BERLIN — A drone packed with explosives discovered at Leipzig Airport is raising fears of foreign interference in upcoming German regional elections in which far-right politicians have campaigned on fears of escalations with Moscow.

The drone — found at a strategic airport serving Ukrainian and NATO aircraft as well as a major DHL logistics hub — is being seen as evidence of a potential act by “foreign powers,” said German Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt.

The Kremlin has been accused of seeking to sway September’s elections in Saxony-Anhalt and Mecklenburg–Western Pomerania, states in the former communist East Germany where pro-Russian sentiment remains strong and where the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party could take power for the first time at the state level.

“We do of course see that Russia attempts every day, in one way or another — through hybrid means and various measures — to exert influence here in Germany in a manner that seeks to undermine our democracy and erode trust in politics and politicians,” said Martin Giese, a foreign ministry spokesperson.

Russian disinformation campaigns have portrayed German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and his government as warmongers. They aim to undermine the already unpopular chancellor and boost Russia-friendly forces such as the AfD and the far-left Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance (BSW) — both of which are strong in eastern Germany.

“The state elections in Saxony-Anhalt and in eastern Germany are, of course, a major target of Russian influence, because these are pivotal elections in the heart of Europe,” said Stefan Meister, a Russia expert at the German Council on Foreign Relations.

He said that it is too early to attribute the explosive-laden drone to Russia as investigations are still ongoing. But he added that Moscow is clearly waging a broad hybrid campaign targeting the region ahead of next month’s votes.

“This could be the first time right-wing populists come to power,” Meister said. “And with that, the chancellor might even fall — or at the very least, the coalition would be severely weakened — and a pro-Russian party would come to power in one of the federal states.”  

“There is a major campaign underway on the Russian side to influence these elections in favor of the AfD and the BSW,” he added. 

Polls show that the AfD has a chance of winning an outright majority in Saxony-Anhalt on Sept. 6 and is poised to be the largest party in Mecklenburg–Western Pomerania and is expected to perform well in Berlin when those states hold elections on Sept. 20.

Vulnerable transport hub

The drone incident risks raising fears in Germany that their country’s support for Ukraine is bringing the war closer to home.

The Leipzig-Halle airport has been a target in the past. In July 2024, an incendiary parcel caught fire at a DHL facility there shortly before it was due to be loaded onto an aircraft. European investigators later identified 22 suspects allegedly working for Russian military intelligence in the wider parcel plot. 

The airport is among Germany’s most strategically important transport hubs.

It is the home base for NATO’s SALIS airlift program, which gives nine participating countries access to Ukrainian Antonov aircraft capable of carrying oversized military cargo for national, EU and alliance missions.

The incident adds to a feeling of insecurity, which could help populist parties, said Meister.

“It’s once again obvious that we’re simply very vulnerable,” he said.

An interior ministry spokesperson said Wednesday that the government was monitoring a campaign it called “Matryoshka,” and regarded it as serious.

German officials said this week that fabricated videos that falsely accused candidates of corruption, sexual misconduct and other crimes appeared to have mimicked trusted outlets such as the German regional public broadcaster ARD and the U.K.’s BBC.

Independent researchers have gone further. Deutsche Welle counted more than 180 fake posts linked to Matryoshka targeting September’s three elections. The posts largely attacked candidates from centrist parties, while sparing the AfD and BSW, according to researchers.

Chris Lunday contributed to this report.

A new survey quantifies the financial and emotional toll of flight disruptions, pointing to a widening gap between passenger rights on paper and passenger experience in practice.

Nearly eight in 10 travelers experienced a flight disruption in the past year, and for most the damage went well beyond the inconvenience itself. A new survey from AirHelp, a company dedicated to supporting travelers throughout their journey, puts a number on what disruption actually costs passengers: an average of €514 out of pocket, plus a real toll on their time, plans and well-being.

These figures reflect an industry operating under sustained pressure, with disruption continuing to shape the everyday experience of millions of travelers.

Air travel has largely recovered from its pandemic-era lows, but disruption remains a persistent feature of modern flying, driven by everything from air traffic control constraints to weather, staffing and aging infrastructure. Globally, 79 percent of respondents had a flight canceled, delayed by more than two hours or otherwise disrupted in the past 12 months. Of those disruptions, 50 percent were delays over two hours, 15 percent were cancellations, and 14 percent involved delayed, lost or damaged luggage. These figures reflect an industry operating under sustained pressure, with disruption continuing to shape the everyday experience of millions of travelers.

The financial toll

Globally, nearly three-quarters of passengers (73 percent) incurred additional expenses due to disruptions, with costs averaging €514 per person, although that figure masks wide differences. It also marks a clear increase from previous surveys, which found average costs of just €362.50 per passenger.

UK and German travelers report the highest average costs, at roughly €708 and €619 respectively. Portuguese and Spanish travelers report the lowest, at approximately €277 and €340. The United States and Brazil sit in the mid-to-high range, at around €577 and €529. The spread likely reflects differing living and wage levels, but it also means the highest-cost markets can see disrupted trips cost nearly three times what they would in the cheapest.

Money isn’t the only thing that weighs on passengers during disruptions.

Fifty-seven percent of passengers had to spend extra out of pocket during a disruption. Another 20 percent lost money that couldn’t be recovered, a non-refundable hotel stay, for instance, while 5 percent lost income they’d expected to earn. Just over a quarter, 27 percent, said the disruption cost them nothing.

Emotional toll

Money isn’t the only thing that weighs on passengers during disruptions. Sixty-eight percent of all respondents globally cited stress or frustration as a consequence of their disruption. That finding holds up when you look at what passengers rated as a major problem. Globally, waiting around for long periods ranked as the most common major complaint, cited by 50 percent of passengers, followed closely by stress itself at 43 percent.

The knock-on effects extended well beyond the airport. Thirty percent said the disruption derailed specific plans during their trip, such as sightseeing or connecting activities. Twenty-nine percent reported negative health or well-being effects like fatigue, missed sleep or illness. Twenty-two percent missed work or professional obligations, and 20 percent missed personal events like family gatherings or celebrations. Only 8 percent said they experienced no impacts beyond the disruption itself.

A pattern of inconsistent support

Much of the toll passengers describe traces back to communication. Many report not knowing what support or compensation they were entitled to during a disruption.
Globally, in-the-moment support was inconsistent: 47 percent of passengers said they never received vouchers, air miles or future discounts, and 44 percent said they never received cash compensation or money back for their costs. Basic support fared a little better but was still patchy- 38 percent never received food and drink, while adequate information about the disruption was more reliably provided, with just 25 percent saying they never got it.

These findings vary by market. On cash compensation, American passengers were the least likely to receive money back, with 52 percent receiving none, while German passengers were the most likely, with only 34 percent reporting none.

The regulatory question

Over a third of travelers (35 percent) said they didn’t know that regulations protecting passenger rights exist when flying in Europe. Among those who might have been eligible for compensation, 31 percent globally never filed a claim simply because they didn’t know they could, while another 22 percent held back because the process seemed too complicated.

Travellers are paying a very high price for flight disruptions, and the damage goes well beyond the bank balance.

Tomasz Pawliszyn, CEO of AirHelp

These findings come from a global survey commissioned by AirHelp and launched in February, polling 1,996 passengers across the UK, Europe, the United States and Brazil about their experiences with flight disruptions over the past 12 months.

“Travellers are paying a very high price for flight disruptions, and the damage goes well beyond the bank balance,” says Tomasz Pawliszyn, CEO of AirHelp. He points to the gap between the protections that exist on paper, air passenger rights laws and what passengers actually experience.

“Passengers are entitled to care and, in many cases, compensation when their flight is disrupted,” Pawliszyn said. “But when the majority of travelers remain uninformed, that protection isn’t reaching the people it’s meant for.”

The findings point to a narrower and more tractable question than airline performance itself: whether existing consumer-protection rules are being communicated clearly enough to function as intended. As aviation authorities in the UK, EU and elsewhere continue reviewing passenger rights frameworks, this data suggests the more urgent gap may not be the rules themselves, but how well travelers understand them.

For Europe’s maritime sector—and beyond—the European Commission’s proposal to revise the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) goes in the right direction and reflects much of what Cruise Lines International Association (CLIA) has consistently called for: a framework in which carbon pricing supports, rather than holds back, the maritime transition, strengthens Europe’s industrial competitiveness and preserves connectivity, including for outermost regions. The starting point is an encouraging one.

The proposal matters because it is about far more than carbon pricing. Not that the sector shies away from that: cruise lines already comply with the ETS, in addition to port dues, passenger charges, tonnage-based taxes and value-added tax (VAT). Unlike traditional taxation, the ETS is designed to drive decarbonization. Its revision matters because, by reinvesting a greater share of maritime ETS revenues in infrastructure—ports, shore-side electricity, alternative fuels, bunkering and other facilities—Europe can help the maritime industry maintain its global leadership while accelerating the energy transition. That leadership is not a matter of prestige. It is a matter of European prosperity, jobs, skills, competitiveness and industrial capacity across the continent.

The cruise industry alone generates an annual economic impact of €64.1 billion in Europe and supports 445,000 jobs. It is also one of Europe’s industrial success stories, combining world-leading shipbuilding, advanced engineering and maritime innovation with high-value tourism. Behind those figures lies a shipbuilding story that few industries can match: 98 percent of the global cruise orderbook is built in European shipyards, from Fincantieri in Italy to Chantiers de l’Atlantique in France and the Meyer yards in Germany and Finland. There is €62.2 billion committed to ships on order through 2037. This investment sustains a vast ecosystem of engineering firms, technology providers and thousands of suppliers, keeping in Europe the skills and industrial capacity that other regions of the world are actively trying to attract.

By reinvesting a greater share of maritime ETS revenues in infrastructure—ports, shore-side electricity, alternative fuels, bunkering and other facilities—Europe can help the maritime industry maintain its global leadership while accelerating the energy transition.

That is why it is important to be clear about cruise’s role in Europe. Cruise is a key part of the maritime industry: we build ships, move people between ports and across seas, and help drive innovation and investment through one of the most advanced supply chains in Europe. Cruise should therefore be understood first and foremost as part of Europe’s maritime industrial ecosystem, combining maritime transport, advanced manufacturing and tourism in a way few sectors do. It is governed by an extensive regulatory framework alongside the rest of international shipping while supporting one of Europe’s most innovative maritime value chains.

Cruise represents just a small fraction of the global fleet—less than one percent of commercial vessels—but it is consistently at the forefront of maritime’s transformation in ways that benefit the broader maritime sector. Decarbonization is our north star, and our experience shows that it advances fastest when it travels hand in hand with innovation. Done well, decarbonization is not only an environmental objective but also a driver of industrial modernization and European competitiveness. This is why cruise matters to Europe’s maritime future: the industry is helping to turn decarbonization ambition into industrial progress—investing more than €44 billion since 2022 in new ships designed to meet or exceed Europe’s environmental regulations to improve performance and advance the maritime transition.

The cruise industry alone generates an annual economic impact of €64.1 billion in Europe and supports 445,000 jobs. It is also one of Europe’s industrial success stories, combining world-leading shipbuilding, advanced engineering and maritime innovation with high-value tourism.

More than half of the capacity on order today is capable of using liquefied natural gas (LNG), which can reduce CO2 emissions by up to 20 percent compared with conventional fuels. And while LNG is not the end-game solution, it does serve as an important bridge to lower-emissions fuels like renewable and synthetic methane as these types of fuels become available at scale. Today, 57 percent of cruise ships on order are designed with multi-fuel capability, meaning their engines will be able to run on low and zero greenhouse gas fuels, when available at scale. In addition, more than 60 percent of the global cruise fleet can already connect to shore-side electricity where ports are equipped, allowing ships to switch engines off at berth and reduce emissions by up to 98 percent. By 2028, close to 75 percent of capacity will be shore-power-ready.

The environmental transition is broader than carbon reduction alone. Across the global fleet, 225 ships—80 percent of the fleet and 84 percent of passenger capacity—are outfitted with advanced wastewater treatment systems, with more than a third capable of meeting stricter Baltic Sea Special Area discharge standards. More than 94 percent of the reporting fleet produces freshwater onboard, and approximately 60 percent can meet their full onboard consumption needs. Together, the cruise sector’s advancements in environmental technologies and practices help reduce emissions, support responsible operations and lessen pressure on local infrastructure in the destinations cruise ships visit.

Europe leads the world in cruise shipbuilding, maritime innovation and the deployment of technologies that can help decarbonize shipping.

None of this happens in isolation from the places we serve. Cruise itineraries are planned up to three years in advance, which makes cruise one of the most predictable forms of tourism and allows ports, destinations and operators to manage visitor flows together. The economic footprint is tangible and local: when a ship provisions in port, a single day’s order of fresh produce alone can be worth some €150,000 to local suppliers, before counting fuel, services, excursions and the wider activity a call generates. And because cruise ships connect islands, outermost regions and remote coastal communities—often where alternative transport links are limited—cruise can extend the tourism season and spread benefits well beyond the traditional hotspots.

The road ahead, through the European Parliament, Council and trilogues, will be long, and we will walk it constructively together with our members and institutions at every stage. But the compass is set. Europe leads the world in cruise shipbuilding, maritime innovation and the deployment of technologies that can help decarbonize shipping. By preserving that leadership and reinvesting the sector’s ETS contribution into maritime infrastructure, fuels and facilities, the ETS will not merely price emissions—it will help build the ports, fuels and ships of the future, preserving the competitiveness and global leadership of Europe’s maritime industry for decades to come.

---

Disclaimer

POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT

• The sponsor is Cruise Lines International Association (CLIA)
• The political advertisement is linked to advocacy on The EU Emissions Trading System (ETS).

More information here.

PARIS — French President Emmanuel Macron’s office is courting Saudi cash to turn what was once the country’s biggest theme park into a manga-themed attraction.

According to half a dozen diplomatic, government and industry officials — all of whom were granted anonymity to speak candidly about a project one person characterized as “highly confidential” — the Elysée Palace has for several months held discussions with potential Saudi Arabian investors about the revival of Mirapolis, which closed in 1991 due to financial issues and has remained abandoned since.

A subsidiary of the Saudi Public Investment Fund called the Qiddiya Investment Company is at the center of the negotiations. The Saudi sovereign wealth fund recently opened an office in Paris.

According to one diplomat with contacts in the Gulf, the project would involve Saudi investors acquiring the former Mirapolis site, located some 30 kilometers northwest of Paris, with an eye to turning it into a theme park based on the popular manga series Dragon Ball.

Manga’s explosion in popularity has been felt keenly in France, where comic books and graphic novels are particularly popular.

The expected investment amount is not yet known, but several parties involved in the discussions suggest the deal could exceed €1 billion.

Saudi spinoff

The enterprise is part of Saudi Arabia Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s Vision 2030 plan, which aims to diversify the kingdom’s oil-dependent economy with massive investments in tourism and leisure.

The Qiddiya Investment Company is overseeing the construction of the city of Qiddiya — a huge entertainment complex situated some 50 kilometers from Riyadh. The site is set to feature a Formula 1 circuit, a large tennis complex designed to host international tournaments, an amusement park operated by the American chain Six Flags and another theme park based on Dragon Ball.

According to three people familiar with the negotiations, the current plan is to build a smaller-scale Dragon Ball park where Mirapolis once stood.

The Elysée did not respond to questions about the project’s details, and Qiddiya Investment Company did not respond to a request for comment.

Qiddiya Managing Director Abdullah Aldawood met with Macron at the last two Choose France summits, which are events organized to attract foreign investment in the country. At the event, the summit’s press kit referred to, in cryptic terms, the signing of a memorandum of understanding aimed at “exploring a major tourism and entertainment project in France.”

A few weeks before Choose France this year, Aldawood met with Valérie Pécresse, president of the Île-de-France region, where the abandoned Mirapolis site is located. Aldawood also met with teams from Business France and Choose Paris Region — the region’s economic development agency — said a person who attended the meeting.

In a sign that the project is progressing well, late last month officials representing Île-de-France, which includes Paris, met with representatives from 10 key ministries, electricity grid operator RTE and public transport operator Île-de-France Mobilités to discuss the park’s possible revival.

The agenda for this meeting, which POLITICO saw, included discussions about the governance of the future project, transportation infrastructure, energy requirements and land acquisition issues. The gathering was chaired by Macron’s former Chief of Staff Georges-François Leclerc, who is now the prefect of the Île-de-France region.

“We had no information before receiving the invitation to the meeting, but we understand that the Elysée wants to step up the pressure on this issue,” said a ministerial adviser who took part in the discussions.

A fallen icon of the 1980s

Opened in 1987 by then-Prime Minister Jacques Chirac and with funding from Saudi billionaire Ghaith Pharaon, Mirapolis was intended to be France’s attempt at subverting U.S. dominance in the theme park industry.

But financial difficulties quickly mounted. Visitor numbers came in below expectations, and competition from EuroDisney further undermined the park’s business model a few years later. Mirapolis closed its doors for good four years later.

Discussions about Mirapolis’ manga successor have remained very limited. No one at the town hall in Courdimanche, the commune where Mirapolis is located, responded to requests for comment.

Rachid Temal, the Socialist Party senator who represents Mirapolis’ constituency, said he was not involved in the discussions and preferred not to comment at this stage.

Aurélien Taché, a member of Parliament from the far-left France Unbowed party who represents the area, said he was not kept in the loop either, and that he will be paying particular attention to “the environmental and social aspects of the project.”

MANCHESTER — Labour’s Bev Craig won the Greater Manchester mayoral by-election Friday night and will now succeed British Prime Minister Andy Burnham in the region’s top job.

Craig came top with 309,525 votes, with Reform UK’s Sian Astley trailing on 157,178 votes. The Green Party placed third.

The victory was achieved with a second round under the city’s supplemental vote system, which allows voters to pick a first and second-preference candidate.

Speaking at the Co-Op Live arena to the east of the city, Craig said she stands “ready to serve” her 3 million constituents.

“Every single decision I take as your mayor of Greater Manchester will pass the test of making your life better,” Craig pledged.

The vote was triggered after three-time mayoral contest winner Burnham resigned the job in June to return to Westminster, where he swiftly claimed leadership of the governing Labour Party and became prime minister. There had been concern that Burnham’s move would allow Reform UK — which performed strongly in local elections in England earlier this year — to seize the mayoralty.

Craig will now be have to deal directly with Burnham, who has promised to devolve more powers to England’s mayors as a part of a devolution package. The post currently comes with powers over transport, policing, and housing.

Turnout for the special election was noticeably lower than when Burnham last ran back in 2024, with only 25 per cent of voters heading to the polls this time, compared to 32 per cent at the last vote. POLITICO witnessed some voters on doorsteps Thursday evening learning of the election for the first time.

Counting continued late into the night as the re-instated supplementary voting system took the contest to a second round for the first time ever.

Reform diverted

In the weeks before the election, polls put Craig firmly in the lead. Reform UK had initially been expected to pose a strong challenge, but some of its resources were diverted South as Nigel Farage called a separate by-election in his constituency of Clacton in a bid to shut down scrutiny of his finances.

The Greens set about targeting areas in which they knew they already had support. While out door-knocking in Longsight, an area in the constituency of Gorton and Denton, candidate Geraldine Coggins said they were “going for the hat-trick,” after winning a councilor and an MP in recent votes. Zack Polanski’s party threw money at an air campaign, too, pumping out Instagram videos featuring the leader, Gorton and Denton MP Hannah Spencer, and Coggins.

Greater Manchester has a huge electorate of 2.1million voters, and there were only 5 weeks to campaign. “You can’t hit all those doors,” explained Coggins.

Coggins’ Instagram account reached 4.6million views in the past 30 days and campaign ads had been shown on screen 50.7million times, according to her team.

Meanwhile, Craig spent some £53,000 on digital ads between Meta and Google, and told POLITICO before the vote: “People have been stopping me in the street. And I’ve been really high-profile and visible in my campaign even when other parties went hard on their attacks.” A yellow Labour battle bus cruised the streets as voters went to the polls Thursday. One campaigner shouted “Vote Bev today” through a microphone while fellow activists cheered and waved posters from the top deck.

Meanwhile, Reform seemed to have toned down their own efforts. One Bolton resident said they had not received a single campaign leaflet from Reform, which traditionally relies on social media and letters rather than door-knocking, despite receiving an influx during the local elections in May where the party made big strides, especially in the north of the city region.

The party’s candidate Sian Astley drew some criticism for backing out of hustings hosted by local media outlet the Manchester Mill, and spent just £14,000 on digital ads.

CORRECTION: This article has been updated to correct the name of Reform UK’s candidate.