Source: United Kingdom – Prime Minister’s Office 10 Downing Street
The Prime Minister met President Emmanuel Macron of France, Chancellor Olaf Scholz of Germany, and President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. of the United States today in Berlin, Germany.
The Prime Minister met President Emmanuel Macron of France, Chancellor Olaf Scholz of Germany, and President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. of the United States today in Berlin, Germany.
The leaders condemned Russia’s continued war of aggression against Ukraine, discussed their plans to provide Ukraine with additional security, economic, and humanitarian assistance, including leveraging the extraordinary revenues of immobilized Russian sovereign assets – as decided at the G7 Summit, discussed President Zelenskyy’s Victory Plan, and reiterated their resolve to continue supporting Ukraine in its efforts to secure a just and lasting peace, based on international law, including the United Nations Charter, and respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity.
The leaders also discussed events in the Middle East, in particular the implications of the death of Yahya Sinwar, who bears responsibility for the bloodshed of the October 7th terrorist attack, for the immediate necessity to bring the hostages home to their families, for ending the war in Gaza, and ensure humanitarian aid reaches civilians.
The leaders also reiterated their condemnation of Iran’s escalatory attack on Israel and coordinated on efforts to hold Iran accountable and prevent further escalation. They discussed the situation in Lebanon and agreed on the need to work towards full implementation of UNSCR 1701 and a diplomatic resolution that allows civilians on both sides of the Blue Line to return safely home.
Source: United States Senator for Mississippi Roger Wicker
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Roger Wicker, R-Miss., the highest-ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, is demanding that President Biden exercise his responsibilities as commander-in-chief and give Ukraine the weapons it needs to make a “substantial difference” on the battlefield in the last 90 days of his term.
Senator Wicker specifically called on the president to provision Ukraine with weaponry at a much faster rate, deliver more vehicles, missiles, drones and counter-drone equipment, and increase defense industrial base cooperation between the United States and Ukraine, among other recommendations. The senator sent these detailed requests, along with more than five others, as a part of a detailed plan to enable Ukrainian success prior to the next presidential term starting.
These demands follow repeated, unsuccessful engagements with the White House since August. In the letter, Senator Wicker notes that he sent a classified letter to President Biden with suggestions on how to improve the military assistance program for Ukraine, and he later followed up with a September phone call to the president regarding the letter. Senator Wicker has also shared these ideas with senior national security officials but has yet to see them yield any significant results.
“I am frustrated – and mystified – that your administration has accomplished so little in the last three months regarding the war in Ukraine. You seem poised to leave the next president a weak hand,” Senator Wicker wrote.
For two years, Senator Wicker has led Senate Republicans in pushing President Biden to implement a more effective strategy for Ukrainian victory. In September, Senator Wicker criticized President Biden’s intention to drag out his use of Presidential Drawdown Authority. Senator Wicker has also repeatedly published a detailed timeline of many instances when President Biden failed to deliver support to Ukraine at a speed where they could make a difference on the battlefield. In a 2023 floor speech, Senator Wicker laid out his first principles as it comes to supporting Ukraine: “more, better, faster.”
Read the full October 18, 2024 letter here or below.
October 17, 2024
President Joseph R. Biden, Jr.
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear Mr. President,
In early August, I sent you a classified letter, which identified steps you could take to support Ukraine more aggressively. The letter contained detailed recommendations, including policy changes and suggestions to improve military assistance delivery and defense industrial base cooperation. My goal was to highlight ways that your administration could use its remaining six months in office wisely – to put Ukraine in the most advantageous position possible for your successor, whomever the American people choose. I followed up with you in a phone conversation in mid-September, and I have attended meetings with senior national security officials.
I am frustrated – and mystified – that your administration has accomplished so little in the last three months regarding the war in Ukraine. You seem poised to leave the next president a weak hand. Nonetheless, I maintain that a focused effort – directed by you – could make a substantial difference over your final 90 days as president.
Toward that end, I have included a list of 10 recommendations.
Recommendation 1: Increase the pace of weapons transfers to Ukraine. The current pace of Presidential Drawdown Authority (PDA) usage would drag on through calendar year 2025. This is true despite the agreement between Congress and your administration that the authority granted in the National Security Supplemental would last through calendar year 2024. That tempo led your administration to seek a $5.5 billion extension of this authority last month.
The Secretaries of State and Defense exercised this authority to prevent its expiration, but your administration has said that the pace of deliveries will not change. Ukraine will continue to receive only about $400 million in military equipment per month for the next 14 months.
I am troubled that your administration is using U.S. military readiness as an excuse to “manage” the conflict in Ukraine. Officials are making decisions about strategic and military risk, but they are not consulting Congress. You should direct the Secretary of Defense to provide you a plan that would deliver the remaining $5.5 billion in Presidential Drawdown Authority (PDA) to Ukraine immediately.
Deliver more vehicles. Ukraine needs many more heavy vehicles, such as M1A1 Abrams tanks and Bradley infantry fighting vehicles, to form the core of combined-arms brigades. Ukraine also faces a significant shortfall of general protected vehicles (such as up-armored HMMWVs, ambulances, and MRAPs) to protect troops from Russian drones and artillery. The U.S. Army and Marine Corps possess ample stocks of these vehicles. Our industrial base can easily replace those that are transferred. Additionally, there is no near-term need for massive stockpiles of vehicles given the degraded state of Russian ground forces.
Deliver more ATACMS. Ukraine has used U.S.-provided ATACMS responsibly and effectively, but it needs more. We have a sufficient inventory of serviceable long-range ATACMS. A significant number of these should go to Ukraine. Although there may be division within your administration on this recommendation, I urge you to push the Army and the combatant commands to aid Ukraine’s largely successful deep strike campaign.
Deliver more drones and counter unmanned aerial systems. U.S. attack drone and counter-UAS production can increase. The industrial base is expanding rapidly and has multiple solution options in each of these areas. Ukraine is quite receptive to using unproven systems.
Recommendation 2: Allow greater flexibility on restrictions for U.S.-provided munitions. One of Ukraine’s key asymmetric advantages against Russia is its ability to target high-value Russian military targets and to do so rapidly. Your administration has hamstrung this crucial advantage. You should immediately revise any policies that limit the use of U.S.-provided munitions, including ATACMS, to strike military targets inside Russia. Any restrictions should be placed on the types of targets, rather than on the distance from a border that Russia does not even recognize. Numerous allies and partners already allow their long-range munitions to be used for deep strikes.
Recommendation 3: Increase the cap of U.S. government non-military personnel allowed in-country. You should direct Secretary Blinken to allow more State Department, Defense Department, and other government agency personnel inside Ukraine. The current number of personnel cannot manage a military aid effort in the tens of billions of dollars while conducting planning for future improvements in the Ukrainian industrial base and economy. As a result, anything beyond the day-to-day management is not getting done. Current staff is overworked, and more U.S. government personnel are required to manage security assistance and to conduct accountability and oversight work. Numerous allies already have a much more risk-tolerant government presence in Ukraine.
Recommendation 4: Establish a regulated presence of U.S. military contractors inside Ukraine. You should allow a limited number of U.S. military contractors to operate in Ukraine – under strict conditions – to increase Ukraine’s ability to maintain its equipment. The current approach is too slow, as we remotely perform maintenance or move Ukrainian equipment to Poland for up-keep. The presence of U.S. contractors in-country would also help to mentor Ukrainian personnel to increase their self-sufficiency. U.S. contractors are well-prepared to execute such a mission. They have extensive experience in Iraq and Afghanistan. British, French, and Czech personnel are already in-country, or will soon be, to conduct similar missions.
Recommendation 5: Expand training for Ukrainian land forces. The United States should maximize the use of all available training capacity located in the European Command (EUCOM) area of responsibility, and it should build up Ukrainian brigades capable of combined arms warfare. Currently, improved Ukrainian recruitment is outpacing Ukrainian and allied training. EUCOM almost certainly has the ability to train even more troops per month than it does now, which would help cover the number of troops that Ukraine does not have the capacity to train.
Recommendation 6: Deliver more shareable, commercially-derived intelligence. The administration should use processes already in place to increase the delivery of available unclassified information to Ukraine, including disposition of Russian forces and location data. The National Reconnaissance Office has contract vehicles in place for commercial satellite services (such as RF data) that are instrumental in providing Ukraine with services for tipping and cueing (i.e., targeting) of Russian radars, air assets, defense systems, and other threats.
Recommendation 7: Dramatically expand the Pentagon industrial base policy workforce. U.S. industrial base expansion and industrial base integration with Europe is not happening fast enough because we lack the personnel to plan and execute these activities. You should direct the Secretary of Defense, in the next 15 days, to reassign at least 100 capable and motivated DOD civil servants, moving them into these offices and asking Congress for new hiring authorities and supplemental money to pay for this expansion. The short-staffed office that runs the Defense Production Act illustrates the need. Only a handful of people staff that organization, which is tasked with finding ways to rebuild our supplier base for solid rocket motors, missile casings, and more. DOD industrial base offices can also help allies and partners expand their own production, such as the Storm Shadow and SCALP lines in the UK and France, respectively.
These U.S. offices include:
Joint Production Acceleration Cell
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base Policy
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for International and Industry Engagement
Manufacturing Capability Expansion and Investment Prioritization (DPA & ICAM/IBAS)
Recommendation 8: Rapidly accelerate contracting timelines. I understand that many large contracts for Ukraine, especially those funded through the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, are still taking a year or more on average. This is unacceptable. Section 1244 of the Fiscal Year 2023 NDAA, as well as additional contracting authorities, grant broad flexibilities to the Department of Defense. By written instruction, you should formally direct the Secretary of Defense and the service acquisition executives to require all contracting officers to leverage – to the maximum extent possible – those contracting flexibilities. The Army has used section 1244 for the new 155mm artillery ammunition factory in Mesquite, Texas, and doing so brought it online two years faster than expected.
Recommendation 9: Hold monthly high-level defense industrial base meetings. You should direct the Secretaries of State, Defense, and Commerce to host monthly high-level defense industrial base meetings with Ukraine, key NATO allies, and defense industry officials. You should prioritize coproduction with Ukraine so it can better meet its own needs.
Recommendation 10: Deliver more DPICMs. In addition to ATACMS, Ukraine also has used Dual Purpose Improved Conventional Munitions (DPICMs) effectively and responsibly. The U.S. inventory includes hundreds of thousands of serviceable 155mm DPICMs rounds. Each 155mm DPICMs round has the effect of 3–5 high explosive artillery projectiles. You possess the authority to send Ukraine $250 million of DPICMs today. There is simply no way to offset the artillery advantage of the Russians without using DPICMs.
Sincerely,
Roger F. Wicker
Ranking Member
Press Conference by Volker Turk, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.
—————————————————-
The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, told journalists in New York that “the number of people at catastrophic levels of hunger is expected to double in the coming months and the risk of famine persists across the whole of Gaza,” and added that “this crisis is principally the consequences of decisions made by the Israeli authorities.”
Following the presentation of his annual report to the General Assembly, Türk said, “starvation of civilians as a method of warfare is prohibited under international humanitarian law. It constitutes a war crime. As the occupying power, Israel has the specific obligations an international humanitarian law to bring into Gaza the necessary foodstuffs, medical supplies and other articles, and to facilitate humanitarian relief by all means at its disposal.”
He said, “there are reports that Israeli forces are preventing humanitarian aid from accessing the north, exacerbating the already desperate humanitarian and medical needs,” adding that Israel’s evacuation orders “appear designed to cut off north Gaza completely from the rest of the territory, as bombing and other attacks continue.”
Turning to Lebanon, the High Commissioner said Israeli “daily strikes on residential buildings in urban areas are taking an appalling toll on civilians with significant numbers of casualties, destruction and displacement,” while “Hizbullah also continues to fire rockets into Israel, where many thousands are displaced from their homes.”
He stressed that the risk of a full-fledged regional conflict “remains very high, one that could engulf the lives and the human rights of millions of people,” and added that the “illogic of escalation, must end.”
On the Ukraine war, Türk said, “nearly 1000 days since Russia’s full-scale invasion, we continue to see terrible devastation characterised by recurring human rights violations and war crimes,” and noted that July 2024 was the deadliest month for civilians in Ukraine since October 2022
He said, “with the ongoing attacks on crucial energy infrastructure, I fear for Ukrainians this coming winter.”
On the situation in Sudan, the High Commissioner said, “the warring parties, affiliated groups and regional actors continue to compete for influence and power, forcing a staggering 10 million people to flee their homes and leaving more than 25 million people facing acute hunger.”
He said, “the situation is desperate, and there is evidence of the commission of war crimes and other atrocity crimes.”
Türk said, “when my office rings warning bells, as we have over many years for all the situations that I referred to above, the international community needs to listen and act to avert catastrophe.”
The IMF Board today completed the Fifth Review of the extended arrangement under the Extended Fund Facility (EFF) for Ukraine, enabling a disbursement of about US$1.1 billion (SDR 834.9 million) to Ukraine, which will be channeled for budget support.
Ukraine’s economy remains resilient, and performance remains strong under the EFF despite challenging conditions. The authorities met all end-June quantitative performance criteria and completed four structural benchmarks.
Sustained reform momentum, domestic revenue mobilization, and timely disbursement of external support are necessary to safeguard macroeconomic stability, restore fiscal and debt sustainability, and enhance institutional reforms.
Washington, DC: The Executive Board of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) today completed the Fifth Review of the EFF arrangement for Ukraine, enabling the authorities to draw US$1.1 billion (SDR 834.9), which will be channeled for budget support. This will bring the total disbursements under the IMF-supported program to US$8.7 billion.
Ukraine’s 48-month EFF arrangement, with access of SDR 11.6 billion (equivalent to US$15.5 billion, or about 577 percent of quota), was approved on March 31, 2023, and forms part of a US$151.4 billion support package for Ukraine. The authorities’ IMF-supported program helps anchor policies that sustain fiscal, external, and macro-financial stability at a time of exceptionally high uncertainty. The EFF aims to support the economic recovery, enhance governance, and strengthen institutions with the aim of promoting long-term growth in the context of reconstruction and Ukraine’s path to EU accession.
All end-June and continuous quantitative performance criteria and indicative targets were met. The authorities have implemented prior action for the review, and completed structural benchmarks relating to tax privileges, public companies affected by the war, customs reform and public investment management, underscoring their continuing commitment to an ambitious reform agenda. Two structural benchmarks have been reset to allow more time for completion of the reform.
The economy was more resilient than expected in the first half of 2024, with continued growth, moderate inflation, and adequate reserves bolstered by continued sizeable external support. Nevertheless, the outlook for the remainder of the year and 2025 has worsened since the Fourth Review, largely due to sustained Russian attacks on Ukrainian energy infrastructure and uncertainty about the war; overall, the outlook remains subject to exceptionally high uncertainty.
Following the Executive Board discussion on Ukraine, Ms. Kristalina Georgieva, Managing Director of the IMF, issued the following statement[1]:
Russia’s war in Ukraine continues to bring a devastating social and economic toll on Ukraine. Despite the war, macroeconomic and financial stability is being preserved through skillful policymaking by the Ukrainian authorities as well as substantial external support. The economy has remained resilient, despite significant damage to the energy infrastructure, reflecting the continued adaptability of households and firms.
Ukraine’s performance and commitment under the program continues to be strong. All quantitative performance criteria for end-June were met, and those for end-September are expected to have been met. All but one structural benchmark through end-September were completed, while the missed structural benchmark has been reset to accommodate delays in the appointment process partly beyond the control of the authorities. Moreover, two structural benchmarks due later in the year and the prior action for the review was also implemented. The program remains fully financed with a cumulative external financing envelope of US$151 billion in the baseline and US$187 billion in the downside over the 4-year program period, including with new commitments from the Extraordinary Revenue Acceleration Loans for Ukraine (ERA) initiative.
Looking ahead, the recovery is expected to slow amid headwinds from the impact of the attacks on energy infrastructure and the continuing war, while risks to the outlook remain exceptionally high. Preparedness is necessary to enable appropriate policy action should risks materialize.
Ukraine’s financing needs remain large, driven by the continuing war. Timely and predictable external support—on terms consistent with debt sustainability—is essential to closing financing gaps and safeguarding stability. At the same time, decisive domestic revenue mobilization is critical for Ukraine to meet elevated spending needs, respond to shocks, and restore fiscal sustainability, which will require further tax policy measures as well as efforts to improve compliance and combat evasion, as envisioned under the National Revenue Strategy.
Further strengthening medium-term budgeting, fiscal risk frameworks and transparency, and public investment management should advance in support of these goals.
The Eurobond exchange in August was an important milestone in the authorities’ strategy to restore debt sustainability. Efforts to conclude the remaining steps in line with the authorities’ strategy and the program’s debt sustainability objectives should continue.
Continued exchange rate flexibility under the managed exchange rate regime will help strengthen the resilience of the economy to external shocks. The recent uptick in inflation suggests limited room for further easing in the near term, though inflation remains well-anchored, and the FX cash market continues to show stability. A state-dependent and gradual approach to the easing of FX controls remains essential to safeguard FX reserves. The authorities’ efforts to avoid monetary financing should continue.
The financial sector remains stable. Efforts should continue to strengthen bank resolution and supervision, governance, and contingency planning in view of risks to the outlook.
Continuing the reform momentum in anticorruption and governance, including ensuring the effectiveness of anticorruption institutions and strengthening governance in the energy sector, remain essential to help contain fiscal risks, secure donor confidence and enhance growth, which would also support Ukraine’s path to EU accession.
Table 1. Ukraine: Selected Economic and Social Indicators, 2021–33
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
Act.
Act.
Act.
Proj.
Proj.
Proj.
Proj.
Real economy (percent change, unless otherwise indicated)
Nominal GDP (billions of Ukrainian hryvnias) 1/
5,451
5,239
6,538
7,542
8,542
9,715
10,761
Real GDP 1/
3.4
-28.8
5.3
3.0
2.5-3.5
5.3
4.5
Contributions:
Domestic demand
12.9
-22.9
13.9
6.3
5.1
4.6
4.3
Private consumption
4.7
-16.8
5.5
3.1
3.2
3.8
3.5
Public consumption
0.1
12.5
2.6
-0.1
-1.0
-2.5
-2.0
Investment
8.1
-18.6
5.8
3.3
2.9
3.3
2.7
Net exports
-9.5
-5.9
-8.6
-3.3
-2.6
0.7
0.2
GDP deflator
24.8
34.9
18.5
12.0
10.5
8.0
6.0
Unemployment rate (ILO definition; period average, percent)
9.8
24.5
19.1
14.2
12.7
10.4
9.4
Consumer prices (period average)
9.4
20.2
12.9
5.8
9.0
7.7
5.0
Consumer prices (end of period)
10.0
26.6
5.1
9.0
7.5
6.6
5.0
Nominal wages (average)
20.8
1.0
20.1
16.6
17.1
14.1
10.6
Real wages (average)
10.5
-16.0
6.4
10.2
7.5
6.0
5.3
Savings (percent of GDP)
12.5
17.1
9.7
9.2
5.2
10.5
16.4
Private
12.7
30.2
24.6
25.5
20.2
15.7
14.0
Public
-0.2
-13.1
-14.8
-16.3
-15.0
-5.1
2.5
Investment (percent of GDP)
14.5
12.1
15.1
17.3
19.5
21.0
22.3
Private
10.7
9.6
10.4
14.8
15.4
16.6
17.2
Public
3.8
2.5
4.8
2.4
4.1
4.4
5.1
General Government (percent of GDP)
Fiscal balance 2/
-4.0
-15.6
-19.6
-18.7
-19.2
-9.5
-2.7
Fiscal balance, excl. grants 2/
-4.0
-24.8
-26.1
-24.5
-20.0
-9.8
-3.8
External financing (net)
2.4
10.8
16.5
15.2
18.2
8.8
3.3
Domestic financing (net), of which:
1.6
5.0
3.1
3.5
1.0
0.8
-0.6
NBU
-0.3
7.3
-0.2
-0.2
-0.2
-0.1
-0.1
Commercial banks
1.5
-1.5
2.5
3.5
1.0
0.8
-0.6
Public and publicly-guaranteed debt
50.5
77.7
82.3
95.6
106.6
107.6
102.6
Money and credit (end of period, percent change)
Base money
11.2
19.6
23.3
16.7
13.2
12.7
12.4
Broad money
12.0
20.8
23.0
15.4
13.3
11.9
10.1
Credit to nongovernment
8.4
-3.1
-0.5
9.0
12.9
21.5
18.7
Balance of payments (percent of GDP)
Current account balance
-1.9
5.0
-5.4
-8.1
-14.3
-10.5
-5.9
Foreign direct investment
3.8
0.1
2.6
2.0
2.1
4.3
4.9
Gross reserves (end of period, billions of U.S. dollars)
30.9
28.5
40.5
42.6
44.9
49.1
52.4
Months of next year’s imports of goods and services
4.5
3.8
5.1
5.1
5.4
5.7
6.0
Percent of short-term debt (remaining maturity)
67.5
64.3
89.5
106.2
106.3
118.3
124.5
Percent of the IMF composite metric (float)
104.4
103.6
124.3
113.5
104.7
104.0
106.9
Goods exports (annual volume change in percent)
35.1
-43.7
-15.4
15.7
6.2
14.0
6.3
Goods imports (annual volume change in percent)
17.0
-24.1
21.5
14.1
7.0
8.8
9.5
Goods terms of trade (percent change)
-8.4
-11.6
3.6
0.3
-1.8
1.2
1.4
Exchange rate
Hryvnia per U.S. dollar (end of period)
27.3
36.6
38.0
…
…
…
…
Hryvnia per U.S. dollar (period average)
27.3
32.3
36.6
…
…
…
…
Real effective rate (deflator-based, percent change)
10.2
27.5
-1.5
…
…
…
…
Memorandum items:
Per capita GDP / Population (2017): US$2,640 / 44.8 million
Sources: Ukrainian authorities; World Bank, World Development Indicators; and IMF staff estimates.
1/ GDP is compiled as per SNA 2008 and excludes territories that are or were in direct combat zones and temporarily occupied by Russia (consistent with the TMU).
2/ The general government includes the central and local governments and the social funds.
3/ Based on World Bank estimates.
[1] At the conclusion of the discussion, the Managing Director, as Chairman of the Board, summarizes the views of Executive Directors, and this summary is transmitted to the country’s authorities. An explanation of any qualifiers used in summing up can be found here: http://www.IMF.org/external/np/sec/misc/qualifiers.htm.
President Nadia Calviño and EIB Group delegation join partners at International Monetary Committee and World Bank Group Annual Meetings in Washington DC.
The EIB will announce new support for Ukraine and innovative financial instruments for countries on the frontline of climate change.
Alongside fellow Multilateral Development Banks, the EIB will play an active role in reinforcing the network of MDBs working more effectively as a system
The European Investment Bank Group (EIB) President Nadia Calviño travels to Washington DC next week, heading an EIB delegation to the annual meetings of the International Monetary Committee and World Bank Group.
The EIB will announce new financing in Washington to support Ukraine and countries on the frontline of climate change. Accompanied by Vice-Presidents Ambroise Fayolle and Thomas Östros, as well as the Director General of EIB Global Andrew McDowell, the delegation will join international partners to present fresh solutions and innovative financing in line with the European Union’s Global Gateway Agenda.
President Calviño said: “More than ever, the world needs joint solutions to the challenges we face. We need to cooperate and reinforce our joint tools to tackle high indebtedness, to support countries on the frontline of climate change, and build a fairer financial system. As the financial arm of the European Union, owned by the 27 member states, the EIB Group is playing its part. In Washington we are announcing new support for Ukraine. And alongside our partners we will also be signing new investments and backing innovative financing to support climate action and resilience. When we act together, we move further and faster.”
The EIB in Washington:
The EIB delegation will be taking part in a number of events on the margins of the Annual Meetings.You can find the highlights here.
For interview requests with members of the EIB delegation please get in touch with the .
Background information
The European Investment Bank (EIB) is the long-term lending institution of the European Union owned by its Member States. It is active in more than 160 countries and provides long-term finance for individual projects and strategic partnerships contributing to EU priorities and policy goals.
EIB Global is the EIB Group’s specialised arm dedicated to investments outside the EU, building international partnerships and financing projects contributing to development and climate action EIB Global brings the Group closer to local people, companies and institutions through our offices across the world.
Since Russia started its war of aggression against Ukraine by illegally annexing the Crimean peninsula, it has been seeking to foster relations with countries in the Global South that are not firmly aligned with the Western world. In 2023, a change in Russia’s foreign policy of 2016 placed a greater emphasis on Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) and Africa, where the Kremlin has been building influence since the Soviet era. Russia’s strategic goal is to counter the United States presence in the neighbourhood and to ensure that Latin America and the Caribbean remain geopolitically neutral. Russia is also pursuing the goal of building a new multipolar world order. Russia’s longstanding political and security partners in LAC are Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela, each under an authoritarian regime. Russia is also trying to strengthen its political ties with other LAC countries such as Bolivia, Brazil and El Salvador. With all LAC countries, Russia works through bilateral agreements and intergovernmental forums, in particular BRICS and the G20. From an economic perspective, Russia’s footprint in the region is very limited: its trade with LAC countries accounts for a mere 2 % of its global trade. Nevertheless, Russia has gained political leverage through its economic ties, especially due to key LAC countries’ reliance on Russian fertilisers and diesel. In addition to political and economic relations, Russia has signed several military cooperation agreements with Latin American countries over the past two decades. Currently, military cooperation is primarily limited to Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela. Russian arms sales to the region have steadily declined since Russia’s invasion of Crimea and are now insignificant. Alongside political, economic and military ties, Russia employs disinformation campaigns to undermine liberal democracies and promote Russian propaganda narratives.
This was the first meeting of the heads of Polish and Italian diplomacy in seven years. The topics of consultations included, among others, defence within NATO and the European Union, migration policy, support for Ukraine and the EU enlargement policy. An example of very good bilateral relations is the cooperation between Poland and Italy in the field of security, related to the participation of the Italian Air Force and Navy in NATO operations on the territory of Poland and the presence of the Military Contingent in the Mediterranean Sea as part of the EU mission. Minister Sikorski emphasised that he and Minister Tajani see a threat to the Schengen system – previously it was a threat from the Mediterranean Sea, the Balkan route, and now also from the Belarusian border. – Belarus is waging a hybrid war using pseudo-migrants, but the effect of this is important – our societies must regain the belief that governments at both the national and EU levels enforce this foreign right to control migration – emphasized the head of the Polish MFA. The minister also appealed for broader Western assistance to Ukraine, especially in the field of weapons to defend airspace, and for the lifting of the ban on the use of Western long-range weapons in Russia. In addition, the head of the Polish MFA thanked his Italian counterpart for the joint protest against Israel’s attacks on the UNIFIL contingent in Lebanon. The interlocutors discussed the situation in the Middle East, expressing concern over the escalation of tensions in Lebanon and emphasizing the need for the international community to act in favor of a two-state solution. On the European agenda and enlargement policy, EU Minister Sikorski assured his interlocutor that progress in the area of EU accession of both the so-called The Eastern Trio (Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia) and the Western Balkan countries will be one of the priorities of the Polish Presidency of the EU Council. Minister Tajani thanked the head of Polish diplomacy for the proposal, cf. During the Polish Presidency in the first half of 2025, they traveled together to Africa, which is too important a continent to be exposed solely to the influence of Russia or China. At the end of the visit, Minister Sikorski paid tribute to the Polish soldiers who died in the Battle of Monte Cassino and are buried at the Polish War Cemetery located there. This year we are celebrating the 80th anniversary of the battle, in which 923 Polish soldiers died, 2,931 were wounded, and 345 were reported missing. The Minister laid a wreath under the Virtuti Militari Cross at the Cemetery, where 1,048 Polish soldiers are buried – in addition to those who died during the fighting, soldiers of the 2nd Polish Corps who died before the assault and who gave their lives in further fighting in the massif, mainly in the battles for Piedimonte, are also buried there.
SABRINA SINGH, DEPUTY PENTAGON PRESS SECRETARY: OK, everyone, good afternoon. Thank you for being here today. It is my pleasure to introduce Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin. The Secretary will deliver some opening remarks, and then we will have time to take a few questions. I will moderate those questions and call on journalists.
With that, Mr. Secretary?
SECRETARY OF DEFENSE LLOYD J. AUSTIN III: Thanks, Sabrina.
Well, good afternoon, everyone. It’s great to be back at NATO. But I wanted to start with just a few words about the Middle East.
As you all know, Israel yesterday killed Sinwar, the leader of Hamas. That’s a major achievement, and it opens a major opportunity for progress.
Sinwar was the architect of the October 7th terrorist assault on Israel. His plot left 1,200 people dead, including civilians from more than 30 other countries, and that includes the United States. He was responsible for the deaths of many Americans over the years, including more than 40 Americans murdered on October 7th and four murdered American hostages.
Sinwar devoted his life to wrecking the chances of peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians. He’s finally been brought to justice, and that removes a huge obstacle.
Our top priority is the 101 hostages still kidnapped in Gaza, including our own American hostages. They have been through hell, and so have their families, and the hostages should not have to suffer one more hour in captivity, and those who are holding hostages should release them immediately.
Sinwar’s death also provides an extraordinary opportunity to achieve a lasting cease-fire to end this awful war and to rush humanitarian aid into Gaza. Our forces in the region stand ready to assist in Israel’s defense, to deter aggression and to reduce the risk of all-out war, and we will continue to drive hard to bring all of the hostages home and to end the conflicts in both Gaza and Lebanon through principled diplomacy.
Now, let me turn back to our work here at NATO. This has been an historic defense ministerial for three reasons. First, this is our new Secretary General’s inaugural ministerial meeting, so I want to thank Mark Rutte and his staff for convening us. And I also look forward to working very closely with Mark and his team.
Second, this is our first defense ministerial with NATO’s Indo-Pacific partners, Australia, Japan, New Zealand, and the Republic of Korea, and that just underscores the importance of working with our partners in the Indo-Pacific on boosting industrial base resilience, combating disinformation and much, much more.
And third, this ministerial is the first high-level NATO gathering since our 75th anniversary summit in Washington back in July. The summit was a major success. We welcomed Sweden as a NATO ally. We endorsed a NATO industrial capacity expansion pledge, and that will strengthen the defense industrial base on both sides of the Atlantic and increase large-scale multinational procurement and help deliver capabilities swiftly and securely. We also launched the NATO security assistance and training for Ukraine, or NSATU. Now, that’s our military effort to plan, coordinate and arrange delivery of the security assistance that Ukraine needs to prevail against Russian aggression. We strengthened NATO’s deterrence and defense. We deepened ties with our global partners, especially in the Indo-Pacific, and we celebrated 75 years of the strongest, most successful defensive alliance in history.
I’m proud of all this progress, but we’ve still got work to do. Our priority is implementing the important agreements from NATO’s recent summits, and today, we continued our progress. We’re forging NATO’s most robust defense plans since the end of the Cold War, and that will help ensure that we have the forces and capabilities to meet any contingency. That includes air and missile defense, which are crucial for defending the allied airspace, and earlier this month, General Cavoli directed a reinforcement of NATO air surveillance in Romania to monitor Russian military activity.
NATO allies continue to make robust investments in air and missile defense, but we must invest in many other areas to meet our requirements, so I’m glad to say that we’re sharing the burden of collective defense more than ever. In this year, a record 23 NATO allies are hitting or topping our shared commitment to spend at least two percent of GDP on defense. But we still need each and every single ally to meet this mutually-agreed-upon obligation as soon as possible, and that will let us fulfill the requirements of our new plans and hit our capability targets. And by investing in our trans-Atlantic defense industrial base and scaling up military production, we can send a long-term demand signal to industry.
AUSTIN: You know, we also met yesterday with our Indo-Pacific partners and with the European Union. It was a very productive meeting, and it underscored the profound links among Euro-Atlantic security and Indo-Pacific security.
We’re concerned by the PRC’s increasingly coercive behavior in the Indo-Pacific, which has profound implications for the whole world. We’re also troubled by the growing alignment between Russia and the People’s Republic of China, including the PRC’s support for Putin’s indefensible war of choice against Ukraine, and that makes our close cooperation with our Indo-Pacific friends more vital than ever.
We also held a NATO-Ukraine Council meeting yesterday. Minister Umerov gave us some great insights, and we made clear our enduring commitment to a free and sovereign Ukraine.
Like countries of goodwill around the world, our NATO allies continue to stand up for Ukraine’s sovereignty and self-defense, and the United States and our allies and partners are determined to stand by Ukraine for the long haul, and we’ll stand by one another.
The foundation of NATO is a collective defense commitment in Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty. The U.S. commitment to Article 5 remains ironclad, and we will defend the sovereignty in the territory of every member of this alliance. Whatever changes lie ahead, we will tackle them together, and that solidarity is the reason why NATO is the greatest defensive alliance in history.
And thanks again, and with that, I’ll be glad to take some questions.
SINGH: Great, thank you. Our first question will go to Phil Stewart from Reuters.
Right here in the middle. Yeah. No, you’re OK.
QUESTION: OK, thank you. So you were saying that Israel has an opportunity to end the war in Gaza, but Israel’s prime minister is vowing today to keep fighting. Do you support Israel’s new campaign to, quote, “stop the axis of evil,” end quote, as Netanyahu put it? Or is Israel missing an opportunity here?
And on — on Ukraine, President Zelenskyy told the Financial Times that a formal invitation to join NATO is the only way Ukraine can survive Russia’s invasion. Do you agree with that assessment? And more broadly, do you endorse his victory plan? Thank you.
AUSTIN: So which one of those questions do you want me to answer, Phil?
(LAUGHTER)
All right, let’s start with the question as to whether or not there is an opportunity available with respect to Gaza. Of course there is, and we would hope that we can work together to take advantage of that opportunity.
The first thing, Phil, that we need to focus on is a return of the hostages. Again, you heard Prime Minister publicly state yesterday that anyone who has control of hostages, he would encourage them to return them, and — and again, I would hope that they would do so.
Beyond that, you know, I think there are other opportunities, and we will see how things evolve. But clearly, there are opportunities for a change in direction, and we would hope that, you know, parties would — would take advantage of that both in Lebanon — in Gaza and in Lebanon.
The second question was — as I recall, Phil, was about the victory plan and whether or not we endorse the victory plan. Again, the victory plan is President Zelenskyy’s plan, and we’re going to do everything that we can to provide the security assistance to support the president as he tries to accomplish his objectives.
But what we all want to make sure that we continue to do is to link military objectives to strategic objectives, and, you know, that dialogue continues. And you know, I just met with Minister Umerov today. We talked through a number of those things. Again, our focus is going to continue to be on doing everything that we can to support the victory plan, or support President Zelenskyy. It’s not my position to evaluate publicly his plan. We have been supporting him by providing security assistance in a major way for over two and a half years. We’re going to continue to do that.
Next question.
SINGH: Thank you. Thank you. Our second question will go to Andrey Smolyakov, Novaya Gazeta Europa.
Right here in the back, in the middle. Yeah.
QUESTION: Thank you. Mr. Secretary, Ukrainian military has been able to carry out some effective UAV strikes deep into Russian territory, but there have been reports, especially in Russian and Ukrainian-language media, that the U.S. has discouraged those attacks. Is there any substance to those reports? And if so, is the U.S. willing to support such operations in the future?
AUSTIN: Actually, Andrey, we’ve seen the Ukrainians use their long-range UAV strike capability to great effect, and we saw recently that they were able to take out a number of strategic-level ammunition supply points, which has had an impact on the battlefield.
I think what’s important to point out here, Andrey, is that they were able to produce these UAVs in Ukraine. They were able to scale that production rapidly. The UAVs have proven to be very effective and accurate. And again, when you consider the fact that one precision-guided missile costs, in some cases, close to $1 million, depending on what it is, and these UAVs, they can produce in great numbers at a fraction of the cost. So when you look at the balance sheet and the effects that are being created on the battlefield, I think this is a great capability. How they use that capability that they’re producing is going to be their call, Andrey, so…
SINGH: Thank you. Our next question will go to Phil Green, right here, Air & Space Magazine. Right here, in the blue.
QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
SINGH: I’m sorry — Chris Gordon. I said “Phil”. Sorry, sorry.
QUESTION: Thank you, Sabrina. Thank you, Mr. …
AUSTIN: You’re Phil now…
SINGH: Yeah, you’re…
AUSTIN: I’m kidding, Chris. I know you’re Chris, so…
(LAUGHTER)
SINGH: Yeah.
QUESTION: Good to hear. Sir, the world is in a very difficult situation, and I have two questions regarding that situation. First, if there is a settlement in Gaza, is the Pentagon prepared to provide logistical support and military advice to an Arab-led stabilization force if there are no U.S. boots on the ground?
And then secondly, to put a finer point on my colleague’s question earlier, President Zelenskyy’s repeatedly appealed to the U.S. to use ATACMS to strike a broader range of targets inside of Russia and to do so more quickly than drones. The Biden administration has not allowed this. Have Putin’s nuclear threats worked?
AUSTIN: Regarding Putin’s nuclear threats, again, you’ve heard me say a number of times that I think any kind of nuclear saber-rattling is reckless and dangerous, and we would call upon Putin and others to not employ that kind of language.
In terms of whether or not we would participate in any kind of stabilization efforts in Gaza, I think that that’s going to require the contributions of a number of countries. Hopefully, countries in the region will step up. There quite possibly is, can be a part for the United States to play in that, as well. What part that would be and what that would look like, Chris, we’re going to have to work with our allies and partners to scope that out. And I certainly would not have any announcements to make on anything like that.
The first step though is we’ve got to get to some sort of ceasefire, and then we need to make sure that we’re putting the right things in place to stabilize the area and provide for some sort of security going forward. But that’s left to be defined yet.
SINGH: Thank you. And our last question will go to Teri Schultz, Deutsche Welle.
QUESTION: Thank you, Secretary Austin. I’m — I’m very interested in the future of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group, a group that you yourself created. I mean, what is the future of this, given that nobody knows what’s going to happen after November under either administration that would take over? What will happen with this group? How do you consolidate what you have done, what has been done under your leadership? But even more of interest to the Ukrainians, do you have a sense after this last meeting that there’s — there’s enough momentum to provide enough to help Ukraine tilt the balance on the — on the battlefield as is necessary, you yourself say, to some day moving to discussions about ending the war?
AUSTIN: Yeah, thanks, Teri. So we’re — we’ve been doing two things simultaneously. We’re providing — focused on providing Ukraine what it needs to be successful on a battlefield today as it tries to defend its sovereign territory, and it’s been very successful at that. And I would remind everybody that Ukraine has taken on the largest military in Europe, and for two and a half years it has successfully defended its territory.
And Putin has not achieved, not one strategic objective that he set out to achieve. Kyiv still stands. The Ukrainian government did not fall. And I could name a number of other things, but they have been very, very successful. So helping them defend the — in the current fight is one objective.
The other objective is making sure that we help them get what’s necessary to be able to defend against aggression in the future and deter aggression as well. And that’s what the capability coalitions have been designed to do.
As you know, we have an Air Force Capability Coalition. It was focused initially and still is focused on helping Ukraine get a fighter aircraft capability. And as you know, Ukraine now has F-16 capability. It will — we will continue to build upon that.
There’s an artillery capability coalition that’s also being very successful, and it’s helping Ukraine acquire the artillery systems and the munitions that it needs not only for today but for the long haul as well.
There’s an IT coalition that helps make sure that Ukraine has what it needs to be able to function in the information space, in the information domain and be effective. That IT coalition has been very, very effective, very impressive.
There’s a drone coalition.
And so these coalitions are designed to ensure that, at the end of the day, Ukraine has what it needs to be able to deter aggression and defend itself going forward. And thank you for bringing it up because it’s a thing that not many people pay attention to. But every day, we are building long-term capability for Ukraine.
And, you know, I have to applaud the work of our allies and partners who are leading some of these coalitions and rallying support for Ukraine and, you know, digging deep to provide them what we think they’ll need going forward.
So I think that will help to spell success for Ukraine in the long haul, and I appreciate you bringing it up, Teri.
SINGH: Thank you, everyone. That concludes today’s press conference.
Source: United States Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn)
NASHVILLE, Tenn. – U.S. Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) sent a letter demanding transparency from U.S. Department of State Secretary Antony Blinken on the Department’s use of taxpayer dollars to pay the salaries of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) employees instead of promoting U.S. security overseas.
Last month, reporting revealed top DEI officials at the Biden-Harris State Department make nearly $200,000 each year – nearly double the pay of average State Department employees.
The State Department Goes to Extreme Lengths to Prioritize Diversity Over Competence
“I write with concern regarding the State Department’s use of hundreds of thousands of taxpayer funds to pay the salaries of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) employees. The State Department’s apparent willingness to go to extreme lengths to prioritize diversity over competence in formulating a workforce for the agency, whose stated mission, in part, is to ‘protect and promote U.S. security,’ is demonstrated by the hefty salaries of top DEI officials. According to financial disclosures, the position of Chief Diversity and Inclusion officer received an annual salary of $194,510, and the State Department’s Special Representative for Racial Justice and Equity receives $191,000 per year. Conversely, the base salary of the average State Department employee is just $97,000.”
As Iran, China, and Russia Wage War on Democracy, the State Department’s DEI Agenda Is Offensive and Irresponsible
“As you know, the current geopolitical landscape is dangerously volatile, and the United States is entangled in multiple diplomatic conflicts worldwide. Israel, one of our closest allies, is fighting an existential war against Iran’s proxy terrorist groups on several fronts, Communist China continues to threaten Taiwan’s sovereignty and bully nations in the Indo-Pacific into subservience, and Russia’s brutal war against Ukraine has now resulted in at least one million casualties on both sides. During this capricious period, it imprudent and offensive for your agency to allocate hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars to support a DEI agenda that does not support, but in fact undermines, America’s interests abroad. The American people deserve transparency over the use of their tax dollars to advance a divisive ideological agenda, particularly when it comes at the expense of protecting and promoting U.S. security overseas.”
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
Foreign Secretary David Lammy met Foreign Minister of the People’s Republic of China, Wang Yi, in Beijing today.
Foreign Secretary David Lammy met Foreign Minister of the People’s Republic of China, Wang Yi, in Beijing today (18 October).
The Foreign Secretary set out that as fellow Permanent Members of the UN Security Council, it is a necessity that the UK and China increase bilateral engagement. He made clear that, as global players, both countries have an obligation to work together to find pragmatic solutions to complex challenges.
Areas of pragmatic, mutually beneficial cooperation were clear. This included working together on achieving the global green transition; making greater efforts on development and global health; and the safe use of AI. The Foreign Secretary reiterated his commitment to promoting secure and resilient growth through increased trade and investment which creates jobs, drives innovation, boosts productivity and provides economic stability and certainty for the UK economy. They agreed that the UK and China can support both countries’ growth objectives, with China as the world’s second largest economy and the UK’s 4th largest trading partner.
The Foreign Secretary also raised a number of foreign policy and security matters, including Russia’s war in Ukraine, where he stated how both the UK and China have a shared interest in European peace and ending the war. He reaffirmed that concerns over China’s supply of equipment to Russia’s military industrial complex risks damaging China’s relationships with Europe whilst helping to sustain Russia’s war. The Foreign Secretary urged Wang Yi to take all measures to investigate and to prevent Chinese companies from supplying Russia’s military. The Foreign Ministers agreed to continue to discuss this and other broader foreign policy issues, such as the ongoing conflict in the Middle East.
Human Rights were discussed, including in Xinjiang, and the Foreign Secretary referenced this as an area which the UK and China must engage, even where viewpoints diverge. Hong Kong is a shared interest, and the Foreign Secretary raised serious concerns around the implementation of the National Security Law and the ongoing treatment of British national Jimmy Lai, again calling for his release.
The meeting was constructive across the full breadth of the bilateral relationship, from areas of pragmatic cooperation to issues of contention. Both the Foreign Secretary and Foreign Minister agreed that maintaining channels of communication was essential and committed to holding regular discussions across their respective governments at Ministerial level.
CHANCELLOR SCHOLZ: (As interpreted.) Mr. President.
(Speaking English.) Dear Joe, it is my great pleasure to welcome you here to the Chancellery in Berlin as a friend of Europe, as a friend of Germany, and, above all, as my friend. Welcome.
(As interpreted.) Dear Joe, our cooperation the past three years was extraordinarily close and full of trust. I know that this is not something that we can take for granted, even among good partners as the U.S. and Germany have been for many, many decades.
I would like to take this opportunity here and today to express my gratitude and say thank you. Thank you, Mr. President.
The times in which we’re living are extremely challenging indeed. With Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, war has returned back to Europe. The European security order has been shaken in its very foundations.
It is all the more important that we reacted decisively and stood closely together and unequivocably condemned this blatant violation of international law and stand by our Ukrainian friends’ side.
It is thanks to your leadership that Putin’s plans failed, that Ukraine wasn’t overrun within a few days. But it is thanks to the bravery of Ukrainian armed forces and the support of many states — above all, the United States and Germany — Ukraine stands up to imperialist Russia since more than two and a half years.
Together, we commit to Ukraine’s sovereignty and integrity so that Russia cannot subjugate Ukraine by force. We stand by Ukraine’s side as long as it is necessary. Putin has miscalculated. He cannot sit and ride out this war.
Together, therefore, we decided, with our G7 partners, to support Ukraine with a loan package to the tune of 50 billion U.S. dollars by the end of this year.
Together, we commit to a strong NATO Alliance which defends every square inch of its territory. Every member of our alliance can rely on that. And together, we commit to the fundamental principles of the free world as enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations.
Mr. President, from the very beginning of the war, we closely coordinated ourselves across the Atlantic. It has made us strong. It has made the Alliance strong, and we will continue to do that.
Our position is clear. We continue to support Ukraine as strongly as possible. At the same time, we are making sure that NATO does not become a party to this war so that this war does not lead to an even bigger catastrophe. We are very much aware of this responsibility, and no one can shoulder this responsibility for us.
Of course, the situation in the Middle East is also on our agenda. The barbaric terrorist attacks of Hamas on Israel of October 7th has massively destabilized the situation.
Israel has the right to defend itself. It is important to me to say this very clearly. We stand by Israel’s side, and we fully agree that it is now more important than ever before to prevent further escalation and a regional conflagration.
With the death of Hamas leader Sinwar, who was responsible for the horrific terrorist attacks, we hopefully now see a tangible prospect of a ceasefire in Gaza, an agreement that leads to the release of hostages held by Hamas.
Joe, your efforts — we always supported your efforts in this conflict, and we will continue to do so. Our common objective remains a credible political process towards a two-state solution, and we will continue to be fully committed to that.
In Lebanon, we’re working towards a situation that the conflict leads to a diplomatic process as soon as possible. It is clear the people in Northern Israel have to be able to live free of fear and insecurity. Lebanon deserves a future in self-determination, stability, and security.
Originally, your visit was scheduled to take place last Friday and had to be postponed due to the severe hurricanes. And I’m delighted that you were able to come today. It affords us the opportunity to talk about the challenging global situation in great detail bilaterally but also together with the French president, Emmanuel Macron, and the British Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, who will join us later.
In my view, we need such talks at highest levels to make progress in the most important, pressing issues.
(In English.) Joe, thanks again for taking the time for this visit. It is a strong signal of our transatlantic unity and of our friendship.
Please.
PRESIDENT BIDEN: Well, Chancellor — Olaf, it’s great to see you again, and I do apologize for having to cancel the first time around, but we did have a crisis in our southeastern border with hurricanes and tornadoes. But we’re here because Germany is — Germany is my country’s closest and most important of allies.
When Putin launched his brutal invasion in Ukraine, you reminded us all why this alliance is so essential. Under your leadership, Chancellor, Germany rose to meet the moment. You showed the wisdom to recognize that this war marked a turning point in the history, an assault on the very principles of the protected peace and security in Europe for more than 75 years.
And then you summoned the resolve to act, remaking Germany’s foreign policy to reckon new realities — with new realities to stand strong and steadfast with Ukraine.
America and Germany are the two largest supporters of Ukraine in its fight for survival as a free and independent nation. As Ukraine faces a tough winter, we must — we must sustain our resolve, our effort, and our support.
And I know the cost is heavy, but make no mistake, it pales in comparison to the cost of living in the world where aggression prevails, where large states attack and bully smaller ones simply because they can.
Today, the chancellor and I are going to discuss ongoing efforts to surge support to Ukraine’s military; to shore up Ukraine’s civilian energy infrastructure, which is under constant assault and bombardment from Russia; and to help Ukraine recover by unlocking the value of frozen Russian assets.
I also want to recognize Germany’s decision to spend 2 percent of your gross domestic product on defense. Please keep it up, because it matters.
Our alliance with Germany extends far beyond Ukraine and Europe. It’s global.
Today, the chancellor and I will discuss regional security in the Middle East, including the ongoing domestic efforts regarding Lebanon and Gaza.
The death of the leader of Hamas represents a moment of justice. He had the blood of Americans and Israelis, Palestinians and Germans, and so many others on his hands.
I told the prime minister of Israel yesterday: Let’s also make this moment an opportunity to seek a path to peace, a better future in Gaza without Hamas. And I look forward to discussing Iran.
Olaf and I spoke the morning after Iran launched 200 ballistic missiles at Israel earlier this month. With our G7 counterparts, we agreed to coordinate our response through sanctions and other measures, and that is what we have done.
I’m grateful for Germany’s cooperation holding Iran accountable for destabilizing policies, including providing missiles and drones to Russia to use against Ukraine.
And just this week, the European Union followed Germany, the UK, and France in sanctioning Iran’s leading airlines. This followed our own oil sanctions. This coordination is going to have to continue.
I also want to thank Germany for standing firm against a vicious surge of antisemitism, hatred, and extremism we’re witnessing today. Some of it fueled by foreign misinformation.
As domestic — as democratic allies, we have to remain ever vigilant against what I call the “old ghosts in new garments,” ancient hatreds resurfacing. Our charge is to make sure that the forces holding our societies together and binding us in the common cause of human dignity and freedom remain stronger — stronger than the forces seeking to pull us apart.
And finally, Chancellor, I deeply appreciate your partnership and the many times you’ve forsaken the easy choice to make the right choice. Your act of statesmanship and friendship has made possible the safe return and unjustly detained Americans and Germans and the reunion of brave Russian dissidents to their families. I want to thank you, thank you, thank you.
I value our conversations, and I look forward to them — this one is — particularly. And I want to — I really mean it — I want to thank you for your friendship, not only personally, but I don’t see how we maintain stability in Europe and around the world without a tight German-U.S. relationship. And you’re the leader to do it.
Of the many stereotypes about Germany — our sense of humor — (laughter) — our spontaneity, our irresistible joie de vivre — (laughter) — only one is really true: We are good at keeping records.
So, 44 and a half years ago, when the young Senator Joseph Biden came to Bonn, a German civil servant — ein guter Beamter, as we like to say — made a note — a rather extensive one, I should say — of this senator’s visit. And being Germans, you understand, we still have that note. (Laughter.) (Holds up a document.) This one. Many pages.
(Speaks German.) (No translation provided.)
That’s the content — the main content of report: “He is keenly interested in the Federal Republic of Germany,” the note concludes. And it adds, “that this senator might look to a,” I quote again, “significant political future.” (Laughter.) “Significant.” What a remarkable understatement.
Today, you are the 46th President of the United States. And under your leadership, the transatlantic alliance is stronger and our partnership is closer than ever.
Mr. President, you are keenly interested in Germany. That we have known for almost half a century. So, it is time for you to know that Germany, in turn, is deeply grateful to you.
Let me say, in the name of my country, thank you, Mr. President. (Applause.)
For Germany, the friendship with the United States has been, is now, and will always be existentially important — existential both for our security and our democracy.
And yet, in this friendship, there have been and always will be times of proximity and greater distance, times of agreement and times of discord. Even recently, just a handful years ago, the distance had grown so wide that we almost lost each other.
But — but, ladies and gentlemen, throughout the ups and downs of time, there have been people who have stood by the transatlantic relations no matter what. And chief among those people, Mr. President, is you.
You stand with us, sir, because you know that what binds us is so much deeper than the news of the day. What binds us is freedom, democracy, and the rule of law.
What binds us is the conviction that if liberal democracy is to have a future in this troubled world, we have to secure it together.
And what binds us are the lessons from our past — sacred lessons that you described so hauntingly in your letter to our beloved Margot Friedländer.
Sir, when you were elected president, you restored Europe’s hope in the transatlantic alliance literally overnight. And then, only a year later, came Putin’s war.
When Putin invaded Ukraine, he didn’t just go after one country. He attacked the very principles of peace in Europe.
Putin thought we would be weak. He thought we would be divided. But the opposite was true. NATO was stronger and more united than ever, and that is, in no small part, Mr. President, thanks to your leadership.
Mr. President, to have you in our most dangerous moment since the Cold War, to have you and your administration on our side is no less than a historical stroke of good fortune.
For us here in Europe, the past two years have shown once again, America truly is the indispensable nation. But it has also shown something else. NATO is the indispensable alliance.
So, in the months to come, I hope that Europeans remember America is indispensable for us, and I hope that Americans remember your allies are indispensable for you.
We are more than just other countries in the world. We are partners. We are friends.
The choice on November the 5th is only Americans’ choice to make. But we, as Europeans, have a choice too. We have the choice to do our part, to be unwavering in our support for Ukraine, to invest in our common security, to invest in our shared future, and, as you have done, sir, to stand by the transatlantic alliance no matter what.
Mr. President, when I visited you in the Oval Office a year ago on October the 6th, just a few hours before Hamas’ brutal attack on Israel, we spoke about the Middle East. We spoke about Ukraine and Russia. But at the end — I will never forget that — at the end of our conversation, you went to your desk and handed me a speech of yours not on foreign policy but on the issue that you care most about and that you worry most about — about democracy.
I quote, “Democracies don’t have to die at the end of a rifle,” you say in that speech. “Democracies can die when people are silent, when they are willing to give away that which is most precious to them because they feel frustrated, tired, alienated.” End of the quote.
Your words, Mr. President, echoed deeply in our part of the world, and they weigh even more heavily coming from the leader of the world’s oldest and most time-tested democracy.
So, let me say this from the bottom of my heart. In this time when democracy is under strain all around the Western world, you, Mr. President, have been a beacon of democracy.
You are a beacon not just by what you have done but by who you are, by the example of your humility, your deep connection with the lives and hopes of hardworking people, and, if you excuse that old-fashioned word, by your decency.
Decency is maybe what we are most at risk of losing. But your decency, sir, is a light that shines very far. It certainly reached the hearts of my fellow Germans.
As U.S. president, you command the most powerful military. You lead the biggest economy in the world. But maybe the most precious service to democracy, the most joyful and reassuring thing for people is to know that even this most powerful man in the world is, in the end, a fundamentally decent human being.
Mr. President, we all know that you love your Irish poets and that you know them well. I have heard you quote Seamus Heaney from memory, so I hope you allow me to end with a quote from his “Republic of Conscience.”
I quote, “At their inauguration, public leaders must swear to uphold unwritten law and weep to atone for the presumption to hold office.”
“The presumption to hold office,” Mr. President. It seems that you have always had a deep sense of the inevitable presumption in holding office, including the highest office — in being elevated above others, in a society of equals.
You have transformed this presumption into a deep sense of responsibility, and you have carried that responsibility throughout your career and have now decided, in the most noble tradition of American leaders since Washington, to let democracy run its ever-changing and uncharted course.
Mr. President, on the historic occasion of your visit to Germany, my country recognizes your decades-long dedication to the transatlantic alliance, your outstanding political leadership in Europe’s most dangerous moment, and your lasting moral example of service, sincerity, and decency.
It is now my great honor to bestow on you the Grand Cross special class of the Order of Merit of the Federal Republic of Germany.
And for that, Mr. President — may I say, dear Joe — congratulations. (Applause.)
I have to read the document — one second — in German.
(Speaks German.) (No translation provided.) (Applause.)
(President Biden is presented the Grand Cross special class of the Order of Merit of the Federal Republic of Germany.) (Applause.)
It’s done. (Laughs.) (Applause.)
PRESIDENT BIDEN: Let me begin by saying I — I’m overwhelmed not just by the award but by the words, Mr. President.
Margot Friedländer, you are a voice of conscience and healing. I’m actually honored to be in your presence, for real.
This award means so much to me for what it says about us, the journey we’ve taken; the alliance we’ve strengthened; the way that we have, as two separate nations, risen together to meet our moment.
I think it’s fair to say, although I know I only look like I’m 40 years old — (laughter) — I — I’ve seen a wide sweep of history.
When I was born, our countries were at war. As a young senator, I visited West Berlin and saw what it meant to live in a divided city, country, and continent. And I forged a bond with Helmut Schmidt, your — my first relationship of candor and trust with a German chancellor but, thankfully, not my last.
And then, in 1989, like millions of people around the world, I saw 70,000 brave souls gathered in Leipzig, crying — crying out for freedom. And the Berlin Wall came down 35 years ago this month.
It was one of the greatest advances in human dignity in my lifetime. Some feared the reunification of Germany would revive old hatreds and rivalries. But leaders of America and Germany dreamed together of a much better future.
The achievement of a Germany whole and free lives on, exceeding, I think, everyone’s expectations. The dream of Europe whole and free remains the work of our time, nor is that work more urgent than a pushing back against Putin’s vicious attack against Ukraine.
German leaders had the wisdom to recognize a turning point in history, an assault on a fellow democracy, and also on principles that upheld 75 years of peace and security in Europe.
Germany and the United States stood together to support the brave people of Ukraine in their fight for freedom, for democracy, for their very survival. And I want to thank every leader across Germany’s government who has worked tirelessly to ensure that Ukraine prevails and Putin fails, and NATO remains strong and more united than ever.
We head into a very difficult winter — (coughs) — but we cannot let up. We cannot — (an aide delivers a glass of water) — thank you so very much. That’s kind of you. (Laughs.)
We head to a dery — a very difficult winter. But we cannot let up. We must sustain our support. In my view, we must keep going until Ukraine wins a just and durable peace consistent with the U.N. Charter, until once again human dignity prevails.
Let me close with this. The times I have lived through have taught me that history does move forward and things can get better if we determine they must — that things can get better and that we should never underestimate the power of democracy, never underes- — -estimate the value of alliances.
Germany — Germany has taught us all that change is possible and, for better or for worse, countries can and do choose their own destinies and the choices that leaders make at critical times truly matters.
I want to thank the current leaders of Germany for the choice you’ve made when it matters most.
I hope you’ll forgive this once, but — if I forsake the great German poets and quote an Irish poet. (Laughter.)
Seamus Heaney said in “The Cure at Troy” — he said, “History teaches us not to hope on this side of the grave. But then — but then, once in a lifetime, a longed-for tidal wave of justice can rise up, and hope and history rhyme.”
When the Berlin Wall fell, hope and history rhymed. When Kyiv stood, hope and history rhymed.
Many Americans and Germans always find the wisdom and the courage. May they keep making hope and history rhyme, because we can, because nothing is beyond our capacity, in my view — nothing is beyond our capacity — when we do it together.
So, thank you again for this award. I’m honored to accept. I do not deserve, but I’m honored to accept. And that, if we continue to work together, Germany has stood up in a way that is incredible.
I want to thank you again for the award. And may God bless you all. And may God protect our troops.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Kieran Maguire, Senior Teacher in Accountancy and member of Football Industries Group, University of Liverpool
When the Premier League broke away from the rest of English football in 1992, its 22 clubs generated £205 million in its debut season, and the average player earned £2,050 a week. Thirty years later, despite having two fewer clubs, the league’s revenue had increased by 2,850% to £6.1 billion and the average player earned £93,000 a week.
At the heart of this extraordinary growth is an American revolution. In the Premier League’s inaugural season, football was still in recovery from the horrors of the stadium disasters at Hillsborough and Heysel. Owners tended to be from the local area and with a business background. The only foreign owner was Sam Hamman at Wimbledon, a Lebanese millionaire who bought the club on a whim having reportedly been much more interested in tennis. The season ended with Manchester United (under Alex Ferguson) winning the English game’s top league for the first time in 26 years.
Now, if the Texas-based Friedkin Group’s recent deal to buy Everton goes through, 11 of the 20 Premier League clubs will be controlled or part-owned by American investors. The US – long seen as football’s final frontier when it comes to the men’s game – suddenly can’t get enough of English “soccer”.
Four of the Premier League’s “big six” are American-owned – Manchester United, Liverpool, Arsenal and Chelsea – while a fifth, Manchester City, has a significant US minority shareholding. Aston Villa, Fulham, Bournemouth, Crystal Palace, West Ham and Ipswich Town also have varying degrees of American ownership.
And it’s not even just the glamour clubs at the top of the tree. American investment has also been significant lower down the football pyramid, led by the high-profile acquisition of then non-league Wrexham by Hollywood actors Ryan Reynolds and Rob McElhenny, and Birmingham City’s purchase by US investors including seven-time Super Bowl winner Tom Brady. American investment in football has reached places as geographically diverse as Carlisle and Crawley in England, and Aberdeen and Edinburgh in Scotland.
The Insights section is committed to high-quality longform journalism. Our editors work with academics from many different backgrounds who are tackling a wide range of societal and scientific challenges.
Manchester United was the first Premier League club to come under American ownership – after a row about a horse.
In 2005, United was owned by a variety of investors including Irish businessmen and racehorse owners John Magnier and J.P. McManus. Their erstwhile friend Ferguson, the United manager, thought he co-owned the champion racehorse Rock of Gibraltar with them – a stallion worth millions in stud rights. They disagreed – and their bitter dispute was such that Magnier and McManus decided to sell their shares in the football club.
The Miami-based Glazer family – already involved in sport as owners of NFL franchise the Tampa Bay Buccaneers – had already been buying up small tranches of shares in United, but the sudden availability of the Irish shares allowed Malcolm Glazer to acquire a controlling stake for £790 million (around £1.5 billion at today’s prices).
The fact Glazer did not actually have sufficient funds to pay for these shares was a solvable problem. In the some-might-say commercially naive world of top-flight English football before the Premier League, Manchester United was a club without debt, paying its way without leveraging its position as one of the world’s most famous football clubs. Glazer saw the opportunity this presented and arranged a leveraged buy-out (LBO), whereby the football club borrowed more than £600 million secured on its own assets to, in effect, “buy itself” in 2005.
Despite the need to meet the high interest costs to fund the LBO, United continued winning trophies under Ferguson – including three Premier League titles in a row in 2007, 2008 and 2009, as well as a Champions League victory in 2008. Amid this success, the club felt that ticket prices were too low and set about increasing them, with matchday revenue increasing from £66 million in 2004/05 to over £101 million by 2007/08.
Commercial income was another area the Glazers were keen to increase. United set up offices in London and adopted a global approach to finding new official branding deals ranging from snacks to tractor and tyre suppliers – doubling revenues from this income source too.
But in this new, more aggressive world of “sweating the asset”, the debts lingered – and most United fans remained deeply suspicious of their American owners. (Following their father’s death in 2014, the club was co-owned by his six children, with brothers Avram and Joel Glazer becoming co-chairmen.)
Today, despite its partial listing on the New York Stock Exchange and the February 2024 sale of 27.7% of the club to British billionaire Sir Jim Ratcliffe for a reputed £1.25 billion, United still has borrowings of more than £546 million, having paid cumulative interest costs of £969 million since the takeover in 2005. But with the club now valued at US$6.55 billion (around £5bn), it represents a very smart investment for the Glazer family.
Indeed, while the prices being paid for football clubs across Europe have reached record levels, they are still seen as cheap investments compared with US sports’ leading franchises. Forbes’s annual list of the world’s most valuable sports teams has American football (NFL), baseball (MLB) and basketball (NBA) teams occupying the top ten positions, with only three Premier League clubs – Manchester United, Liverpool and Manchester City – in the top 50.
With NFL teams having an average franchise value of US$5.1 billion and NBA $3.9 billion, many English football clubs still look like a bargain from the other side of the pond.
The risk of relegation
The latest to join this US bandwagon, the Friedkin Group – a Texas-based portfolio of companies run by American businessman and film producer Dan Friedkin – is reported to have offered £400m to buy Everton, despite the club’s poor financial state.
“The Toffees” have been hit by loss of sponsorships as well as two sets of points deductions for breaching the Premier League’s financial rules, leading to revenue losses from lower league positions. While the new stadium being built at Liverpool’s Bramley-Moore dock has been yet another financial constraint, it will at least increase matchday income from the start of next season.
Everton’s new stadium at Bramley-Moore dock will open in time for the start of the 2025-26 season. Phil Silverman / Shutterstock
A wider reason for the relative bargain in valuations of European football clubs is the risk of relegation – something that is not part of the closed leagues of most US sports. While the threat of relegation (and promise of promotion) has always been an integral part of English and European football, the jeopardy this brings for supporters – and a club’s finances – does not exist in the NFL, NBA, Major League Soccer and similar competitions.
The Premier League, with its three relegation spots at the end of each season, has featured 51 different clubs since it launched in 1992. Only six clubs – Arsenal, Spurs, Chelsea, Manchester United, Liverpool and Everton – have been ever present, with Arsenal now approaching 100 years of consecutive top-flight football.
Other Premier League clubs have experienced the dramatic cost-benefit of relegation and promotion. Oldham Athletic, who were in the Premier League for its first two seasons, now languish in the fifth tier of the game, outside the English Football League (EFL). In contrast, Luton Town, who were in the fifth tier as recently as 2014, were promoted to the Premier League in 2023 – only to be relegated at the end of last season.
While it is difficult to compare football clubs with basketball and American football teams, the financial difference between having an open league, with relegation, and a closed league becomes apparent when you look at women’s football on both sides of the Atlantic.
Angel City, a women’s soccer team based in Los Angeles, only entered the National Women’s Soccer League (NWSL) in 2022 and is yet to win an NWSL trophy. But last month, the club was sold for US$250 million (£188m) to Disney’s CEO Bob Iger and TV journalist Willow Bay – the most expensive takeover in the history of women’s professional sport.
In comparison, Chelsea – seven-time winners of the English Women’s Super League and one of the most successful sides in Europe – valued its women’s team at £150 million ($US196m) earlier this summer. While there are a number of factors to this price differential, the confidence that Angel City will always be a member of the big league of US soccer clubs – and share very equally in its revenue – will have made its new owners very confident in the long-term soundness of their deal.
The story of Angel City FC, the most expensive team in women’s sport.
A further attraction for American investors is the potential to enter two markets – one mature (men’s football) and one effectively a start-up (the women’s game) – in a single purchase. In the US, the top men’s and women’s clubs are completely separate. But in Europe, most top-flight women’s teams are affiliated to men’s clubs – with the exception of eight-time Women’s Champions League winners Olympique Lyonnais Feminin, which split from the French men’s club when Korean-American businesswoman Michele Kang bought a majority stake in the women’s team in February 2024).
While interest in, and hence value of, the WSL is now growing fast, the women’s game in England is dwarfed by viewer ratings for the Premier League – the most watched sporting league in the world, viewed by an estimated 1.87 billion people every week across 189 countries.
These figures dwarf even the NFL which, while currently still the most valuable of all sporting leagues in terms of its broadcasting deals, must be looking at the growth of the Premier League with some jealousy. This may explain why some US franchise owners, such as Stan Kroenke, the Glazer family, Fenway Sports Group and Billy Foley, have subsequently purchased Premier League football clubs.
Ironically, for many spectators around the world, it is the intensity and competitiveness of most Premier League matches – brought on in part by the threat of relegation and prize of European qualification – that makes it so captivating. However, billionaire investors like guaranteed numbers and dislike risk – especially the degree of financial risk that exists in the Premier League and English Football League.
European not-so-Super League
In April 2021, 12 leading European clubs (six from England plus three each from Spain and Italy) announced the creation of the European Super League (ESL). This new mid-week competition was to be a high-revenue generating, closed competition with (eventually) 15 permanent teams and five annual additions qualifying from Europe. According to one of the driving forces behind the plan, Manchester United co-chairman Joel Glazer:
By bringing together the world’s greatest clubs and players to play each other throughout the season, the Super League will open a new chapter for European football, ensuring world-class competition and facilities, and increased financial support for the wider football pyramid.
The problem facing the Premier League’s “big six” clubs – and their ambitious owners – is there are currently only four slots available to play in the Champions League. So, their thinking went, why not take away the risk of not qualifying? However, the proposal was swiftly condemned by fans around Europe, together with football’s governing bodies and leagues – all of whom saw the ESL proposal as a threat to the quality and integrity of their domestic leagues. Following some large fan protests, including at Chelsea’s Stamford Bridge, Manchester City was the first club to withdraw – followed, within a couple of days, by the rest of the English clubs.
Under the terms of the ESL proposals, founding member clubs would have been guaranteed participation in the competition forever. Guaranteed participation means guaranteed revenues. The current financial gap between the “big six” and the other members of the Premier League, which in 2022/23 averaged £396 million, would have widened rapidly.
For example, these clubs would have been able to sell the broadcast rights for some of their ESL home fixtures direct to fans, instead of via a broadcaster. All of a sudden, that database of fans who have downloaded the official club app, or are on a mailing list, becomes far more valuable. These are the people most willing to watch their favourite team on a pay-per-view basis, further increasing revenues.
At the same time, a planned ESL wage cap would have stopped players taking all these increased revenues in the form of higher wages, allowing these clubs to become more profitable and their ownership even more lucrative.
American-owned Manchester United and Liverpool had previously tried to enhance the value of their investments during the COVID lockdowns era via ProjectBig Picture – proposals to reduce the size of the Premier League and scrap one of the two domestic cup competitions, thus freeing up time for the bigger clubs to arrange more lucrative tours and European matches against high-profile opposition.
Most importantly, Project Big Picture would have resulted in changing the governance of the domestic game. Under its proposals, the “big six” clubs would have enjoyed enhanced voting rights, and therefore been able to significantly influence how the domestic game was governed.
Any attempt to increase the concentration of power raises concerns of lower competitive balance, whereby fewer teams are in the running to win the title and fewer games are meaningful. This is a problem facing some other major European football leagues including France’s Ligue 1, where interest among broadcasters has dwindled amid the perceived dominance of Paris St-Germain.
So while to date, American-led attempts to change the structure of the Premier League have been foiled, it’s unlikely such ideas have gone away for good. The near-universal fear of fans – even those who welcome an injection of extra cash from a new billionaire owner – is that the spectacle of the league will only be diminished if such plans ever succeed.
And there is evidence from the women’s game that the US closed league format is coming under more pressure from football’s global forces. The NWSL recently announced it is removing the draft system that is designed (as with the NFL and NBA) to build in jeopardy and competitive balance when there is no risk of relegation.
Top US women’s football clubs are losing some of their leading players to other leagues, in part because European clubs are not bound by the same artificial rules of employment. In a truly global professional sport such as football, international competition will always tend to destabilise closed leagues.
Why do they keep buying these clubs?
Does this mean that American and other wealthy owners of Premier League clubs seeking to reduce their risks are ultimately fighting a losing battle? And if so, given the potential risks involved in owning a football club – both financial and even personal – why do they keep buying them?
The motivations are part-financial, part technological and, as has always been the case with sports ownership, part-vanity.
The American economy has grown far faster than that of the EU or UK in recent years. Consequently, there are many beneficiaries of this growth who have surplus cash, and here football becomes an attractive proposition. In fact, football clubs are more resilient to recessions than other industries, holding their value better as they are effectively monopoly suppliers for their fans who have brand loyalty that exists in few other industries.
From 1993 to 2018, a period during which the UK economy more than doubled, the total value of Premier League clubs grew 30 times larger. And many fans are tied to supporting one club, helping to make the biggest clubs more resilient to economic changes than other industries. While football, like many parts of the entertainment industry, was hit by lockdown during Covid, no clubs went out of business, despite the challenges of matches being played in empty stadiums.
Added to this, the exchange rates for US dollars have been very favourable until recently, making US investments in the UK and Europe cheaper for American investors.
So, while Manchester United fans would argue that the Glazer family have not been good for the club, United has been good for the Glazers. And Fenway Sports Group (FSG), who bought Liverpool for £300 million in 2010, have recouped almost all of that money in smaller share sales while remaining majority owners of Liverpool.
Despite this, the £2.5 billion price paid for Chelsea by the US Clearlake-Todd Boehly consortium in May 2022 took markets by surprise.
The sale – which came after the UK government froze the assets of the club’s Russian oligarch owner, Roman Abramovich, following the invasion of Ukraine – went through less than a year after Newcastle United had been sold by Sports Direct founder Mike Ashley to the Saudi Arabian Public Investment Fund for £305 million – approximately twice that club’s annual revenues. Yet Clearlake-Boehly were willing to pay over five times Chelsea’s annual revenues to acquire the club, even though it was in a precarious financial position.
Clearlake is a private equity group whose main aim is to make profits for their investors. But unlike most such investors, who tend to focus on cost-cutting, the Chelsea ownership came in with a high-spending strategy using new financial structuring ideas, such as offering longer player contracts to avoid falling foul of football’s profitability and sustainability rules (although this loophole has since been closed with Uefa, European football’s governing body, limiting contract lengths for financial regulation purposes to five years).
Chelsea’s location in the one of the most expensive areas of London, combined with its on-field success under Abramovich, all added to the attraction, of course. But there are other reasons why Clearlake, along with billionaire businessman Boehly, were willing to stump up so much for the club.
From Hollywood to the metaverse
While some British football fans may have viewed the Ted Lasso TV show as an enjoyable if slightly twee fictional account of American involvement in English soccer, it has enhanced the attraction of the sport in the US. So too Welcome To Wrexham – the fly-on-the-wall series covering the (to date) two promotions of Wales’s oldest football club under the unlikely Hollywood stewardship of Reynolds and McElhenney.
Welcome To Wrexham, season one trailer.
The growth in US interest in English football is reflected in the record-breaking Premier League media rights deal in 2022, with NBC Sports reportedly paying $2.7 billion (£2.06bn) for its latest six-year deal.
But as well as football offering one of increasingly few “live shared TV experiences” that carry lucrative advertising slots, there may also be more opportunity for more behind-the-scenes coverage of the Premier League – as has long been seen in US coverage of NBA games, for example, where players are interviewed in the locker room straight after games.
According to Manchester United’s latest annual report, the club now has a “global community of 1.1 billion fans and followers”. Such numbers mean its owners, and many others, are bullish about the potential of the metaverse in terms of offering a matchday experience that could be similar to attending a match, without physically travelling to Manchester.
Their neighbours Manchester City, part-owned by American private equity company Silverlake, broke new (virtual) ground by signing a metaverse deal with Sony in 2022. Virtual reality could give fans around the world the feeling of attending a live match, sitting next to their friends and singing along with the rest of the crowd (for a pay-per-view fee).
Some investors are even confident that advancements in Abba-style avatar technology could one day allow fans to watch live 3D simulations of Premier League matches in stadiums all over the world. Having first-mover advantage by being in the elite club of owners who can make use of such technology could prove ever more rewarding.
More immediately, there are some indications that competitive matches involving England’s top men’s football teams could soon take place in US or other venues. Boehly, Chelsea’s co-owner, has already suggested adopting some US sports staples such as an All-Star match to further boost revenues. Indeed, back in 2008, the Premier League tentatively discussed a “39th game” taking place overseas, but that idea was quickly shelved.
The American owners of Birmingham City were keen to play this season’s EFL League One match against Wrexham in the US, but again this proposal did not get far. Liverpool’s chairman Tom Werner says he is determined to see matches take place overseas, and recent changes to world governing body Fifa’s rulebook could make it easier for this proposal to succeed.
The potential benefits of hosting games overseas include higher matchday revenues, increased brand awareness, and enhanced broadcast rights. While there is likely to be significant opposition from local fans, at least American owners know they would not face the same hostility about rising matchday prices in the US as they have encountered in England.
When the Argentinian legend Lionel Messi signed for new MLS franchise Inter Miami in 2023, season ticket prices nearly doubled on his account. And while there is vocal opposition to higher ticket prices in England, this is not borne out in terms of lower attendances for matches against high-calibre opposition – as evidenced by Aston Villa charging up to £97 for last week’s Champions League meeting with Bayern Munich.
Villa’s director of operations, Chris Heck, defended the prices by saying that difficult decisions had to be made if the club was to be competitive.
Manchester United’s matchday revenue per EPL season (£m)
For much of the 2010s, with broadcast revenues increasing rapidly, many Premier League owners made little effort to stoke hostilities with their loyal fan bases by putting up ticket prices. Indeed, Manchester United generated little more from matchday income in the 2021-22 season, as football emerged from the pandemic, than the club had in 2010-11 (see chart above).
However, this uneasy truce between fans and owners has ceased. The relative flatlining of broadcast revenues since 2017, along with cost control rules that are starting to affect clubs’ ability to spend money on player signings and wages, has changed club appetites for dampened ticket prices. This has resulted in noticeable rises in individual ticket and season ticket prices by some clubs.
However, season ticket and other local “legacy” fans generate little money compared with the more lucrative overseas and tourist fans. They may only watch their favourite team live once a season, but when they visit, they are far more likely not only to pay higher matchday prices, but to spend more on merchandise, catering and other offerings from the club.
Today’s breed of commercially aware, profit-seeking US Premier League owners – pioneered by the Glazer family, who saw that “sweating the asset” meant more than watching football players sprinting hard – understand there is a lot more value to come from English football teams. The clubs’ loyal local supporters may not like it, but English football’s American-led revolution is not done yet.
To hear about new Insights articles, join the hundreds of thousands of people who value The Conversation’s evidence-based news. Subscribe to our newsletter.
Kieran Maguire has taught courses and presented on football finance for the Professional Footballers Association, League Managers Association, FIFA and national football associations in Europe.
Christina Philippou is affiliated with the RAF FA, and Premier League education programs.
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
Defence Secretary agrees to range of initiatives from boosting ease of access to space and virtual training to developing cutting-edge drones.
NATO allies could be set to use Britain’s launch vehicles and space ports, following new work that will see the alliance start work to rapidly deploy assets to space.
With adversaries attempting to maximise their advantages in space, the Defence Secretary John Healey MP today signed a letter of intent, which will see NATO allies work closer on government and commercial space launch capabilities.
Attending his first NATO Defence Ministerial, the Defence Secretary also signed up to a range of multinational long-term projects, from virtual training to drone procurement.
Tomorrow and Saturday (Friday 18 October, Saturday 19 October) the Defence Secretary will attend the G7 Defence Ministers meeting.
The meeting, hosted by the Italian Presidency of the G7, in Naples, will see the Defence Secretary meet with his G7 opposite numbers.
On the margins of the G7, Mr Healey will also attend a meeting of the Global Combat Air Programme, with his Italian and Japanese counterparts.
Today’s space cooperation announcement will see the UK help develop NATO’s space capabilities.
Known as the STARLIFT programme, it will build space launch capabilities across the alliance and will see the UK, alongside our allies and commercial partners, create a network of space launch capabilities across the alliance.
Defence Secretary John Healey MP said:
By developing these cutting-edge technologies, we are setting up our Armed Forces for the battlefields of the future, and creating significant opportunities for British industry.
Our Government’s commitment to NATO is unshakeable. Together with our partners, we will ensure the collective security of our citizens and strengthen our alliance for decades to come.
Virtual training
The UK is today signing a letter of intent to share virtual simulator training across NATO, allowing Allies to train and work together without the need for a physical deployment, saving time, resources and money.
Artillery munitions
The UK has agreed today that NATO will create a single test network to enable allies to use different munition types, such as 155mm, on various artillery systems. This will ensure greater flexibility in joint operations.
Drones
The Defence Secretary also confirmed that the UK will take part in a project to develop cutting-edge drones.
The UK has played a key role in sending thousands of drones to Ukraine, where we have seen first-hand the vital role they have played in fighting back against Putin’s forces.
NATO allies will work together to develop these unmanned platforms which will gather intelligence, surveillance and deliver strike capabilities.
UK participation also helps to integrate the MQ-9B/Protector uncrewed aircraft capability into the NATO Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance Force and defence of the High North and Arctic region.
The UK’s participation in these ambitious projects underline our unshakeable commitment to NATO.
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION TO U.S. NEWS WIRE SERVICES OR DISSEMINATION IN THE UNITED STATES.
VANCOUVER, British Columbia, Oct. 17, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Westhaven Gold Corp. (TSX-V:WHN) (“Westhaven” or the “Company”) is pleased to announce the closing of its previously announced brokered private placement (the “Offering“) for aggregate gross proceeds of C$6,000,004.50, which includes the full exercise of the agent’s option for proceeds of C$1,000,002.50. Under the Offering, the Company sold the following:
10,000,000 units of the Company (each, a “Unit”) at a price of C$0.15 per Unit for gross proceeds of C$1,500,000 from the sale of Units;
5,714,300 common shares of the Company that qualify as “flow-through shares” within the meaning of subsection 66(15) of the Income Tax Act (Canada) (each, a “Traditional FT Share”) at a price of C$0.175 per Traditional FT Share for gross proceeds of C$1,000,002.50 from the sale of Traditional FT Shares; and
15,909,100 flow-through units of the Company (each, a “Charity FT Unit”, and collectively with the Units and Traditional FT Shares, the “Offered Securities”) at a price of C$0.22 per Charity FT Unit for gross proceeds of C$3,500,002 from the sale of Charity FT Units.
In connection with the Offering, Rob McEwen made a strategic investment of C$1.5 million. Following the completion of the Offering, Mr. McEwen owns approximately 5.3% of the issued and outstanding common shares of the Company. Mr. McEwen is the founder and former Chairman of Goldcorp, is currently the Executive Chairman and largest shareholder of McEwen Mining Inc. and is a member of the Mining Hall of Fame.
Each Unit consists of one common share of the Company (each, a “Unit Share”) and one half of one common share purchase warrant (each whole warrant, a “Warrant”). Each Charity FT Unit consists of one common share of the Company that quality as a “flow-through share” within the meaning of subsection 66(15) of the Income Tax Act (Canada) (a “Charity FT Unit Share”) and one half of one Warrant, which will also qualify as a “flow-through share” for the purposes of the Income Tax Act (Canada). Each Warrant entitles the holder to purchase one common share of the Company (each, a “Warrant Share”) at a price of C$0.22 per Warrant Share at any time on or before October 17, 2026.
Red Cloud Securities Inc. (the “Agent”) acted as sole agent and bookrunner in connection with the Offering. In consideration for their services, the Agent received a cash commission of C$346,867.77 and 1,815,564 broker warrants (the “Broker Warrants”), with each such Broker Warrant exercisable for one common share of the Company (a “Broker Share”) at a price of C$0.15 per Broker Share at any time on or before October 17, 2026.
Subject to compliance with applicable regulatory requirements and in accordance with National Instrument 45-106 – Prospectus Exemptions (“NI 45-106”), the Units and Charity FT Units (the “LIFE Securities”), representing gross proceeds of C$5,000,002.00, were sold to purchasers in the provinces of Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario, and Saskatchewan (the “Canadian Selling Jurisdictions”), the United States and certain offshore jurisdictions pursuant to the listed issuer financing exemption under Part 5A of NI 45-106 (the “Listed Issuer Financing Exemption”). The Unit Shares, Charity FT Unit Shares and Warrants that were issued, and the Warrant Shares that may be issued upon due exercise of the Warrants, pursuant to the sale of the LIFE Securities will be immediately freely tradeable under applicable Canadian securities legislation if sold to purchasers resident in Canada. The Traditional FT Shares sold pursuant to the Offering were offered by way of the “accredited investor” exemption under NI 45-106 in the Canadian Selling Jurisdictions and Quebec. The Traditional FT Shares are subject to a hold period under Canadian securities laws ending on February 18, 2025.
The Company intends to use the net proceeds from the sale of Units for working capital and general corporate purposes. The gross proceeds from the sale and issuance of the Traditional FT Shares and the Charity FT Units will be used to incur “Canadian exploration expenses” on the Company’s mineral projects in British Columbia and will qualify as “flow-through mining expenditures”, as both terms are defined in the Income Tax Act (Canada) (collectively, “Qualifying Expenditures”), which will be incurred on or before December 31, 2025 and renounced to the subscribers of the Offering with an effective date no later than December 31, 2024 in an aggregate amount not less than the gross proceeds raised from the sale of the Traditional FT Shares and Charity FT Units. In addition, with respect to British Columbia resident subscribers or those who are eligible individuals under the Income Tax Act (British Columbia), the Qualifying Expenditures will be eligible for the 20% BC mining flow-through share tax credit.
The securities offered have not been, nor will they be, registered under the U.S. Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or any state securities law, and may not be offered, sold or delivered, directly or indirectly, within the United States, or to or for the account or benefit of U.S. persons, absent registration or an exemption from such registration requirements. This news release does not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy nor shall there be any sale of securities in any state in the United States in which such offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful.
On behalf of the Board of Directors
WESTHAVEN GOLD CORP.
“Gareth Thomas”
Gareth Thomas, President, CEO & Director
Neither the TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.
About Westhaven Gold Corp.
Westhaven is a gold-focused exploration company advancing the high-grade discovery on the Shovelnose project in Canada’s newest gold district, the Spences Bridge Gold Belt. Westhaven controls ~60,950 hectares (609.5 square kilometres) with four gold properties spread along this underexplored belt. The Shovelnose property is situated off a major highway, near power, rail, large producing mines, and within commuting distance from the city of Merritt, which translates into low-cost exploration. Westhaven trades on the TSX Venture Exchange under the ticker symbol WHN. For further information, please call 604-681-5558 or visit Westhaven’s website at http://www.westhavengold.com
Forward Looking Statements:
This press release contains “forward-looking information” within the meaning of applicable Canadian and United States securities laws, which is based upon the Company’s current internal expectations, estimates, projections, assumptions and beliefs. The forward-looking information included in this press release are made only as of the date of this press release. Such forward-looking statements and forward-looking information include, but are not limited to, statements concerning the Company’s expectations with respect to the Offering, including the use of proceeds of the Offering. Forward-looking statements or forward-looking information relate to future events and future performance and include statements regarding the expectations and beliefs of management based on information currently available to the Company. Such forward-looking statements and forward-looking information often, but not always, can be identified by the use of words such as “plans”, “expects”, “potential”, “is expected”, “anticipated”, “is targeted”, “budget”, “scheduled”, “estimates”, “forecasts”, “intends”, “anticipates”, or “believes” or the negatives thereof or variations of such words and phrases or statements that certain actions, events or results “may”, “could”, “would”, “might” or “will” be taken, occur or be achieved.
Forward-looking information involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause the actual results, performance, or achievements of the Company to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. Such risks and other factors include, among others, and without limitation: the Company will not be able to raise sufficient funds to complete its planned exploration program; that the Company will not derive the expected benefits from its current program; the Company may not use the proceeds of the Offering as currently contemplated; the Company may fail to find a commercially viable deposit at any of its mineral properties; the Company’s plans may be adversely affected by the Company’s reliance on historical data compiled by previous parties involved with its mineral properties; mineral exploration and development are inherently risky industries; the mineral exploration industry is intensely competitive; additional financing may not be available to the Company when required or, if available, the terms of such financing may not be favourable to the Company; fluctuations in the demand for gold or gold prices generally; the Company may not be able to identify, negotiate or finance any future acquisitions successfully, or to integrate such acquisitions with its current business; the Company’s exploration activities are dependent upon the grant of appropriate licenses, concessions, leases, permits and regulatory consents, which may be withdrawn or not granted; the Company’s operations could be adversely affected by possible future government legislation, policies and controls or by changes in applicable laws and regulations; there is no guarantee that title to the properties in which the Company has a material interest will not be challenged or impugned; the Company faces various risks associated with mining exploration that are not insurable or may be the subject of insurance which is not commercially feasible for the Company; the volatility of global capital markets over the past several years has generally made the raising of capital more difficult; inflationary cost pressures may escalate the Company’s operating costs; compliance with environmental regulations can be costly; social and environmental activism can negatively impact exploration, development and mining activities; the success of the Company is largely dependent on the performance of its directors and officers; the Company’s operations may be adversely affected by First Nations land claims; the Company and/or its directors and officers may be subject to a variety of legal proceedings, the results of which may have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business; the Company may be adversely affected if potential conflicts of interests involving its directors and officers are not resolved in favour of the Company; the Company’s future profitability may depend upon the world market prices of gold; dilution from future equity financing could negatively impact holders of the Company’s securities; failure to adequately meet infrastructure requirements could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business; the Company’s projects now or in the future may be adversely affected by risks outside the control of the Company; the Company is subject to various risks associated with climate change, the Company is subject to general global risks arising from epidemic diseases, the ongoing conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East, rising inflation and interest rates and the impact they will have on the Company’s operations, supply chains, ability to access mining projects or procure equipment, supplies, contractors and other personnel on a timely basis or at all is uncertain; as well as other risk factors in the Company’s other public filings available at http://www.sedarplus.ca. Readers are cautioned that this list of risk factors should not be construed as exhaustive. Although the Company believes that the expectations reflected in the forward-looking information are reasonable, there can be no assurance that such expectations will prove to be correct. The Company cannot guarantee future results, performance, or achievements. Consequently, there is no representation that the actual results achieved will be the same, in whole or in part, as those set out in the forward-looking information. The Company undertakes no duty to update any of the forward-looking information to conform such information to actual results or to changes in the Company’s expectations, except as otherwise required by applicable securities legislation. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on forward-looking information.
Source: The White House
5:54 P.M. EDT THE FIRST LADY: Thank you. (Applause.) Thank you, Alexa. And I’m excited to see your generation forging new connections to our past and shining such a bright light into our future. And I’m also grateful to the National Italian American Foundation. (Applause.) John, Robert, you’ve all — you’ve helped so many people experience our heritage in Italy and preserve it here in the United States. So, thank you. Buonasera, everyone. (Laughter.) AUDIENCE: Buonasera! THE FIRST LADY: And welcome to the White House. When I was a little girl, I learned what it means to be Italian American in my grandparents’ tiny, well-worn kitchen — and not only because there were ribbons of pasta — homemade pasta and sauce bubbling over on the stove. No, the most important lesson that I learned in their kitchen was that, when you’re Italian American, there’s always room for one more chair at the table — (applause) — enough bread toast to feed one more guest, enough space in our hearts for another friend to become like family. And even when times are hard, there’s — THE PRESIDENT: Looking at me. (Laughter.) THE FIRST LADY: There’s always enough time to — (the president makes the sign of the cross) — (laughter) — enjoy the pleasures of life together. My grandparents also taught me to never waste an opportunity to invite more people to the table and make a difference together. So, I knew I had to bring those values of love, abundance, and service to the White House as the first Italian American first lady. (Applause.) That’s why I’ve used this platform to give more women a seat at the table in discussions about their own health — (applause) — to hear from military families about how we can support them, to uplift community college students. And I’ve had the opportunity to bring so many more people inside the historic walls of the White House by creating new educational experiences that allow more Americans to immerse themselves in this house, the People’s House; by using these rooms to celebrate the young people who are changing our world; by honoring the immigrants who helped build this country; and tonight — (applause) — thank you — and tonight, gathering with this community — my community — to celebrate our culture. (Laughter.) So, it’s been the honor of my life to serve as first lady. And during my time here, I’ve often thought of my great-grandparents leaving everything they knew behind to chase the promise of America. And then, when they arrived on Ellis Island to take their first strides into a new life, I don’t think that they could ever have imagined that a group of hundreds of Italian Americans — coming together in the White House. When our roots run deep, there’s no limit to how high we can reach. So, tonight, I hope that you feel the power of our ancestors’ values beating inside of us as we carry their legacy forward; that you feel home — you feel at home, eat good food, and end up with a little something sweet together, as a family. (Laughter.) Now, it’s my pleasure to introduce a man who’s always felt at home — (laughs) — with Italian Americans. (Applause.) In fact, Joe first met my family at a big cookout at my grandparents’ house in Hammonton, New Jersey. So, I was pretty nervous, you know, about Joe coming to meet my family. But as soon as Joe pulled up into the driveway — and you kn- — you can picture this — my tiny grandmom bolted out of the house, bounded down the porch steps, in her housecoat and her apron, and she gave Joe this huge hug, as if she’d known him his entire life. And before he could even get a plate, Joe was greeted not as a stranger but as family. Over the years, I’ve seen the Italian American community extend the same joyful love and support to Joe. You mean so much to him. (Laughs.) So, please welcome — I don’t know why I’m getting so emotional — your president, my husband, Joe. (Applause.) THE PRESIDENT: Welcome to the White House. (Applause.) My name is Joe Biden, and I’m Jill Biden’s husband. (Laughter and applause.) Now, I may be Irish, but I’m not stupid. (Laughter.) I married Dominic Giacoppa’s granddaughter. And five years ago, I want you to know, I received the Sons of Italy Man of the Year award. To the best of my knowledge, I’m the only non-Italian ever to receive that award. (Laughter and applause.) There was a large crowd when I received that award. It was down by the train station. You know, I said I — I moved from an Irish Catholic neighborhood in Scranton to an Italian Catholic neighborhood in Claymont, Delaware. And I went from a — where — a place where you ended like Finnegan and Murphy and all that, down if your name didn’t lend — end in “O,” you’re in real trouble. (Laughter.) I was one of the few guys whose name didn’t end in “O.” I’d look out there and look at all my friends. You know, I accepted the award and named some of the guys I grew up with next door: Sonny Daramo, whose mom would say, “Joey, it’s not sauce; it’s gravy, Joey. It’s gravy, Joey.” (Laughter and applause.) Oh, you think I’m kidding. I’m not. (Laughter.) No, Anzilotti, De- — Sabatino, Buchini, Bifferato, Ceni, Congialdi, Deluterio, Monaco — no, you think I’m kidding — Tancr- — By the way, after I talked about it, I looked down at that crowd and said, “You know…” — thinking about it, I said, “I deserve this damn award.” (Laughter.) “With that many Italian friends, man, I deserve that award.” (Laughter.) Thank you, Alexa, for being here and sharing your pride in your family and your heritage. Look, and it’s great to see so many friends from the National Italian American Foundation, you know, the Sons and Daughters of Italy, and so many other Italian American leaders and organization from all across the country. You know, I can honestly say I wouldn’t be president without you. I wouldn’t be president without the Italian American community. Now, what she didn’t say is we do have something in common. I’m Catherine Eugenia Finnegan — Irish Catholics background. You guys, a lot of you are Catholics, you know. (Laughter.) I know you don’t admit it as much, but there — (laughter). This month is about celebrating the extraordinary contributions and proud, proud herita- — heritage of Italian Americans to our nation. And it’s kind of endless. For some of our families, your story is America’s story. It stretches back generations. For others, it just started. No matter when these st- — stories of immigrants who left everything behind to travel across the ocean in pursuit of the American dream just for a shot — just a simple shot. You and your ancestors worked hard to help build this country and build the middle class. People like my college friend, the late Congressman Bill Pascrell — he’s been — Bill, Jr. is here. Where — where are you, Bill? (Applause.) There you are. I used to kid his dad all the time. I said, “You know, Delaware may be the second-smallest state in the Union, but we own the Delaware River up to the highwater mark in New Jersey.” (Laughter.) There was actually a Supreme Court case about that. Anyway. (Laughter.) But he represented New Jersey, and his son represents the House of Representatives. And Bill did it for 27 years, when he passed away this summer. He was the grandson of Italian immigrants, a giant in the community, and a devoted patriot to the nation. You got good blood, kid, as my dad would say. (Applause.) He was a part of a proud, proud heritage of Italian Americans who enrich every part of American life: entrepreneurs, educators, scientists, chefs, diplomats, doctors, servicemembers, veterans, athletes, actors, artists, and so much more. There’s nothing the Italian community is not engaged in — I mean, virtually nothing. There’s noth- — no community you don’t excel in. But I also know it wasn’t always easy. Many of your ancestors faced horrific discrimination, like my ancestors faced horrific discrimination, when they first came to our shores. Yet, even in the face of — Italian Americans proved that they had the resilient spirit and a devotion to family and community, an unshakeable faith in the promise of a better tomorrow. You know, my dad used to have an expression. He’d say, “Joey, family is the beginning, the middle, and the end — the beginning, the middle, and the end.” It’s a faith that has carried through to today, both at home and abroad. Italian Americans are central to our nation’s deep friendship and strategic partnership with Italy. I’ve — I’ve worked out a really good relationship with the Italians. I’m — well, Ital- — I better have done that but at home. (Laughter.) But all kidding aside, with th- — with Italy. What a magnificent country. You know, and — anyway, I won’t get started. But — (laughter) — you know, the bond between our countries is founded on a shared principle and shared commitments, including the shared support for the brave people of Ukraine as they defend themselves against Russia’s illegal (inaudible). (Applause.) I might add, they have a female leader. (Applause.) I wish Sonny Daramo were here to hear that. (Laughter.) In addition, Italy’s remarkable stewardship with the presidency of the G7 this year, as well as Italy’s long-standing contributions to transatlantic security through NATO — look, and their strong leadership in the European Union — it underscores how important Italy’s role is on the global stage, not just, you know, for America but for the world. You know, let me close with this. You know, Michelangelo famously said he “saw an angel in the marble, and I carved until I set it free.” “I saw an angel in the marble, and I carved until I set it free.” To me, that’s the essence of what Italian Americans have done to our country for our entire history. You’ve carved until you set us free. I’m — I’m being dead- — deadly earnest. We’re all reminded that when Jill and I had the honor to host one of the greatest singers of all time, in my view, Andrea Bocelli, here at the White House for Christmas in our first year in office, he performed with his son and his daughter as if they were a choir of herald angels. They were incredible. You know, with their God-given talent, the Bocelli family moved our hearts, pierced our souls — and I mean this sincerely — I have all of the music on my — and they embodied the spirit and beauty of all that connects us as people. A powerful reminder that America’s story depends on — not on any one of us but on — not on some of us but all of us. It’s a story I see in all of you, working tirelessly — tirelessly to help realize the promise of America — and I mean it — for all Americans. Not a joke. Because some of you have been on the short end of the stick like my family growing up had been. This is what the Italian American Heritage Month is all about. It’s about celebrating and connecting, feeling the pride in heritage and community, remembering who the hell we are. We’re the United States of America, and there’s nothing beyond our capacity when we do it together — nothing, nothing, nothing. (Applause.) No, I really mean it. So, thank you. Thank you, thank you, thank you. And I want to tell you, you know what made me mo- — the — probably one of the most famous guys in my family — the whole family? Not being president. I took her to a beautiful little island off of Sicily. (Laughter.) And she keeps saying, “I’m going back.” (Laughter.) THE FIRST LADY: Soon! THE PRESIDENT: “With — with or without you.” (Laughter.) So, folks, all kidding aside, thank you. You’re an incredible community. (Applause.) THE FIRST LADY: Thank you. THE PRESIDENT: You’re an essential part of my life. Thank you, thank you, thank you. (Applause.) Enjoy the day. God bless you all. And may God protect our troops. Thank you. (Applause.) All right. 6:07 P.M. EDT
Source: Switzerland – Department of Defence, Civil Protection and Sport
Federal Department of Defence, Civil Protection and Sports
Bern, 16.10.2024 – On Thursday, 17 October, President Viola Amherd met with Poland’s President Andrzej Duda to discuss their countries’ bilateral relations, the negotiations between Switzerland and the EU, the security situation in Europe, migration matters and geopolitical developments. Poland will hold the presidency of the Council of the EU in the first half of 2025.
At the meeting in Warsaw, both sides emphasised the excellent relations between Switzerland and Poland, which are characterised by close political, economic, cultural and scientific ties. Cooperation as part of Switzerland’s second contribution to selected EU member states is also important. With a total of CHF 320.1 million until 2029, Poland will receive the largest cohesion framework credit among the 15 countries benefiting from this second Swiss contribution. The cooperation programme is particularly geared towards socially disadvantaged regions and promotes stability in Europe. A further priority is research at Polish universities. The programme offers an opportunity to intensify contacts and technical cooperation between Swiss and Polish research institutions.
In the current, increasingly unstable geopolitical context, both sides agreed that close partners should maintain good and stable relations. With regard to the bilateral relations between Switzerland and the EU, President Amherd gave an update on the state of the negotiations. She and President Duda also discussed outstanding issues. Ms Amherd emphasised the need for balanced solutions to stabilise and further develop bilateral relations to the mutual benefit of both sides and to gain domestic support in Switzerland and in the EU. Mr Duda, in turn, outlined the priorities of his country’s presidency of the Council of the EU in the first half of 2025.
The discussion on the security situation focused on the war in Ukraine and the Ukraine Mine Action Conference (UMAC2024), which opened in Lausanne on the same day and addresses the importance of mine clearance as part of the recovery of Ukraine. The conference in Lausanne follows the Ukraine Recovery Conference (URC2022) in Lugano in July 2022 and the Summit on Peace in Ukraine at the Bürgenstock resort in June 2024. The discussion in Warsaw focused on the solidarity of both countries with Ukraine and the steps needed to achieve a just and lasting peace.
Further topics included geopolitical developments, in particular the situation in the Middle East, the state of multilateralism, and Switzerland’s second presidency of the UN Security Council this month. On Friday, Ms Amherd will meet with the presidents of Poland’s parliamentary chambers, Szymon Hołownia and Małgorzata Kidawa-Błońska.
Consumers of western media could be forgiven for supposing that Ukraine, the state whose sovereignty was violated so brutally with the Russian invasion of February 2022, enjoys unstinting support from its western neighbour Poland. The support of the Polish government has been unambiguous. Donations of military equipment and humanitarian support for refugees have been second to none in Europe.
The election of a new government at the end of 2023 made no discernible difference to the Polish commitment. Antipathy towards Russia in Poland has strong roots, dating back even before the days when much of the country (including Warsaw) was formally incorporated into the Romanovs’ Russian empire.
Observers in the west take it for granted that the pro-Ukrainian policies of successive Polish governments – endorsed by the Catholic churches – reflect views shared by citizens throughout the country.
But after more than two years of war, as I found during a recent research trip, doubts are being voiced in some segments of society.
Farmers have been angry for years. Ukraine has rich soils and its agribusiness is free from EU regulations. In the exceptional conditions created by the invasion, with the government desperately in need of revenue, Ukraine has been allowed to export its cheap grain to the EU. This has undermined the market for Polish farmers. Some Poles event believe that, since much Ukrainian farmland is owned by foreign capital, the prolongation of the war has been orchestrated by the west for economic reasons.
Similar arguments can be heard concerning energy. The end of cheap gas from the Russian Federation promises a bonanza for the producers of alternative supplies, notably in the United States at the expense of higher prices for Polish households. I also heard in plenty of conversations that Poland is the only ally of Ukraine to provide military hardware free of charge – whereas other Nato states insist on full payment or offer credits that will theoretically have to be repaid one day.
The resentments run deep and they affect large sections of the population. Why do I have to wait months for my hospital appointment, people ask – is it because of increased demand for health services from the millions of Ukrainian refugees? Why should my taxes pay for generous financial grants to Ukrainians who turn up at the border, claim the cash, and promptly return home?
A tangled history
Most educated citizens dismiss such allegations with scorn. Those who complain and exaggerate isolated abuses are often written off as gullible victims of Russian propaganda. But Poles are unlikely dupes. Monuments to communist crimes are everywhere – above all the Katyń massacres of 1940, when the Soviet security forces murdered thousands of Polish officers. More recently, many Poles still suspect the Kremlin’s complicity in the plane crash that killed their then president, Lech Kaczyński in Smolensk in 2010.
Yet hatred of Russia does not translate into unconditional support for Ukraine.
The enduring reason for friction between the two states has to do with diverging interpretations of violence which took place during and after the second world war. Ukrainian ministers have the undiplomatic habit of pointing out that large areas of present-day Poland were formerly occupied by Ukrainians. According to the historical ethno-linguistic and religious criteria generally considered central in the formation of peoples, Ukraine might indeed have a stronger claim to sections of the Polish Carpathians than it has to Crimea or Donbas.
Does this help explain why the Polish government upholds the sanctity of Ukraine’s border with Russia? They want Ukraine’s border with their country to be equally sacrosanct.
The typical Polish response to Ukrainian nationalist goading is to point out that Poles used to form the majority in most towns of western Ukraine – and that Lviv itself was a Polish city until Stalin redrew the borders in 1944 and the Polish population was deported westwards. These eastern borderlands are known to Poles as the Kresy. They are the focus of strong emotions and mythology. The Kresy is imagined as a harmonious realm in which, for many centuries, cultivated Poles ruled benignly over all other nationalities.
This multiculturalism came to an abrupt end in the 1940s. These days, Poles with family roots in Volhynia and Galicia, much of which is now in western Ukraine, are incensed by Kyiv’s refusal to admit that Ukrainian nationalists were responsible for the ethnic cleansing of the Polish population. Poland’s prime minister, Donald Tusk, recently made it clear that Poland’s continued support for admitting Ukraine to the EU will depend on coming to terms with this dark past.
Western complicity
During my recent visit, I was sometimes asked why the BBC and other influential western media never probed behind the slick public face of Volodymyr Zelensky’s team to report on the real conditions and opinions of ordinary Ukrainians. Instead, Russians are demonised and Ukrainians hailed for their “European values” and their sacrifices on behalf of the west.
Coverage in Polish state media conveys a similar message – but I found many citizens have become sceptical. There is pity for conscripts, sorrow for the loss of young lives on both sides and fear for where all this dehumanising violence is leading. But few of the people I spoke with believed that Russians are the only party violating the Geneva Conventions.
Often, the conversation turned to Boris Johnson. I was asked to explain why the then prime minister advised Zelensky in April 2022 that Ukraine should continue the fighting. Did Johnson, as has often been rumoured, sabotage proposals for a negotiated peace carefully drawn up in Istanbul shortly before his visit? Was it the spontaneous whim of a western politician who knew nothing about regional history, a clown playing macho games with Zelensky for the sake of his own image? Did he not care at all about the hundreds of thousands who would suffer and die if this war continued? Was he pursuing a devious strategy agreed with EU leaders and Nato partners, above all Washington?
I did not have answers to any of these questions.
Chris Hann does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
This article was first published in our World Update newsletter. To receive a weekly briefing on global affairs and international relations direct to your inbox, please subscribe to the newsletter.
Vladimir Putin’s regular threats about his nuclear arsenal have focused minds on the existential threat his nuclear weapons still represent. But it’s the volatility of the situation in the Middle East that has added a worrying degree of uncertainty to the international situation.
A year after the brutal Hamas attack on Israel – and after months of tit-for-tat missile attacks between Israel and Iran – Israel has commenced a ground invasion of Lebanon which pits the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) directly against Iranian proxy Hezbollah.
At the same time, the government of Benjamin Netanyahu is pursuing an ever more drastic campaign against Hamas in Gaza. It is now reportedly planning to expel all residents from the north of the enclave in order to establish a military zone there. Meanwhile it has ramped up its attacks on the Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen and against Iranian proxies in Syria.
All-out war between Israel and Iran remains unthinkable, even as questions are raised about Iran’s nuclear ambitions. And yet, as any historian will tell you, the wrong combination of miscalculation, errors of strategic judgement and failures of diplomacy to cause things to escalate with alarming rapidity.
In 1997, Austrian economist Friedrich Glasl published a model of conflict escalation which is generally accepted as the best study of how disagreements can develop into disastrous warfare. It maps, in nine stages, how a conflict can develop from tension between antagonists to a situation into which the warring parties plunge “together into the abyss”.
Nine stages of confict escalation. Graphic by Swinnall, original from Sampi. Derived from: Konflikteskalation nach Glasl.svg, CC BY-NC-SA
Matthew Powell, a historian of warfare, compares Glasl’s model to the situation between Israel and Iran. He assesses the two antagonists have have reached stage seven, “where they are launching limited blows against each other while avoiding direct confrontation. Both want to make their adversary consider whether the cost of continuing is worth the potential rewards that can be gained”.
Powell believes that both sides presently seem keen to remain at arms length for fear that a direct conflict could plunge them – and their allies – into the aforementioned abyss.
Now, more than ever, it’s vital to be informed about the important issues affecting global stability. Sign up to receive our weekly World Update newsletter. Every Thursday we’ll you expert analysis of the big stories making international headlines.
For longtime Middle East analyst Paul Rogers, one of the key issues governing the likely future of the conflict is likely to be the domestic politics of Israel. He has watched the country move steadily to the right over more than 50 years, to the extent that the Netanyahu government is now heavily influenced by religious nationalists. Netanyahu has depended for two years on the support of some of the more extreme elements on Israel’s political fringe in order to stay in power.
These hardliners, Rogers writes, are willing to subvert Israeli democracy itself in order to realise their dream of “Messianic Judaism”. A byproduct of this dream would be to push the Palestinian population out of Gaza, which would be a disaster for regional stability. The irony is that by making war on Lebanon, Netanyahu has managed to improve his standing with the Israeli people and is no longer as dependent on political hawks.
Of course, what may be good for Netanyahu is a disaster for Lebanon, where the death toll is rising daily and more than one-quarter of the population has been displaced.
While Israel’s air force has launched 140 airstrikes across the country, most of the activity has focused on the border areas in the south of the country, where the IDF is reported to be clearing villages, perhaps in anticipation for setting up a buffer zone there.
Israeli ground operation in southern Lebanon as at October 16 2024. Institute for the Study of War
Over the past fortnight there have been repeated incidents where the IDF have – apparently deliberately – targeted units of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (Unifil). This peacekeeping force was set up in 1978 and has the mandate to enforce the UN’s resolution to prevent clashes between Israel and Hezbollah in southern Lebanon. Netanyahu has demanded that Unifil move its peacekeepers out of the conflict zone, but so far the UN troops, led by France and Spain, have refused to leave their posts.
Vanessa Newby and Chiara Ruffa, with input and advice from former senior Unifil political and civil affairs officer John Molloy, (formerly of the Irish Defence Forces) have been tracking the incidents. Most recently they involved an IDF tank firing on a Unifil watchtower and has resulted in a growing number of casualties among the peacekeepers.
Newby and Ruffa believe that Israel wants to remove Unifil from southern Lebanon because it wants to carry out its operations without the scrutiny of an international observer. They also speculate that the sheer number of forces being moved by the IDF into south Lebanon indicates that Israel may be planning to occupy a swath of territory beyond what its military has described as a “limited, localised, and targeted” operation.
Meanwhile tensions are rising between Hezbollah and other sections of Lebanese society. We’ve seen this before, and it has never gone well, writes Mohamad El Kari, who has witnessed the challenges to security in Lebanon firsthand as a translator.
He fears that Israel’s assassination of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah will kick off a bout of factional infighting that could seriously destabilise a country that is already showing signs of serious social and political instability. In some areas, Kari writes, people were dancing in the streets at the news of Nasrallah’s death. Not a good sign for Lebanon’s fragile stability.
All this talk of escalation had me reflecting on history. I grew up during the cold war under the shadow of the nuclear threat. As a schoolboy in the 1970s, I was taken to a nuclear bunker where, in the event of a nuclear attack on the UK, key personnel would have sheltered as they ran secure communications.
As a student in the 1980s, I shared a house with several women who would spend weekends at Greenham Common airbase where they protested against the presence of nuclear weapons there. I remember the gallows humour with which we greeted the government’s Protect and Survive campaign, which encouraged building makeshift nuclear shelters under the stairs.
The peace movement of the day adapted the campaign into the slogan “protest and survive” and the Raymond Briggs graphic novel When the Wind Blows darkly lampooned the government’s advice with its portrayal of an elderly couple following the government’s instructions with predictably tragic results.
In 1984, Britain was horrified by the BBC film, Threads, a docudrama based on the idea of a nuclear attack on Sheffield. The premise called for a confrontation between Nato and the Warsaw Pact after a US-sponsored coup in Iran. It showed how quickly an international crisis could degenerate into global nuclear conflict and, in turn, how quickly societal collapse was likely to follow.
Then in the 1990s the nuclear threat seemed to diminish. The collapse of the Soviet Union and treaties to limit the spread of nuclear weapons and decommission existing stockpiles meant that, for most of us anyway, the idea of a nuclear holocaust receded to almost nothing.
The BBC recently screened the film again, to mark its 40th anniversary, and has made it available for streaming on iPlayer. The Independent’s preview of the screening noted that the Doomsday Clock, which atomic scientists use to indicate how close the world is to nuclear disaster, is set at 90 seconds to midnight, the closest it has ever been. The scientists said that conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza, with the prospect the latter might spread across the Middle East had made the world a much more dangerous place in 2024. And so it has come to pass.
Philosopher Mark Lacy was shown the film as a schoolboy and doesn’t intend to watch it again. But he’s an expert in the changing nature of warfare and he has seen how conflicts can explode out of “accidents, miscalculations and errors of strategic judgement”.
He is concerned that, unlike in the cold war where events were largely controlled by “rational actors” who were all too aware of the potential for “mutually assured destruction” and made their calculations accordingly, today’s leaders may not act with the same circumspection. And this is what makes the world a much more dangerous place.
The latest edition of our podcast, The Conversation Weekly, focuses on the the Middle East question. Podcast host Gemma Ware speaks with two academic experts in Middle East politics, Amnon Aran and Mireille Rebeiz, to get a sense of what’s at stake for the region.
Speaking to leaders, Parliament President Metsola reiterated Parliament’s unwavering support for Ukraine. She called for a coordinated European approach to ensure the integrity of Schengen.
On Ukraine
It has been almost 1,000 days of aggression in Ukraine. We will, and we must, keep standing with Ukraine – and equally we need to reinforce our efforts for peace. A peace that is rooted in freedom; that is anchored in dignity and that is built on justice. A peace that is not a capitulation. A peace that protects our values. Anything less than that is no real peace at all.
When we talk about Ukraine’s future and putting an end to this terrible war, we need to be clear: only a strong, sovereign Ukraine can achieve that. The European Parliament stands firm in its conviction: nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine.
Next week the European Parliament will take a final vote in plenary to support Ukraine with an exceptional Macro-Financial Assistance loan of up to 35 billion Euros. Politically and technically, we are proud to have done our work.
On Middle East
Alongside the recent escalation in Lebanon, including now involving the United Nations Interim Forces in Lebanon, it is more critical than ever to find a sustainable solution and to do so urgently. Europe has a role to play here and we cannot be found wanting.
The European Parliament’s position is clear. Our calls for the immediate release of the remaining hostages will remain steadfast. Our calls for a ceasefire will remain resolute. Our efforts towards de-escalation will remain strong. And our work for a real, dignified, sustainable, long-term peace in the region, based on two States that gives real perspective to Palestinians and security to Israel, will remain unwavering.
We cannot ignore the ripple effects of instability. What happens in Eastern Europe, in the Middle East, in Northern Africa or anywhere else near our borders, does not just stay isolated – it has consequences for Europe. Nowhere is this more visible than in the area of migration.
On Migration
The EU Migration and Asylum Pact, which we adopted earlier this year after a decade of political impasse, offers a pathway forward. But it will not work if, in moments of pressure, we undermine what we have built together. That is why it is important that we scale-up efforts to swiftly implement the Pact.
Our commonly agreed-to framework that protects our borders, but that is also fair with those eligible for protection, that is firm with those not eligible and who must be safely and swiftly returned, and that – critically – is harsh against the trafficking networks, including malign States like Russia and Belarus using hybrid threats, preying on the vulnerable and weaponising migration.
The nature of these hybrid threats [coming from Russia and Belarus] require us to think outside the box. We must respond to those actors who seek to abuse the systems we built for the betterment of man, against the very humanity they are meant to protect. And we can do so within the parameters of our values and legal frameworks.
The key here is cooperation. The real solution is a European solution – one that is broad, that is holistic, and that is sustainable. Because only a coordinated European approach can ensure the integrity of our Schengen area.
Source: Switzerland – Federal Administration in English
Federal Department of Foreign Affairs
Lausanne, 17.10.2024 – Address by Federal Councillor Ignazio Cassis, Head of the Federal Department of Foreign Affairs (FDFA) – Check against delivery
Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,
I’d like to begin by saying, at the end of this day, that my thoughts go out to the Ukrainian people suffering in the midst of this war, to those who have lost a parent, a loved one, a child.
Mine action is not an end in itself. It saves lives and limbs and is a precondition for sustainable development in affected places. In Ukraine, confronted with such a large-scale contamination, it is stage Zero of reconstruction and the recovery process.
In other words: Mine action is anything but a quiet road. And at the end of this high-level day of the conference, I am proud to report that we have paved the way for continued international cooperation and support in this area.
Our shared commitment to humanitarian mine action has brought together high-level representatives from governments, international and regional organizations, the private sector and academia.
Your participation has demonstrated the importance of this collective engagement — not just for Ukraine, but for the global community.
A lot has already been done, with three Recovery Conferences in Lugano, London and Berlin; last year’s International Conference on Demining in Zagreb; and all technical discussions which have led us to Lausanne today.
Throughout the day, we’ve explored key issues that have touched us, provided insights and hopefully brought us a step further. With much work ahead and concrete engagement needed.
Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,
Switzerland is actively financing projects in Ukraine that make a real difference on the ground, saving lives by reducing risks for the civilian population.
In the vast territories suspected of mine contamination, we are supporting rapid surveys and efforts to return cleared land to productive civilian use.
Our focus has been particularly strong in the Kharkiv region, which has seen the highest number of mine-related accidents. Here, we partner with the Fondation suisse de déminage FSD, one of the most experienced demining operators in Ukraine.
We will continue this impactful collaboration: last week, my government has decided to allocate an additional 30 million CHF to the FSD so that it can expand its activities in the Kharkiv and Kherson regions until 2027.
Starting in 2025, these efforts will be enhanced by innovative technologies, including the use of detection dogs and Swiss-made demining machines. Moreover, we place great importance on developing local expertise, with the aim of supporting a Ukrainian humanitarian demining NGO to become fully autonomous by 2027.
Switzerland also engages in risk education and in victim assistance programs. We are working to prevent new victims and to assist the survivors who have suffered injuries by mines and explosive remnants of war. Supporting their rehabilitation and reintegration remains central to our mission.
Additionally, Switzerland was one of the first to support the UN initiative to return agricultural land to farmers, an effort that has now received broad international backing. This project is vital to restarting agricultural production in contaminated areas, contributing to both local and global food security.
At the same time, we should not forget the continuous challenges in affected countries around the world and Switzerland will keep up its assistance. Based on the Swiss Action Plan for 2023-2026, we will continue strengthening the norms against mines, supporting mine action on the ground and promoting innovative solutions.
Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,
Mine action in Ukraine is done for Ukraine, with Ukraine – and to a large part by Ukraine. Mine action programs should be nationally owned and led, supported by international and national partners.
In Ukraine, the basis for our cooperation and assistance is the recently adopted National Mine Action Strategy and the Operational Plan.
It is now my honor to present to you the outcome document of this Conference: the Lausanne Call for Action.
This document reflects our collective will to take concrete steps. We want to support the implementation of the strategy and address mine contamination in Ukraine and around the world.
The Lausanne Call for Action focuses on the three key pillars: People, Partners, and Progress.
• Under the People pillar, we commit to carrying out safe and high-quality mine action activities and to restore contaminated land to safe and productive use. We will also address the needs of victims and people with disabilities.
• Under Partners, we call to continue international cooperation and to promote sustainable national capacities. The goal is to foster long-term and all-encompassing cooperation aligned with national strategic objectives.
• The pillar Progress underscores the importance to explore new sources of funding. We emphasize the value of exchanging experiences, best practices and lessons learnt and want to develop and use innovative methods and technologies.
Ladies and Gentlemen
This document is not just another declaration; it is a commitment — a call for collective action to restore safety, rebuild lives, and sustain long-term recovery.
Our efforts will remain on the global agenda, with our eyes set on the next Ukraine Mine Action Conference in 2025, which will be hosted in Japan.
I sincerely hope that by then, we’ll be able to talk about both demining and peace in Ukraine.
In closing, I thank you all for your participation, engagement, and dedication. The journey continues tomorrow with technical discussions, and I encourage you all to contribute to those essential conversations.
Thank you.
Address for enquiries
FDFA Communication Federal Palace West Wing CH-3003 Bern, Switzerland Tel. Press service: +41 58 460 55 55 E-mail: kommunikation@eda.admin.ch Twitter: @SwissMFA
Source: The White House
2:15 P.M. EDT
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Okay. So, I’m just going to get straight to it.
As you can see, I have the national security advisor, Jake Sullivan, here to talk to us about the trip but also the latest in the Middle East.
Jake, the floor is yours.
MR. SULLIVAN: So, I don’t know if you guys have heard because of the lack of Wi-Fi back here, but the IDF has confirmed the death of Yahya Sinwar, the Hamas leader, and I’ll come to that in just a moment.
But let me start by laying out what we hope to achieve over the course of the next 24 hours in Berlin. This is the president’s first visit to Berlin as president, and he did not want his time in office to go by without going to the capital of one of — one of our most important partners and allies.
Germany is a core Ally in NATO, a core partner in the G7. They’ve been a core player in the Allied response to Russia’s brutal invasion of Ukraine. And the president is looking forward to having the opportunity to talk to the chancellor and other German officials about where we go from here in Ukraine; about developments in the Middle East, in Iran, Lebanon, Gaza, Israel; about how we align our respective approaches on the PRC; about how we align our industrial and innovation strategies; about artificial intelligence and the clean energy transition.
He will also have the opportunity to meet with the prime minister of the UK and president of France. The four leaders — Germany, France, UK, U.S. — will sit together to particularly focus on two issues.
One, the war in Ukraine and the pathway ahead, particularly in light of the fact that they’ve all had the opportunity to engage in person with President Zelenskyy over the course of the last few weeks and heard from him about where he sees things going. So, this is an opportunity to consult on that.
And then, second, to talk about the ongoing and fast-moving developments across the Middle East region.
The president will see President Steinmeier. He’ll spend one-on-one time with Chancellor Scholz. He’ll spend time with his delegation — with Chancellor Scholz and his delegation.
And then, of course, there’ll be this meeting among the four leaders in the afternoon, and there’ll be an opportunity for press statements with the chancellor and the president.
So, that’s the plan for tomorrow.
Of course, this comes against the backdrop of a pretty significant — very significant day in the Middle East, and that is that Yahya Sinwar has been taken off the battlefield. This is a murderous terrorist responsible for the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust. He has a lot of blood on his hands — Israeli blood, American blood, Palestinian blood — and the world is better now that he’s gone.
President Biden has just put out a written statement sharing his thoughts and reactions to the death of Sinwar, and he looks forward to the opportunity soon, perhaps very shortly, to speak to Prime Minister Netanyahu to congratulate the IDF and the brave Israeli soldiers and security professionals who carried out the operation that killed Sinwar but also to talk about the way forward, because Sinwar was a massive obstacle to peace and the day after in Gaza. And now that that obstacle has been removed, President Biden looks forward to talking to Prime Minister Netanyahu about how we secure the return of the hostages, an end to the war, and a move to the day after in Gaza — a Gaza where Hamas is no longer in power or control.
So they’ll have the opportunity to have an initial conversation about that, but this truly is an opportunity we need to seize together to bring about a better day for the people of Gaza, the people of Israel, the people of the whole region. And the United States is committed to doing everything in our power to help contribute to that.
Last thing I will say is that from shortly after October 7th, President Biden dispatched special operations personnel and intelligence professionals to Israel to work side by side with their Israeli counterparts in the hunt for Hamas leaders, including Sinwar, and it was with American intelligence help that many of these leaders, including Sinwar, were hunted and tracked, were flushed out of their hiding places, and put on the run. And, ultimately, this is a credit to the IDF for taking out Sinwar over the course of the last hours and days, but we’re proud of the support that the United States has given to the IDF all along the way.
So, with that, I’d be happy to take your questions.
Q Jake —
Q Can you say anything — well, go ahead. I’m sorry.
Q Jake, thanks so much for doing this. You kind of implied that Sinwar had been an obstacle to hostage release and ceasefire. How big an obstacle is that? And does this give you additional hope now of a ceasefire and possibly a hostage release? How should we process this?
MR. SULLIVAN: I didn’t just imply it; I stated it explicitly.
At various points along the way, Sinwar was more interested in causing mayhem and chaos and death than in actually trying to achieve a ceasefire and hostage deal. And we repeatedly saw moments where it was him, in particular, who stood in the way of making progress towards a ceasefire and hostage deal. Now, there were other obstacles too along the way, but he was certainly a critical one.
And, yes, I think his removal from the battlefield does present an opportunity to find a way forward that gets the hostages home, brings the war to an end, brings us to a day after. That’s something we’re going to have to talk about with our Israeli counterparts.
Of course, there are still other Hamas actors who need to be brought to justice, and there are hostages, including Americans, being held by terrorists. We’re going to have to deal with all of that, but we believe there is a renewed opportunity right now that we would like to seize.
Yeah.
Q Do you assess this as being the cutting off of the head of the Hydra, or what — what’s your assessment of Hamas’ capabilities from now on? Is there going to be a mop up? And what — what would you recommend the Israelis do?
MR. SULLIVAN: Sinwar was a critical figure operationally, militarily, and politically for Hamas. He had, in fact, consolidated control of both the political and military wing under his singular leadership in — in recent weeks and months. And so, this is a very significant event.
But what exactly it means for the future of Hamas as an organization, it’s early days yet. We will have to see.
What we do know is that the broad military structure, the battalions of Hamas have been systematically dismantled. We do know that Hamas does not pose the kind of threat to Israel that it posed on October 7th or anything close to it. We also know that there are still Hamas terrorists wielding guns and holding hostages and harboring a desire to continue to attack Israel and attack others.
And so, we’re going to have to sort through all of that. But this is an incredibly significant blow to Hamas. It is the removal of someone who, as I said, was unique in the consolidation of the control of the Hamas apparatus under his command. And now we will have to work to ensure that his death actually does deal the kind of long-term blow to Hamas that all of us would like to see.
Q Can you give —
Q Do you get the sense that Netanyahu is done now, that he’s — he’s reached his objectives? You just laid out the decimation of Hamas —
MR. SULLIVAN: No, his critical objective that — has not been reached. That objective is the return of the hostages, including American hostages. So, from the United States’ perspective, we now need to work with Israel, with Qatar and Egypt, with others — and this is something we’ll discuss with our European partners as well — to secure the release of those hostages. We’d like to see that happen.
Q You referenced U.S. intel. To what extent did that play a role in this particular operation?
MR. SULLIVAN: This operation was an IDF operation. I’m not here to overclaim or — or try to take credits for something where the credit belongs to them.
But the Americans — the special operations personnel, the intelligence professionals — they also deserve our thanks for the work that they did alongside the IDF over the course of many months to help create the kind of counterterrorism pressure in Gaza that put a lot of these guys on the run. And Sinwar was plainly on the run (inaudible).
Q Earlier this — earlier this week, Secretary Blinken and Secretary Austin sent letters to their counterparts threatening legal action if the humanitari- — humanitarian situation in Gaza doesn’t improve. Can you give us a sense of what that legal option would be and if there are any deadlines or specific actions that the president will raise with Prime Minister Netanyahu about that today?
MR. SULLIVAN: The letter speaks for itself. I think a lot of the headlines were breathless and overblown. We have had an ongoing dialogue with Israel for months now about improving the humanitarian situation. We have had previous communications that looked quite similar and that generated positive momentum towards opening crossings and getting more aid in. We’ve had, actually, constructive back-and-forth with our Israeli counterparts over the last few days in response to our requests, and we expect that we’ll see progress on the ground.
One thing that has unfolded this week is — is the reopening of some of the crossings that had been closed in the north and trucks going in. We need to see that sustained and expanded as we go forward, among the other requests in that letter.
But I’d — and I’d — just the other point I would make here is that it’s — it was a private diplomatic communication. It was a serious, substantive laydown. It’s part of our ongoing work and partnership with Israel. And having it all out there in the open, leaked in the way that it was, I think, was highly unfortunate. And I’ll leave it at that.
Q Can you give us a sense of what the president will say in this conversation with Netanyahu? Will he push for an accelerated timeline for a ceasefire? Will he say, you
know, kind of, “Now you achieved the main direct- — main objective and we should move forward on — on other things,” or push for humanitarian aid?
MR. SULLIVAN: I’m going to let the president speak to the prime minister before I preview what he’s going to say in the press on the record, but we’ll try to give you a good sense of both what the president is thinking and what he’s communicating to the prime minister at the appropriate time.
Q To — to what extent do you think this success with Sinwar might embolden Netanyahu when it comes to retaliating against Iran? Or do you see them as totally unrelated? And what are your conversations right now with them in terms of restraint — or whatever you want to call it — when the president has thoughts about what the target should be when they hit back?
MR. SULLIVAN: We’ve had very constructive communications with the Israelis about how they’re thinking about responding to the attack on October 1st. Those conversations will continue.
I can’t speculate as to the psychology of the prime minister based on what happened today. What I can say is that the logic of deterrence, the logic of a response to a salvo of 200 ballistic missiles — nothing in the Middle East is unrelated, but that is a distinct logic from the killing of Sinwar today.
Q Jake, going back to the trip. What message will President Biden give his fellow leaders about America’s place in the world, given the uncertainty around our upcoming election?
MR. SULLIVAN: Say that again.
Q What reassurance will President Biden give his fellow leaders about America’s place in the world, given the uncertainty about our upcoming presidential election?
MR. SULLIVAN: What President Biden can do is what he’s done for four years, which is lay out his vision of America’s place in the world and point the way forward based on what he thinks are in America’s national security interests and in the interests of our close allies.
Beyond that, he can’t speak for anyone else and doesn’t intend to.
Q Is there any —
Q Does this change your calculus on whether Israel can come to the table on a ceasefire by the end of the year?
MR. SULLIVAN: I’m sorry?
Q Your calculus on whether a ceasefire could be reached by the end of the year.
MR. SULLIVAN: I have long since given up on making predictions or drawing timelines. All I can say is that we see an opportunity now that we want to seize to try to secure the release of the hostages, and we’re going to work at that as rapidly as we possibly can.
Q Give- — given the situation, would the president reconsider possibly holding a press conference during his time in Berlin? It would be good to hear from him firsthand on how he thinks about this and the situation in Ukraine.
MR. SULLIVAN: I will note for the record there are heads nodding. (Laughter.) I’ll also note for the record that that is a really fascinating way to bring the press into the middle of a world historical event. So — (laughter) — and I’ll leave it at that.
Q I’ll follow up on that. The president talks about democracy as being a key part of his administration, of his vision for America that you just referenced. Why would he not take questions from the press at what was originally going to be a state visit to Germany? I don’t understand.
MR. SULLIVAN: It’s fascinating how you guys can — (laughs) — make this the story.
Q It’s not the story. It’s just a question.
MR. SULLVIAN: I mean, honestly, I think invoking democracy and suggesting that President Biden is somehow insufficiently committed to it because of the structure of his press engagement on one day in Germany is a bit ludicrous.
Q I can ask a Germany question. So, a lot of the moves that President Biden has made both domestically and internationally have been characterized as “Trump-proofing” the — the, you know, U.S. government for a future Trump presidency.
How do you feel about that characterization? I’m talking about moves like bringing NATO under — forgive me, it’s too complicated to explain, but you know what I’m talking about.
So, do you think he’s Trump-proofing?
MR. SULLIVAN: I — I don’t like characterizations like that because they’re inherently political.
Q So, what is he doing, then?
MR. SULLIVAN: What the president is trying to do is to make our commitment to Ukraine sustainable and institutionalized for the long term. And every other ally agreed that that was the responsible thing to do.
The la- —
Q (Inaudible) necessarily reduced U.S. role, is that the idea?
MR. SULLIVAN: Not at all. The basic logic was what the president laid out at the Washington Summit this summer, which is the communiqué said Ukraine’s place, Ukraine’s future, is in NATO. There is work to do to get from here to there, including reforms and security conditions being met.
So, the question is, how do you build a bridge from where we are now to Ukraine’s eventual membership in NATO? And the answer to that question was the set of deliverables in Washington, including the institutionalization of the security support apparatus for Ukraine. That is what we were trying to accomplish, and that’s what we believe we did accomplish.
Q Jake, on Iran. Can you confirm and elaborate on reporting that President Biden directed the NSC to warn Iran that any attempt on President Trump’s life would be seen as an act of war?
MR. SULLIVAN: I will tell you that President Biden has taken this issue with the utmost seriousness. He asked to be updated on it regularly. He gives us direction for how to respond to it regularly and in a very serious and consequential way. We are following his directives and implementing them. And I’m not going to get into specifics on what that looks like.
Q Jake, what about these reports that President Trump and President Putin have had seven conversations? Are you worried about this? Are you worried about any sort of backdoor conversations President Trump is having with leaders?
MR. SULLIVAN: I do not know if that’s true or not, but obviously that would raise red flags if it were true.
Q Another one on — since you just said Putin. There’s been reporting in Germany that Chancellor Scholz said he would be open to speaking with President Putin ahead of the G20 if asked — sort of various ways he said it. Have you guys talked about this? Has he told President Biden about this? Do you think this would be a good idea to do a leader-level conversation with President Putin at this time?
MR. SULLIVAN: That has not come up between the chancellor and the president. You know, I was just in Germany at the end of last week with my German counterpart. That — the question of a call to Putin didn’t come up. So, I think that’s a question better put to the chancellor.
Q The official who briefed us yesterday about the Germany trip on the — on the phone mentioned that the Ramstein meeting would be rescheduled. Does that mean the president will be going back to Ramstein at some point, or what — what did that mean?
MR. SULLIVAN: We will hold a leaders-level Ramstein meeting virtually in November.
Q One more. On the frozen assets deal — the Russian frozen assets. What’s the progress on that there? I assume this comes up in the conversations. Is there a plan B if the EU doesn’t figure out a sanctions regime?
MR. SULLIVAN: I’m feeling very good about the progress that we’ve made on the G7 commitment to mobilize $50 billion from the proceeds of the Russian sovereign assets by the end of the year. We intend to meet that commitment, and we intend to make a contribution — the United States. The EU, obviously, has announced that it’s prepared to make a contribution. So are other partners. So, from my perspective, at this point, everything is on track.
Q Is there any update on when the president might talk to President Xi?
MR. SULLIVAN: No.
Thank you, guys.
Q Thank you.
Q Who you — wait, who are you rooting for in the playoffs, World Series?
MR. SULLIVAN: I’m a Minnesota Twins fan, so I can’t root for the Guardians, but I definitely can’t root for the Yankees.
I don’t know.
Q What about the Dodgers and Mets?
MR. SULLIVAN: Yeah, I’m watching, but actually I don’t — I’ve not clearly determined who I’d prefer to win. But, yeah, Dodgers or Mets.
Q Can you swing back and talk to us off the record later?
MR. SULLIVAN: Sure.
Q Great.
Q Thanks.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I don’t know. Is there any real thing — anything else to discuss? Let me t- —
Q The only thing I would say is we disagree with the suggestion that democracy and speaking — and taking questions from the press is “ludicrous.”
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: All right. Noted.
Q I would argue that our stories allow the president to have a relationship with the world, not just with other leaders, and the ability to talk openly will help that.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: All right. Noted. Noted.
Let’s move on.
So, just want to talk about an announcement. This is domestic, obviously, going to go to the — to that space. I just wanted to touch on an announcement very quickly.
And so, today, the Biden-Harris administration announced an additional $4.5 billion in student debt cancelation for over 60,000 public service workers, bringing the total number of public — of public service workers who have had their student debt canceled under the Biden-Harris administration to over 1 million people.
One such example is Kelly, a kindergarten teacher in Rhode Island, who had been paying off her student loans for a decade. After the student let her know that her debt had been canceled, she tol- — after the president, pardon me — she told us that after 12 years of marriage, she might be able to take the honeymoon she never had.
The president — the president’s administration made it a priority to fix the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program. Prior to our administration, only 7,000 public service workers had received relief since the program was established in 2007.
Thanks to the work of the Biden-Harris administration, as of today, 1 million teachers, nurses, firefighters, service members, first resp- — responders, and — and more who — who pursued careers in public service have gotten the relief they deserve.
The relief brings the total loan forgiveness approved by the Biden-Harris administration — administration to over $175 billion for nearly 5 million Americans. And while — meanwhile, our Republicans elected officials have repeatedly attempted to block student debt relief.
President Biden and Vice President Harris remain committed to making education affordable for all Americans.
With that, what else do you guys have for me?
Q I have a question.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Sure.
Q Did President Biden talk to Vice President Harris ahead of this trip to see if she had any message for the world leaders or to get her input on what the situation should be going forward?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: As you know, the president and the vice president talk regularly. I don’t have a specific call to — to read out, but I think you can see the last almost four years of the — what we’ve been able to do, what the president has been able to do on the world stage, certainly has been in partnership with the vice president. I know that she supports his trip and everything that he’s — he’s trying to do tomorrow in the — in the short trip that we have in — in Germany.
I just don’t have anything to read out as a call specifically on this trip.
Q Is the president or the administration facing pressure from allies to get something done after the election but before he is out of office? There’s been some talks that Zelenskyy — you know, whether that’s accelerating a push for Ukraine into NATO or — or other funding things for Ukraine?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Well, you’re talking about the victory plan. Certainly, I’m going to let the Ukr- — Ukrainians speak to their victory plan as it relates to that question about NATO.
Look, I think — I think what you have seen from this president, from this administration — obviously, including the vice president — is how much we have stand behind — next to, if you will — with Ukrainians and how they’re trying to beat back the aggression that we’ve seen from Russia. And you have not just seen us standing there. You’ve seen this president take action, and — which is why you see NATO much stronger than it was, and that’s why you see 50 countries have gotten behind Ukraine. And you heard us — you heard us lay out yesterday an additional assistance package that we have provided to Ukrainians.
And so, we’re going to have to continue — we’re going to continue having conversations with the Ukrainians on what they need on the battlefield and how else we can be helpful to them.
As it relates to their victory plan — as it relates to what’s next, I’m certainly going to let the Ukrainians speak directly about that.
Obviously, the president has had a conversation with the president, President Zelenskyy, on that plan. I just don’t have anything beyond that, and I’m not — certainly, I’m not going to get into hypotheticals from here.
Q The president at the funeral yesterday had a — what looked like a spirited conversation with former President Obama. Did you talk to him about what they discussed?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: No, it’s been kind of busy the last couple hours on the plane, as you can imagine.
Look, I’ll — I’ll say this. The president really very much looked — appreciated being there at the — at the funeral of Ethel Kennedy, who he saw as someone who was incredible and had a — was an incredible force, obviously, in her life, during her — her years. And what he wanted to do is — was to lift up — lift her up and speak to her accomplishment and what she meant to him — not just to him but to her family and to the country. So, he appreciated doing that.
And we have said many times the president and — and president — and former President Biden [Obama] — they have a very close relationship. They’ve had one for a long time, obviously, as he served as his vice president.
I don’t have anything else to — to share on that. I have not had this conversation with the president. Obviously, we’ve been pretty busy these past couple of hours on the plane.
Q Do you know if the president was able to watch any of the Fox News interview that Vice President Harris did? And does —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yes, he —
Q — did he talk to you about how — how she did?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah, he was able to — to catch that. And he saw her performance, her interview as strong. And I think what you saw and what — and this is what he believes — is that you saw why Americans and people want to see her continuing to fight for them. And that’s what he saw last night. That’s what we all saw — many of us saw. So, I think she was strong and incredibly impressive in that interview.
Q Karine, does the president believe that his vice president would be a markedly different leader?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I mean, look, he talked about this on Tuesday when he was in Philly, and he — and I talked a little bit about this as well, just reit- — really reiterating what the president shared, which is that, look, she’s going to be essentially her own person, right? She is going to have her own direction, her own view of how to move forward.
And he did that, right? He was loyal to President Obama when he was vice president, but he cut his own path. And so, that’s what he expects from the vice president to do.
So, nothing — nothing new. That’s what he expects her to do — to have her own path, to have — to build on — certainly, to build on the economic successes that we have seen and continuing the — the work that we’ve been able to do.
But she’s going to cut her own path. He was very clear about that a couple days ago.
Q Karine —
Q But on student loans — you talked about the PSLF 1 million, a huge achievement for those borrowers — what’s your message for the other 40 million-plus borrowers who’ve been caught up in a lot of legal limbo over the past three years?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Look, I’ll — I’ll say this. You know, I’m not going to speak to the legal — the legal components of this. There are legal matters that are happening, so they are ongoing. So, I’m not going to speak to that.
But I think what you can take away from what this president has — trying to do, when Republicans have continued to block him, in promising to give Americans a little bit of breathing room, to make sure that Americans who have — borrows [borrowers] who have loans and — and are squeezed by those loans are not able to, you know, buy a home, start a family.
The president was very attuned to that and very clear that he wanted to give them an opportunity — an opportunity to really, you know, be able to — to start that life that they wanted. And so, he’s been trying to do that, even though he’s been blocked and — and Republicans have gotten in the way.
I think you can see over the past — certainly, the past six months, the president continuing to try to take actions to — to make sure he kept his commitment to Americans who, again, need a little bit of breathing room.
So, I’m not going to speak to the legal matter, but I think this announcement today shows his commitment to public service workers, right? I talked about firefighters, nurses. I talked about police officers, who put so much on the line, who give so much for — for everybody, for folks who need their assistance and their help, and wanted to give them that opportunity to really be able to — to move on economically in what they want to accomplish for themselves and for their family.
All right. Anything else?
Q On the —
Q So —
Q Sorry. Go ahead.
Q Sorry.
Now going back to the funeral for a minute. Did he speak with Speaker Emeritus Pelosi? And also, she was not seen at the Italian American celebration, when she’s been front and center in the past. Was she not invited?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I — I don’t have anything to share with you on that. I didn’t talk to the president about that at all. But what you saw — obviously, you saw the president and the former president, Pres- — President Obama, connect, have a moment together. The president m- — very much looked forward to that. I just don’t have anything on Nancy Pelosi.
Q Just —
Q I noticed he didn’t recognize her when he recognized the other two presidents at the funeral.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Well, he wanted it — I can say this. He wanted it to be, you know — to — to be very focused on the family. He wanted it to be, you know, brief and — and very poignant. And that’s what his focus was yesterday on his remarks.
Q On the trip. Obviously, this is a abbreviated agenda from, you know, the Ramstein summit —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah.
Q — and other things.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah.
Q But can you explain to us, what’s the reason that it’s so short? Why do we have to get out of Germany at 4:00 p.m. tomorrow? Is there a reason on the German chancellor’s schedule why we have to —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, I mean —
Q Regardless of the press conference, there was also talk about maybe doing a Holocaust memorial situation. What’s —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: No, I totally understand what — totally — as you — let’s step back for a second.
The reason that the president had to postpone his trip was because Hurricane Milton was coming, and it was — it was forecast to be a historical hurricane, and the president wanted to be in the States to deal with the response and what was needed, certainly, by the impacted region, for what folks on the ground really needed.
And so, that’s why we postponed the trip. We said that we wanted to certainly get that back on the books. We were able to do it — to your point, a truncated version, but it is a robust schedule. And we were able to work with the Germans and to be able to get done what we can on this trip.
I mean, the president has a busy schedule. He does. There’s a lot going on in the next couple days, couple weeks.
Q But he has to get back to the States for something in particular —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I mean, we’ll —
Q — that we don’t know about?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: We’re certainly going to share with you what the — his — the next couple of days of his schedule is going to look like. But he wanted to — and I said this yesterday in the briefing room. He wanted to thank the chancellor for his partnership, for his leadership as well with Ukraine. Outside of the U.S., U- — the U- — German is the second — have provided the second-most resources, assistance to Ukrainians.
And so, he wanted to be, you know, thankful to him. And so, that’s what you’re seeing on this trip. He wanted to make this happen. He asked his team to make this trip happen.
And so, look, we have a busy schedule. We got a lot going on in next couple of days, next couple of weeks. And so, we tried to fit this in, and this is what we were able to do in working with the German government as well to make this happen.
Q Does the president, as the election hits its final two weeks, expect to get more aggressive in outreach and participation? Is that maybe what you’re referencing, or what’s his thinking on that?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, you know I can’t speak to political trips or any- —
Q But if —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: But wa- —
Q — you could speak on his schedule.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Well, I — I’m just — want to get that out of there. And so, look, the president is certainly looking at — looking forward to being out there and supporting the vice president.
I just want to be super mindful. But he will — you’ll see him — you’ll see him hit the road. You’ll see him hit the road, for sure.
That’s all I got.
All right. Thanks, everybody. Sorry my voice is a little hoarse.
Q Thanks, Karine.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Thanks, everybody.
2:45 P.M. EDT
Source: United States Senator for Delaware Christopher Coons
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Chris Coons (D-Del.) and Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) today announced plans to introduce the Advancing Digital Freedom Act of 2024, which would equip the U.S. State Department with the authorities to elevate digital freedom as a cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy and support its critical role in advancing democratic governance around the world. Companion legislation will also be introduced in the House by Representatives Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-Calif.) and Young Kim (R-Calif.).
“As a global leader of human rights, the United States must deter authoritarian and illiberal states that are using advanced technologies to threaten human rights alongside our own national security,” said Senator Coons. “Protecting digital freedom abroad is a cornerstone of American foreign policy for the modern age, and that is why we must cooperate with like-minded countries to develop and deploy emerging technology in a manner that respects democracy and rule of law. As Co-Chair of the Senate Human Rights Caucus, I’m confident that this bill will help protect digital freedoms and counter global misinformation and disinformation in partnership with our allies.”
“With increasing cyber threats and attacks on the horizon than ever before, working with our allies to counter them is all the more important,” said Senator Tillis. “Protecting and promoting digital freedom across the globe must be a priority, which is why I look forward to introducing this bipartisan legislation to ensure the Department of State continues to prioritize this as a cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy.”
“Digital technology has both benefits and drawbacks when it comes to advancing democracy,” said Congresswoman Kamlager-Dove. “It can enable citizens to access information, share ideas, and organize while simultaneously allowing for authoritarian regimes to spread propaganda, enhance surveillance, and stifle free speech. We must ensure that digital technologies are used to strengthen democracy, not dismantle it. It is crucial for the United States to develop a comprehensive strategy to safeguard digital freedom worldwide and work with partners to implement this plan. Promoting human rights and democracy at home and abroad must remain a bipartisan issue, and I am proud to advance these priorities with a bipartisan, bicameral group of congressional colleagues.”
“The Unholy Alliance, including the People’s Republic of China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea, relies on abusive surveillance technologies to restrict access to information and the outside world and to maintain their grip on power,” said Congresswoman Young Kim, Chair of the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Indo-Pacific. “To remain a global human rights leader, the United States cannot stand idly by as these authoritarian regimes use digital technologies and platforms to suppress innocent civilians, religious minorities, and political dissenters. I am proud to join Representative Kamlager-Dove and Senators Coons and Tillis to lead this bipartisan, bicameral effort to protect the right to international digital freedom. I’ll keep fighting to ensure the United States promotes global human rights and protects freedom-loving people around the world.”
The right to freedom of expression has become a fault line between pro-democracy groups and authoritarian governments. Digital platforms, including social media, have been crucial tools for movements such as the Mahsa Amini protests in Iran or the Umbrella Movement in Hong Kong. However, autocratic governments have attempted to stifle these efforts by cracking down on digital freedom. Russia and China deploy digital tools to identify and silence dissidents, Iran routinely blocks access to thousands of websites conveying political content, and North Korea and Venezuela coordinate disinformation campaigns to undermine citizens’ access to credible information. To address such threats to digital freedom, the Advancing Digital Freedom Act would strengthen the United States’ role in leading efforts to ensure technology is used to uphold human rights, democratic values, and the rule of law.
Specifically, the bill would:
Elevate digital freedom as a foremost foreign policy priority of the United States;
Empower the Coordinator for Digital Freedom in the State Department’s Bureau of Cyberspace and Digital Policy to lead global efforts to protect digital freedom, counter disinformation and misinformation, and advance democratic governance in the digital space;
Encourage the State Department to engage with foreign governments, nongovernmental organizations, and other actors to coordinate efforts to defend digital freedom against digital authoritarianism; and
Require the Bureau of Cyberspace and Digital Policy to submit an annual report to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the House Foreign Affairs Committee on the state of global digital freedom, including analysis of emerging and concerning trends impacting digital freedom.
As Co-Chairs of the Senate Human Rights Caucus, Senators Coons and Tillis are committed to the promotion and protection of human rights and democracy through U.S. foreign policy. Recently, the caucus has held briefings and issued statements on the state of conflict and human rights across the globe, including in the Horn of Africa, Ukraine, and across Latin America.
The text of the bill is available here.
Source: United States Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn)
MINNESOTA – With stops today in three remaining counties: Aitkin (American Peat Manufacturing); Carlton (local airport), and Kanabec (Lakes & Pines Community Action Council), U.S. Senator Amy Klobuchar has once again visited every one of Minnesota’s 87 counties in one year.
“The best way for me to do my job is by listening to the people of Minnesota and getting things done for them,” said Klobuchar. “That’s why every year I meet with Minnesotans all over our state and discuss what we can get done together. From expanding child care and housing to supporting local businesses, I’m committed to taking action on the issues that matter most.”
Today, Klobuchar toured American Peat Technology in Aitkin and then went to the Cloquet Airport in Carlton County which is developing a new storage hanger thanks to federal funding. Klobuchar ended the day in Mora and visited the Lakes and Pines Community Action Council.
This year, Klobuchar’s stops included:
1. Aitkin • Toured American Peat Technology and met with their leadership team.
2. Anoka • Gave remarks at the USA Cup Opening Ceremony in Blaine. • Attended the 43rd annual Game Fair and discussed conservation policy with Ron Schara. • Participated in Coon Rapids 4th of July Festivities. • Attended the Blaine Festival.
3. Becker • Led a child care discussion and toured the Boys & Girls Club of Detroit Lakes LEAP Preschool.
4. Beltrami • Led a breakfast discussion with Bemidji City and Beltrami county and tribal leaders. • Spoke at the dedication ceremony of the new Bemidji Veterans Home, toured it with veterans, and met with Red Lake Band Members.
5. Benton • Toured SNX Technologies Inc. and met with their leadership.
6. Big Stone • Discussed agriculture with local farmers while touring Anne Schwagerl’s farm.
7. Blue Earth • Visited Mankato in the aftermath of severe flooding with Mankato mayor and Representative Finstad. • Met with family and friends of Sergeant Cade Wolfe.
8. Brown • Attended the community celebration at the Pheasant Opener in Sleepy Eye and spoke at the Pheasants Forever land dedication. • Toured the New Ulm Airport’s recent upgrades and met with local leaders.
9. Carlton • Toured the new Cloquet airport hangar with airport leadership and the Cloquet mayor.
10. Carver • Led a discussion with the City of Chaska mayor and public safety leadership about their Emergency Operations Center project. • Toured the town of Carver with the mayor in the aftermath of severe flooding. • Attended the Highway 212 Groundbreaking Ceremony. • Spoke to veterans at the Chanhassen Memorial Day event.
11. Cass • Led a community discussion with the Walker mayor and local business leaders.
12. Chippewa • Spoke with veterans and toured the new Montevideo Veterans Home.
13. Chisago • Discussed regional tourism and toured the Franconia Sculpture Park.
14. Clay • Celebrated the launch of the federally funded Moorhead 11th Street Underpass project. • Attended the Reimagine Romkey Park event.
15. Clearwater • Toured TEAM Industries and met with their leadership.
16. Cook • Visited the North Shore Winery and Coho Cafe.
17. Cottonwood • Toured Red Rock Rural Water Treatment Center and visited with local leaders.
18. Crow Wing • Met with the mayor and city leadership about the Highway 210 expansion in Brainerd. • Toured the new YMCA child care center.
19. Dakota • Gave remarks at the Kaposia Library opening in South Saint Paul. • Met with Burnsville first responders. • Attended the opening ceremony of the Veterans Memorial Greenway in Inver Grove Heights. • Met with law enforcement and community leaders in Hastings to highlight the Cooper/Davis Act that requires social media to alert authorities when controlled substances are being distributed illicitly on their platforms. • Attended an event in Inver Grove Heights to highlight the new Criminal Justice Network for Minnesota law enforcement. • Led the Survivor March and delivered remarks at the Susan G. Komen 32nd Annual Race for the Cure in Eagan.
20. Dodge • Met with the owner and toured Chaotic Good Brewery in Kasson.
21. Douglas • Led a discussion at the Alexandria YMCA about their child care program.
22. Faribault • Met with leadership and toured Winnebago Manufacturing in Blue Earth.
23. Fillmore • Toured Harmony Enterprises manufacturing facility and their child care center. • Toured the new Preston State Veterans Home and met with veterans.
24. Freeborn • Led a discussion and toured the Freeborn/Mower Electric Cooperative in Albert Lea.
25. Goodhue • Met with students and school leadership to hear about the Red Wing Flight Path workforce training program. • Spoke at the 50th Anniversary Jaunt With Jim bike ride in Cannon Falls.
26. Grant • Toured the West Central High School Greenhouse and the Central Lakes College’s mobile meat cutting trailer and met with FFA students and their instructors.
27. Hennepin • Attended the annual MLK Breakfast. • Delivered remarks at the Asia Mall Lunar New Year celebration in Bloomington. • Delivered Remarks at the MN Newspaper Association Convention. • Met with officers at the Minneapolis Second Precinct Station. • Convened a meeting with the Metropolitan Airport Commission leadership to hear updates on aviation safety and passenger experience. • Delivered remarks at the Stand with Ukraine Two Year Commemoration event. • Spoke at the Annual Parkinson’s Foundation Walk in Plymouth. • Delivered remarks at the Celebrating the Sistas Awards Ceremony and presented the Icon Award honoring Laysha Ward. • Delivered remarks at the MN Ovarian Cancer Alliance Gala. • Visited Woodlake Nature Center in Richfield and met with staff. • Spoke at the 78th Annual Paralyzed Veterans of America National Convention. • Participated in the groundbreaking event for the St. Louis Park Cedar Lake Road Reconstruction project. • Spoke at the Annual Somali Independence Day Street Festival. • Delivered remarks at the Hazelden Betty Ford Foundation 75th Anniversary Gala. • Toured the I-494 construction site and met with local project leaders in Bloomington. • Attended the Minnesota Business Partnership Annual Dinner. • Attended the Twin Cities Pride Parade and Festival in Minneapolis. • Honored the Legendary Cornbread Harris at an event with his son Jimmy Jam. • Attended Champlin Father Hennepin Festival. • Convened a meeting with the Metropolitan Airport Commission leadership to hear updates on aviation safety and passenger experience. • Attended the Charles Lindbergh Richfield Post Office Dedication Ceremony. • Presented the Spirit of Hospitality Award at the Bloomington Travel and Tourism Diamond Service Awards Gala. • Attended the Niron opening and met with local businesses and Shakopee Band investors.
28. Houston • Led a discussion with leadership and toured the Houston County airport in Caledonia.
29. Hubbard • Toured a workforce housing development and met with local leaders.
30. Isanti • Toured the North Star Child and Family Advocacy Center in Braham.
31. Itasca • Met with leadership and toured the KOOTASCA Child Care Hub.
32. Jackson • Met with first responders to discuss the new EMS telemedicine ambulance in Jackson.
33. Kanabec • Toured the Lakes and Pines Community Action Council and visited with leaders.
34. Kandiyohi • Toured the Life Link III Air Base at Willmar Municipal Airport. • Attended the four lane Highway 23 completion celebration.
35. Kittson • Met with owners and toured Far North Distillery.
36. Koochiching • Met with the team at the Voyageurs National Park Headquarters.
37. Lac qui Parle • Toured PURIS Plant-Based Protein manufacturing facility and met with leadership.
38. Lake • Visited the iconic Betty’s Pies in Two Harbors.
39. Lake of the Woods • Met with county leadership about their new water safety equipment.
40. Le Sueur • Led a discussion with the Le Sueur Sheriff and other local leaders and toured the department. • Viewed the flood damage and met with leadership in Waterville about federal assistance.
41. Lincoln • Led a discussion at Lyon-Lincoln Electric Co-Op with their leadership.
42. Lyon • Visited the farm of Carolyn and Jonathan Olson in Cottonwood.
43. McLeod • Participated in the Winsted Post Office Rededication Ceremony to James A. Rogers, Jr.
44. Mahnomen • Toured the White Earth Nation College with Chairman Fairbanks and members of the Tribal Council.
45. Marshall • Toured North Valley Health Center Community Hospital in Warren.
46. Martin • Toured the CHS soybean processing facility in Fairmont.
47. Meeker • Toured the Doosan Bobcat manufacturing plant and met with leadership in Litchfield.
48. Mille Lacs • Met with the owner and enjoyed breakfast at the Bee Cafe in Milaca.
49. Morrison • Delivered remarks at the Memorial Day program at the Minnesota State Veterans Cemetery in Little Falls. • Met with the mayor and area leadership to discuss the Little Falls bridge project.
50. Mower • Led a discussion and toured the Hormel Foods child care center in Austin. • Attended the I-90 bridge project groundbreaking ceremony in Austin.
51. Murray • Met with the owners and got a tour of Painted Prairie Vineyard in Currie.
52. Nicollet • Toured KATO Engineering and met with leadership in North Mankato. • Delivered remarks and presented the Purple Heart at a ceremony honoring Corporal Earl Meyer in St. Peter.
53. Nobles • Met with CEDA and county officials to discuss child care projects and solutions in Worthington. • Toured the Highway 59 federally funded street project with Worthington leadership.
54. Norman • Convened a meeting with Norman County leadership to discuss the West Central Regional Water District project.
55. Olmsted • Delivered remarks at the Minnesota Police and Peace Officers Association Annual Legislative Conference in Rochester. • Attended the Memorial Day Rochester Honkers game. • Toured the Mayo Clinic’s new Kellen building. • Delivered remarks at the Soldier’s Field Aquatic Center improvements opening ceremony. • Led a discussion with county leadership and law enforcement about efforts to combat illegal fentanyl use in Rochester.
56. Otter Tail • Met with leadership from Pioneer Kids Child Care and toured the facility in Fergus Falls with Fergus Falls Chamber of Commerce members.
57. Pennington • Visited Northern Woodwork Inc. in Thief River Falls. • Met with city and business leadership at Rivers and Rails Brewing Company.
58. Pine • Toured Pine Technical & Community College and met with leadership.
59. Pipestone • Met with local leaders at the Pipestone Airport to discuss improvement plans.
60. Polk • Met with child care and city leaders at the Prairie Pines Child Care Center in Fosston.
61. Pope • Met with staff and toured Clyde Machines in Glenwood with the mayor and Pope County leadership.
62. Ramsey • Toured PAR Systems in Shoreview. • Delivered remarks at the St. Paul Firefighters Local 21 Installation celebration. • Gave welcome remarks at the Thai Songkran Festival opening ceremony. • Delivered remarks at the Official State Memorial Day event at Fort Snelling. • Spoke at the Hmong Freedom Festival in St. Paul. • Hosted Secretary Becerra at the Episcopal Homes Senior Living Center to highlight Medicare drug pricing. • Hosted tourism event at the Minnesota State Fair in Falcon Heights. • Toured the Carter Work Project in St. Paul with Habitat for Humanity leadership. • Delivered remarks at the Military Appreciation Day event at the MN State Fair. • Spoke at the CLUES Fiesta Latina in St. Paul. • Toured Delkor Systems in Arden Hills with Ex-Im Bank Director Herrnstadt. • Led a round table discussion with Ex-Im Bank director and Minnesota business leaders. • Delivered remarks at the St. Paul Kellogg-Third Street Bridge Construction Kick Off event. • Attended the Serving Our Troops Event in support of military families. • Attended St. Paul St. Patrick’s Day festivities. • Toured the Neighborhood Development Center with Secretary Yellen
63. Red Lake • Led a discussion about the Farm Bill with the Minnesota Wheat Growers Association and Minnesota Barley Growers Association.
64. Redwood • Delivered remarks and met with agricultural leaders at Farmfest.
65. Renville • Toured K&M Manufacturing in Renville and met with employees.
66. Rice • Met local leaders and manufacturers to tour a planned child care facility in Faribault. • Toured flood damage and met with leadership in Northfield.
67. Rock • Toured the new child care center under construction in Luverne.
68. Roseau • Attended annual Hockey Day Celebration activities in Warroad.
69. Saint Louis • Toured flood damage in downtown Cook with the mayor and local leaders. • Toured the flash flood damage in Biwabik with the mayor and local leaders. • Joined Duluth mayor to highlight the success of their flood mitigation projects. • Visited the Blatnik Bridge to highlight its need for repair. • Attended Fourth of July festivities in Aurora, Gilbert, Eveleth, Tower, and Ely. • Presented a flag to the Ely mayor at Ely Memorial High School in commemoration of their 100th Anniversary Celebration. • Attended Labor Day events in Duluth and Virginia.
70. Scott • Met with Scott County Sheriff leadership, viewed the new rescue equipment, and toured the 911 Dispatch Center in Shakopee.
71. Sherburne • Met with leadership of the Wave Youth Center in Big Lake to tour and discuss their expansion project for middle and high school-aged youth.
72. Sibley • Toured the Heartland Ethanol Plant in Winthrop with company leadership.
73. Stearns • Delivered remarks at the annual St. John’s Boys’ Choir Spring Gala in St. Cloud. • Spoke at the St. Cloud VA Medical Center 100th Anniversary celebration. • Toured the St. Cloud Coborn’s with business leadership.
74. Steele • Convened a discussion with Owatonna High School staff and Chamber of Commerce leadership about their Youth Skills Training Program.
75. Stevens • Met with the Chancellor of UMN Morris and toured the campus.
76. Swift • Toured the Swift County Historical Museum in Benson and met with leadership.
77. Todd • Met with company leadership of EnterpriseCP Manufacturing and toured the facility.
78. Traverse • Led a discussion with Browns Valley mayor and fire chief to hear about fire department operations.
79. Wabasha • Toured Pepin Manufacturing Inc. in Lake City. • Spoke at the Governor’s Fishing Opener Kick-Off in Lake City.
80. Wadena • Met with Central Lakes College leaders to discuss their Butchery Program and federal partnerships.
81. Waseca • Met with staff and toured Winegar Manufacturing in Waseca.
82. Washington • Spoke at the 1st Annual Momentous Music Festival with Brian Mueller in Woodbury, honoring Aimee Muller. • Attended the Hugo Good Neighbors Day festivities.
83. Watonwan • Visited the farm of Harold Wolle in St. James.
84. Wilkin • Toured CHI St. Francis Health and met with leadership in Breckenridge.
85. Winona • Visited local businesses in Winona with Chamber of Commerce leadership to discuss tourism.
86. Wright • Attended the I-94 West Corridor Coalition Gap Project Groundbreaking Ceremony in Monticello which received federal funds.
87. Yellow Medicine • Met with leadership and visited the Yellow Medicine County Historical Society and Museum. • Walked the Dave Smiglewski Memorial Trail in Granite Falls with the Smiglewski Family.
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
Foreign Secretary David Lammy arrives in China on two-day trip, which will include meetings in Beijing and Shanghai
Foreign Secretary arrives in China on two-day trip, which will include meetings in Beijing and Shanghai
UK is taking a consistent, strategic and pragmatic approach to China which prioritises the UK national interest
Foreign Secretary will urge China to stop its political and economic support of the Russian war effort
The UK is to take a stable, consistent and pragmatic approach to China, with engagement vital between two global players. That is the message the Foreign Secretary David Lammy will deliver as he lands in Beijing today.
The Foreign Secretary will meet with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi in Beijing on Friday (18), with talks which will cover a breadth of issues, from climate and trade, to global foreign policy challenges including Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine.
In Shanghai, the Foreign Secretary will meet with British business leaders to discuss how our economic links with China support growth in the UK.
Foreign Secretary David Lammy said:
As permanent members of the UN Security Council with major global economies, the UK and China are global players. Our relationship matters.
Engagement with China is pragmatic and necessary to support UK and global interests. From stopping Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine, to supporting a global green transition, we must speak often and candidly across both areas of contention as well as areas for cooperation in the UK’s national interest.
UK diplomatic efforts with China will be one of serious, stable and pragmatic reengagement across the full spectrum of government, prioritising the UK’s national interests.
This will come with a firm recognition that the UK and China will not, and do not, always agree. We have significant differences including on democratic values and freedoms, Hong Kong and support for Russia’s illegal war in Ukraine; but we also have shared interests, including a global green energy transition, and deep economic links, with China including Hong Kong the UK’s 4th largest trading partner.
The Foreign Secretary’s visit is a reflection of the consistent, strategic and pragmatic approach the UK government will take to managing the UK’s relations with China – co-operating where we can; competing where we need to; and challenging where we must.
European Council President Charles Michel held a press conference at the end of the meeting held on 17 October 2024. EU leaders adopted conclusions on Ukraine, Middle East, competitiveness, migration and foreign affairs. Ahead of this meeting, EU leaders and leaders from the Gulf region gathered in the first EU-Gulf Cooperation Council summit on 16 October 2024.
Hundreds of parliamentarians, from some 130 countries, gathered at the 149th IPU Assembly in Geneva, have adopted a resolution reaffirming unwavering support for multilateralism through the United Nations system and other global institutions.
Against a backdrop of escalating conflicts around the world, the consequences of climate change and the risk of pandemics, resulting in a multiplication of humanitarian crises, lawmakers emphasized the urgency of a collective response and cooperation at the international level.
The resolution, put forward by the IPU’s founding Members, France and the United Kingdom, along with Germany, the Netherlands and Canada, calls for a “complete rejection of the indiscriminate targeting by armed forces of civilians, wherever they may be, particularly emergency personnel, health and education workers, and medical, education and other public infrastructure”.
The resolution was reinforced by the IPU’s Committee to Promote Respect for International Humanitarian Law, which issued a plea for the international community to pressure the parties to the conflict in Israel, Lebanon, and Gaza, to take action to avert a full-scale war.
The Assembly also provided a space for intensive parliamentary diplomacy, including meetings of the IPU’s various international parliamentary bodies which contribute to peace-building efforts, such as the Task Force for the peaceful resolution of the war in Ukraine and the Committee on Middle East Questions.
Other outcomes on science, technology and Artificial Intelligence (AI)
The global parliamentary also adopted a landmark resolution on The impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on democracy, human rights and the rule of law.
The resolution urges parliaments worldwide to swiftly develop and implement robust legal frameworks and policies for the responsible creation, deployment and use of AI technology.
Key demands of the resolution include:
Mitigating risks to democracy, human rights and the rule of law, with a particular focus on the disproportionate impact of AI on women and girls
Legislating against deepfake intimate images and AI-generated content that fuels hate speech or incites violence
Developing tools to verify the origin of online images and content, empowering users to discern authenticity
Reviewing and updating existing legislation to close loopholes exposed by AI advances.
The resolution underscores the need for parliaments to stay ahead of the curve in regulating AI, striking a balance between innovation and the protection of fundamental rights.
IPU Charter on the Ethics of Science and Technology
During the Assembly, the Governing Council adopted a new Charter on the Ethics of Science and Technology.
Drafted by the IPU’s Working Group on Science and Technology, the Charter underscores the critical role of scientific knowledge in parliamentary decision-making and the ethical considerations essential for governing emerging technologies.
Key highlights of the Charter include:
Emphasizing ethical responsibilities in scientific advancements
Advocating for equitable global participation, and addressing gender, social and economic inequalities
Outlining key principles for regulating science and technology, including enacting laws promoting societal values, the preservation of research freedom, international cooperation and sustainability considerations.
The Charter recommends that legislators maintain parliamentary structures for presenting evidence-based information, engage with competent organizations on ethics, develop checklists for scrutinizing legislation and consult civil society.
Geneva Declaration on science and technology
In their final Declaration, legislators expressed resolve to harness and regulate science, technology and innovation (STI) for the benefit of humanity.
The Declaration emphasizes the need to bridge digital divides, protect human rights, and foster international cooperation in STI governance.
Parliamentarians pledged to implement these commitments through legislative, budgetary and oversight actions, striving for an equitable and technologically advanced world.
Background
The 149th IPU Assembly took place from 13-17 October 2024 in Geneva, Switzerland. It was attended by over 630 MPs, including 54 Speakers of Parliament and 36 Deputy Speakers. Around 36% of the MPs were women and some 25% were young MPs under 45.
The 150th IPU Assembly will take place in Tashkent, Uzbekistan from 5-9 April 2025.
The IPU is the global organization of national parliaments. It was founded in 1889 as the first multilateral political organization in the world, encouraging cooperation and dialogue between all nations. Today, the IPU comprises 181 national Member Parliaments and 15 regional parliamentary bodies. It promotes peace, democracy and sustainable development. It helps parliaments become stronger, younger, greener, more innovative and gender-balanced. It also defends the human rights of parliamentarians through a dedicated committee made up of MPs from around the world.
Source: The White House
On the occasion of President Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s visit to Germany, the United States reaffirms its commitment to deepening the close and historic bond between the two nations as Allies and friends. For over 75 years, Germany has been a crucial partner in ensuring the stability, security, and prosperity of the transatlantic alliance. In October 2023, President Biden welcomed President Steinmeier to Washington during German-American Day, underscoring the enduring people-to-people ties between our two countries, including the over 40 million Americans who claim German heritage and strengthen the diverse fabric of the United States. In February 2024, President Biden welcomed Chancellor Olaf Scholz to the White House, where the two leaders reaffirmed their support for Ukraine’s defense against Russia’s war of aggression, discussed regional stability in the Middle East, and prepared for the NATO Summit in Washington.
During his visit to Germany, President Biden will underscore our mutual commitment to upholding democracy, combating antisemitism and hatred, and expanding collaboration to promote economic growth and technological innovation. In addition, he will express gratitude to Germany for its role in hosting approximately 39,000 U.S. service members and its vital contributions to the security of NATO and the broader transatlantic community.
The United States and Germany are partners in a wide range of new and continuing initiatives to address the most pressing challenges of our time, some of which are listed below.
