, because at the end of the day you’re talking about maximizing clippable sound bites. It’s almost what a cable news hit was, except now you can control a lot more of the scene and what you’re saying.”

National Democrats who have watched Ossoff’s recent rise say the combination of careful message control and ability to go viral has made him stand out at a moment when the party is looking for candidates who can break through.

“Democrats want to fight back, they want to stand for something, and they want to show that they can govern,” said a New York-based Democratic donor who is planning to attend an Ossoff fundraiser in the Hamptons this weekend. “And he embodies that.”

Alex Gangitano contributed to this report.

Chinas Exporte treffen die deutsche Kernindustrie in nie da gewesener Härte und Geschwindigkeit. Weil massiv Arbeitsplätze wackeln, sucht Europa händeringend nach einer politischen Notbremse. Rixa Fürsen spricht mit Janka Oertel über die existenzielle Bedrohung für den Autobau und Maschinenbau. Oertel ist Politikwissenschaftlerin und China-Expertin, bei der Denkfabrik „European Council on Foreign Relations“ ist sie Direktorin des Asienprogramms und Senior Policy Fellow.

Wie hart Peking inzwischen zurückschlägt, zeigt die Reaktion auf jüngste EU-Sanktionen. Binnen 24 Stunden konterte China mit Exportrestriktionen gegen Rüstungskonzerne wie Rheinmetall. Trotzdem wächst in Europa der Widerstand, sodass beim EU-Rat im Oktober scharfe Handelsschutzmaßnahmen folgen könnten.

Während wir noch über E-Autos diskutieren, plant China längst die nächste industrielle Revolution. Im Bereich der sogenannten Biomanufaktur will Peking eine globale Dominanz aufbauen, um unabhängiger von fossilen Rohstoffen zu werden. Oertel warnt davor, dass Europa auch bei dieser Zukunftstechnologie seine aktuelle Führungsrolle verspielen könnte.

Das Berlin Playbook als Podcast gibt es jeden Morgen ab 5 Uhr. Gordon Repinski und das POLITICO-Team liefern Politik zum Hören – kompakt, international, hintergründig.

Für alle Hauptstadt-Profis: Der Berlin Playbook-Newsletter bietet jeden Morgen die wichtigsten Themen und Einordnungen. Jetzt kostenlos abonnieren.

Mehr von Rixa Fürsen gibt es auch hier:
Instagram: @rixafu | X: @rixa_fursen.

POLITICO Deutschland – ein Angebot der Axel Springer Deutschland GmbH
Axel-Springer-Straße 65, 10888 Berlin
Tel: +49 (30) 2591 0
information@axelspringer.de
Sitz: Amtsgericht Berlin-Charlottenburg, HRB 196159 B
USt-IdNr: DE 214 852 390
Geschäftsführer: Carolin Hulshoff Pol, Mathias Sanchez Luna

ATHENS — Greece’s attempt to lure top scientists back to their homeland after the trauma of the financial crisis has stalled after an ambitious program to reverse the brain drain descended into fiasco.

A group of professors who hoped to bring back young researchers through a much-advertised program financed with EU funds are now feeling betrayed, having been left waiting for years only to find out the program won’t happen.

To rub salt into the wound, no one from the government bothered to inform them that the scheme was dead, they said.

“All this ‘brain gain’ talk isn’t just a joke; it’s a massive step backward,” Aristides Hatzis, a professor at the University of Athens, said. “During the financial crisis, there was only one area where there was money invested: research, as the EU prioritized this. Now there’s nothing; it’s at the very bottom of the list of priorities — a complete abandonment.”

An estimated 500,000 people moved abroad during Greece’s financial crisis, which began in 2008, shrinking the country’s economy by a quarter and driving unemployment to 28 percent. Greece had experienced mass migration before, including in the decades after World War II, but this time it was many citizens with high levels of education and skills who emigrated.

“Brain Regain,” an initiative by the ruling conservative New Democracy government to reverse the mass exodus of scientists and professionals, comprises several schemes, such as offering a 50 percent income tax exemption for seven years, and is expanding to include high-skilled public sector roles.

And overall, the situation has improved since the crisis era.

According to the survey OECD Diaspora Review Greece, from 2021 onward, there has been a steady increase in the number of citizens returning to Greece, with 2023 marking a milestone year when — for the first time since the start of the crisis — more people returned than left. Specifically, during the two-year period of 2023–2024, 69,000 Greeks left their country while 98,000 returned.

But when it comes to scientists, there is still a major problem.

Star-crossed project

The current fury of many researchers and scientists hinges on a Greek government project called “Trust your Stars” — an €80 million research funding program backed by funds from EU’s post-Covid recovery fund, the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF).

Research teams were called to submit their proposals, with 145 out of a total 1,241 submissions selected. Thirteen months later, after several complaints regarding the delay, the selected list of projects was finally published on July 22, 2025.

Then, it all started to unravel.

Those not selected for funding reacted fiercely, with some 203 submitted objections and calls for reevaluation. Scientists raised their concerns over the evaluation process itself, and some even submitted complaints to the European Public Prosecutor’s Office.

In January 2026, Greece’s development ministry then issued a statement, saying payments of some €40 million had already been made, and that the remaining half of the program’s budget was earmarked for completion by Dec. 31, 2029. But complaints only escalated, with some of those selected for funding sending formal legal notices to the education ministry, seeking details about where the money had been spent since the program had not yet started.

Then, the final bombshell dropped: Trust your Stars was not going to receive the EU funds anymore.

In a statement published in May, Greece’s education ministry said the country’s finance ministry had decided to “remove the project during the review of Greece’s National Recovery and Resilience Plan.” It was later revealed that on the day the list of selected proposals was officially published, the government also delisted the program — but no one informed the applicants for 10 months.

“It was ultimately not possible to implement the project ‘Trust your Stars’ within the time frame set out by the RRF,” said an official from the education ministry. “For this reason, the project was removed, as part of a review of the National Recovery and Resilience Plan by the Council of the European Union.”

“As regards the funds linked to the actions in question, these were redirected to finance other actions undertaken by the RRF and the Education Ministry. Consequently, under no circumstances was there any loss of resources from the RRF,” added the official.

Shattered hopes

On July 15, Greece’s finance ministry issued a statement, saying it was trying to secure funds “to settle any outstanding financial obligations arising from legal commitments entered into at the time of the revocation of the program.”

While the statement rekindled hopes that a solution would be found, Hatzis argues that it was just a legal trick and that the education ministry has no legal commitment since no contracts were signed following the initial announcement of accepted proposals.

“What happened violates a fundamental principle, one that is sacrosanct in states governed by the rule of law: ‘reliance,’ the citizen’s legitimate trust in the state,” he said. “There may be no contractual liability, since we did not sign an agreement, but there is a political, moral and even legal obligation. Many young people turned down other offers or did not take up jobs elsewhere because they hoped they would be paid through the program.”

Hatzis added that with its handling of the situation, the government had managed to turn the entire scientific community against it — both those who had been successful and those who had not.

“If you’re a young scientist and you’re abroad, stay there! If you’re a young scientist and you’re thinking of moving abroad, go for it. Don’t wait a minute!” he wrote in a lengthy social media post.

Pantelis Kammas, an associate professor at the Athens University of Economics and Business who was co-leading one of the teams that had a successful proposal, said the program was a chronicle of a death foretold.

“The perception within the scientific community was that this was EU money and that it could be handed out hastily through nontransparent procedures. There was a sense of mistrust because this was a one-off emergency program,” said Kammas. “The ministry lacked an organized framework for evaluation, the academic community’s objections were based on these well-known shortcomings, and media that seek to oppose the government jumped on that. This was the perfect storm, so the government decided to backtrack and cancel the program.”

Petros Bouras-Vallianatos, an associate professor of the history of science at the University of Athens, said he had gathered a team of 25 young scientists to come to Greece from countries like the U.K. and Germany for a study of medicines used during the Byzantine period, which could serve as inspiration for new pharmaceutical formulations. Fortunately, they had not already traveled by the time the project was canceled.

“The most offensive thing is that the government never bothered to meet us or give us a reasonable explanation about what happened,” he said, noting the government’s handling created even greater problems with the scientific community than those that already existed.

Bouras-Vallianatos himself returned to Greece in 2022 after a 15-year career in Edinburgh, and has not regretted the decision, as he wanted to raise his children in his homeland. However, he added that while many others wanted to return to Greece, the conditions for doing so were not in place. Some of them do but only for sentimental, personal reasons, he said.

“There has been no serious policy by the Greek state to get its scientists back.”

According to preliminary statistics, research spending in Greece has declined, dropping to €1.27 billion — or 0.51 percent of GDP — in 2025, from €1.30 billion in 2024.

“Funding and low salaries is a big issue,” continued Bouras-Vallianatos. “An independent body should be set up, which would allocate funds for research and adheres to international standards in terms of evaluation. We are a small country; we all know each other, so a large proportion of the evaluators should be foreigners.”

LONDON — Britain’s Liberal Democrats are holding fire against Andy Burnham — for now.

The centrist party has studiously avoided criticizing the new Labour prime minister during his first weeks in power, instead pushing the same “constructive opposition” approach followed during predecessor Keir Starmer’s early stint in Downing Street.

“I like what he’s doing,” says 2024-intake Lib Dem MP Martin Wrigley. “I like the way he’s going, focusing on things that matter.” The question is: how long can it last?

A person familiar with Lib Dem Leader Ed Davey’s thinking, granted anonymity because their job does not authorize them to speak publicly, says the party hopes Burnham removes the “performative hostility” from Westminster.

“That style of politics really suits the populist parties, both on the left and the right, and it isn’t the sort of politics that we as Liberal Democrats want to do,” they argued.

But while not rocking the boat has landed well with Lib Dem MPs, there is still a call for a distinctive identity for the party in a highly competitive political environment, with Labour enjoying a “Burnham bounce” in the opinion polls on the left, and Tory Leader Kemi Badenoch’s personal brand on the up.

Duty of care

Davey — whose party enjoyed its best-ever result at the 2024 election but remains only just in double digits in national polls — has already made one big play in the Burnham era: being helpful on reforming social care.

The creaking social care system in England is a policy challenge governments of all stripes have failed to meet — leaving families with drained finances and cash-strapped local authorities plugging the gaps.

The Lib Dem leader, who cares for his disabled son, attended a virtual cross-party meeting after Burnham, whose own father is in a care home with Alzheimer’s, called for an open conversation on a fix.

This proactive approach has so far landed well with Davey’s troops. “I don’t think we’re going to sink the process if we don’t get everything we want,” says Lib Dem Shadow Commons Leader Bobby Dean. “If we can get cross-party consensus on one element, then we should get on with that element straight away.” 

Indeed, Mike Storey, the Lib Dems’ co-deputy leader in the House of Lords, says the party will “cooperate fully on social care … and we’ll do it with no strings attached.” 

The person familiar with Davey’s thinking laid out the approach, saying “People are put off” by opposition parties that “decide to just immediately say ‘oh, they’re terrible. They’re breaking everything again’” when a new government arrives.

Tom Lubbock, co-founder of polling agency J.L. Partners, agrees a conciliatory approach makes sense for now as “you just look a bit mad if you just go in studs-up within the first couple of months.”

But there’s some angst about making sure the Lib Dems clearly separate themselves from Labour.

Party of the countryside 

It’s not the first time the Lib Dems have tried to play nice with a Labour prime minister.

But Davey’s party soon found ways to differentiate themselves from the increasingly unpopular Keir Starmer.

After Starmer’s government changed inheritance tax rules for farmers, the Lib Dems spied an opening — dubbing it the “family farm tax” and ramping up campaigning.

The party has an “extraordinary niche and an extraordinary opportunity” to pose as the “Countryside Alliance arm of the Labour Party,” argues Lubbock — in other words, a progressive rival to Labour that rural voters can still get behind.

Burnham’s focus on reviving urban areas may lend itself to this approach, with Lib Dem figures poised to exploit any perception “Avanti Andy” is shuttling between London and Manchester, another major city.

Adam Dance, who represents the rural constituency of Yeovil, warns Burnham “can’t be a prime minister just for Manchester and the biggest cities” and says “he needs to understand rural areas.” 

Northern MP Tom Gordon also challenges the prime minister’s claim to represent northern England, arguing this “does feel slightly performative.” He reckons voters “don’t hate him [Burnham] yet” as “he’s not had long enough to make any really unpopular decisions.”

Left vs. right blocs 

Much of the Lib Dems’ success under Davey has come from wooing disillusioned Conservatives, targeting Tory-held seats in the home counties — dubbed the “blue wall.”

But winning remaining Tory areas next time round could be harder if the Lib Dems appear too closely aligned with a Labour government. 

Lubbock argues the Lib Dems will do “much worse” if supporters of Nigel Farage’s Reform UK “get on the Conservative bandwagon” to help defeat Labour nationally. That would be a mirror of the way some Labour supporters tactically backed the Lib Dems in 2024 to oust the Tories.

Though the Tories are still stuck below 20 percent in most polls, there are signs of recovery. YouGov data last month put Badenoch’s net favorability score at the highest of any Conservative leader for more than five years. Her position is undeniably more stable than it was 12 months ago.

While Lib Dems are optimistic Badenoch’s moves to the right on net zero and human rights will push more One Nation, centrist Conservatives in their direction, their Tory rivals sound bullish.

Tory MP Gregory Stafford, who saw off a challenge by the Lib Dems to win Farnham and Bordon two years ago, doesn’t think there are more Tories left for the Lib Dems to poach.

“All I’m seeing is those people coming back, not the other way round,” says Stafford about voters who bid the Tories farewell in 2024. Despite his narrow win, he thinks some of the 6,000 Reform UK voters in his seat will return — thanks to Badenoch.

“They see demonstrably in Kemi a leader that both they like as a person, but also speaks their language and speaks to the policies that they’re concerned about,” he argues.

As such, the Lib Dems may settle for a stronger attack against the right.

“People just don’t feel listened to,” says the party’s Scotland spokesperson Susan Murray. “When they don’t feel listened to, they are open to populism.” She argues that both the Lib Dems and Labour are “not succeeding in getting that message [of hope and opportunities] across.” Dean adds, “There’s a massive demand out there for a liberal party to make a bold offer to the country and at the moment that space feels vacated.” 

It’s a perceived weakness Stafford, the Conservative MP, plans to leap on at the next election. “The real danger for the Liberal Democrats is that they are seen as a patsy party that might champion local issues locally, but actually have nothing to say distinctive on the national stage,” he argues.

Roz Savage, who entered the Commons for the Lib Dems in 2024, recognizes the outfit has a “PR challenge that people think of us as the nice party.” Instead, a “bigger story” is required about a future Lib Dem government, she says.

“When we talk to Lib Dem voters in focus groups, they don’t really have a clear vision for what the Lib Dem party should stand for,” says Merlin Strategy’s Head of Research, Julian Gallie. People often back them as a vote against other parties, the political analyst says.

MPs also want the Lib Dems to reach beyond their traditional strongholds and target historically Labour areas — including Newcastle and Hull. Both have Lib Dem-run city councils, but are the kind of areas in which Burnham will fancy he can improve Labour’s standing. Meral Hussein-Ece, the Lib Dems’ Lords equality spokesperson, says the party must also do more to understand “the diversity of this country, which I don’t think we’ve done very well so far.” 

Lib Dem conference in Brighton next month will give the party a chance to lay a marker for the expected general election in 2029. But MPs want more than set-piece events to present a distinctive vision. 

“We do have to do better at utilizing the likes of social media and capturing the attention all the time, not just when we get the spotlight shined on us,” argues Gordon, the Harrogate and Knaresborough MP.

The Lib Dems, he says, have to drive “conversation on our own terms, rather than always having to just respond.”