The “world is failing” people living with disabilities, UN deputy chief Amina Mohammed has told a major summit which aims to galvanize global efforts to ensure they are fully integrated into all parts of society.
Although persons with disabilities represent a sizeable 16 per cent of the world’s population, they still experience a range of health inequities, including premature deaths, poorer health outcomes, and higher disease risk when compared to the general population.
Addressing the Global Disability Summit in Berlin in a video message on Monday, Ms. Mohammed said that providing opportunities to people with disabilities “is a matter of dignity, of humanity, of human rights,” adding that it is a test not only of “our common values,” but also “plain common sense.”
Conflict zones
The Deputy Secretary-General highlighted the vulnerability of people living in conflict areas such as Gaza, Ukraine and Sudan, noting that Gaza now has the highest number of child amputees in modern history.
“Too often, persons with disabilities also face inaccessible evacuation routes, shelters, and services – an assault on their human rights and dignity,” she said.
UN research shows that they are often among the first casualties in conflict.
The UN deputy chief focused on a young Palestinian woman called Mai, working for the United Nations in Gaza, who “did not let her muscular dystrophy or her wheelchair confine her dreams.”
Mai, a top student, became a software developer for the UN, “bringing skill and determination to all she did,” but in November 2023, Ms. Mohammed said, “she was killed along with her family,” adding that her story still weighs heavily on our hearts.”
Internationally protected rights
The rights of people living with disabilities are protected by a treaty adopted in 2006 at the United Nations.
The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities is recognized as the first comprehensive human rights treaty of the 21st century which “clarifies and qualifies how all categories of rights apply to persons with disabilities and identifies areas where adaptations have to be made for persons with disabilities to effectively exercise their rights.”
In the wake of the Convention, nearly 90 per cent of developing countries have laws or policies protecting education for persons with disabilities, yet only about one-third of those countries have accessible schools.
Half of all people with disabilities in the same countries face inaccessible transportation.
“Behind these figures are people,” said Ms Mohammed.
The ongoing war in Gaza has displaced more than 1.9 million people, many who seek shelter in makeshift tents.
“Children shut out of classrooms. Adults who cannot get to work. Families denied essential services. This must change. And we must all be part of it.”
The Global Disability Summit 2025 is taking place in Berlin from 2-3 April and is expected to bring some 4,000 people together. It has been organized by the governments of Jordan and Germany in collaboration with the International Disability Alliance.
One significant outcome is expected to be the “Amman-Berlin Declaration on Global Disability Inclusion.”
Question for written answer E-001263/2025 to the Commission Rule 144 Piotr Müller (ECR), Waldemar Buda (ECR)
An EU decision on the temporary suspension of duties and quotas on Ukrainian agricultural products, with a view to supporting Ukraine’s economy in the face of Russian aggression, has been in force since June 2022. Ukraine is hoping for a further extension to the current agreement, which is set to expire on 5 June 2025.
In recent months, some Member States, especially those bordering Ukraine, have expressed concern over the destabilisation of their agricultural markets due to the increased influx of Ukrainian products, which has led to the introduction of protection mechanisms as well as numerous discussions in the Council.
In connection with the above:
1.Does the Commission intend to extend the current agreement on duty-free trade with Ukraine beyond 5 June 2025 and, if so, under what conditions?
2.What is the Commission’s assessment of this trade agreement’s consequences on Member States’ economies to date, especially in relation to its effect on the EU’s agricultural markets?
3.Has the Commission consulted Member States on this issue and, if so, what were the results of those consultations?
MEPs want the EU to respond determinedly to Russia’s aggression in Ukraine, conflict in the Middle East, and the return of so-called “great power” politics.
The EU should meaningfully increase and speed up support for Ukraine, to put it in a position of strength and deter any further aggression by Russia following a potential ceasefire agreement ,MEPs say in two reports adopted on Wednesday.
In the report on Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) adopted by 378 votes in favour, 188 against and 105 abstentions, Parliament warns Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine erodes Europe’s security architecture, by destabilising and threatening the Eastern European neighbourhood and the Western Balkans.
Concerned about rising tensions in the Middle East, MEPs are asking EU foreign affairs chief Kaja Kallas to produce a comprehensive EU strategy for the region and to increase Europe’s presence there. Calling for lasting peace and security for both Israelis and Palestinians, MEPs welcome the prospect of a return of the Palestinian Authority to Gaza and express support to the Global Alliance for the Implementation of the two-State Solution.
Cooperation with partners, including the US
In light of intensifying efforts by China, Russia, Iran, and others to destabilise the existing international order and undermine multilateralism, the report says enhanced cooperation and coordination by the EU with like-minded partners is essential. MEPs are worried about the fast pace at which the new US administration is reversing established partnerships and dismayed by its policy of appeasing Russia and targeting traditional allies. Nonetheless, MEPs believe it is more crucial than ever to continue engaging with the US. They encourage member states to pursue bilateral diplomatic channels with their US counterparts as the format of cooperation preferred by the US administration, while at the same time demonstrating unity and commitment to a common EU position.
Robust and credible security guarantees for Ukraine
In the report on Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP), adopted by 399 votes in favour, 198 against and 71 abstentions, MEPs express their deep concern about the apparent shift in the United States’ stance on Russia’s war of aggression. They strongly deplore any attempts at blackmailing Ukraine’s leadership into surrendering to the Russian aggressor for the sole purpose of announcing a ‘peace deal’(AM 15).
The resolution says a possible peace agreement, which respects Ukraine’s independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity, needs to be accompanied by robust and credible security guarantees in order to deter future Russian aggression. MEPs welcome the recent efforts in this regards with like-minded NATO partners as well as the European Council conclusions of 20 March 2025 that underline that the EU and member states are ready to contribute to security guarantees, in particular by supporting Ukraine’s ability to defend itself effectively (AM 23).
Close coordination and cooperation between the EU and NATO
The resolution further stresses that close coordination on deterrence and collaboration between the EU and NATO is needed for the development of coherent, complementary and interoperable defence capabilities and the reinforcement of Europe’s industrial production capacity. MEPs concur with the wider ambition to strengthen the European pillar within NATO, but they reiterate that the development of a European Defence Union should go hand-in-hand with the deepening of EU-NATO cooperation.
Finally, Parliament wants the Commission to raise common debt to provide the EU with the fiscal capacity to borrow in exceptional and crisis situations now and in the future. MEPs say Europe is “now experiencing a pressing need to boost security and defence for protecting EU citizens, restoring deterrence and supporting the EU’s allies, first and foremost Ukraine”. The burden of these actions should, MEPs argue, be shared fairly (AM 101).
Quotes
The rapporteur on the Common Foreign and Security Policy David McAllister (EPP, DE) said: “We underscore the importance of a determined, disciplined and assertive EU foreign policy to address geopolitical challenges such as the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine, the conflicts in the Middle East, and growing geopolitical competition. The EU must be able to fulfil and defend its own strategic objectives on the international stage. Parliament’s contribution can help shape a medium- to long-term strategic vision that guides the High Representative’s priorities throughout this legislature and into the future.”
“This report provides a basis for how the EU should respond to the geopolitical paradigm shift we are witnessing around the world. The European Union has to take its future into its own hands. We will need to work closely in the coming years with the United States on security and defence, but in the longer term, the EU also needs to establish its own credible dissuasive powers. To do this, we need to invest a lot more in our own security and defence, while also demonstrating political unity and determination. We also need to continue to provide strong support to Ukraine as they continue to defend Europe’s territorial integrity, independence and values.”
Question for written answer E-001291/2025 to the Commission Rule 144 Petra Steger (PfE)
The threat posed by Russia, despite its rather limited military successes after more than three years of war in Ukraine, is being deliberately exaggerated in EU propaganda in order to instil maximum fear in the European population and create a supposed need for debt-financed arms build-up programmes costing billions. For instance, citing European intelligence service reports, Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Kaja Kallas have been warning for months about an attack by Russia on EU Member States that may be in the offing over the next few years. Those intelligence service reports also form the basis for the Commission’s case for the EUR 800 billion ‘ReArm Europe’ military build-up plan presented on 4 March 2025. However, no mention is made by those in charge of what this supposed attack might specifically involve or how Russia’s army, which is not in good shape, would be able to make such a threat a reality.
1.What are the specific European intelligence service reports that are cited by the Commission, and what solid evidence and information is there that backs up its alarming warnings?
2.How does the Commission justify the potential misuse of unrealistic intelligence service reports to provide grounds for a debt-financed arms build-up programme costing billions?
3.What other security threat analyses have been contracted by the Commission, and how high do they assess the likelihood of an actual attack by Russia on EU Member States?
While peace negotiations on Ukraine have been reshaped since the election of US President Trump, Members of the DROI subcommittee, the Delegation to the EU-Russia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee and the Delegation to the EU-Ukraine Parliamentary Association Committee will exchange on Monday 7 April with Mariana Katzarova, UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Russian Federation and Oleksandra Matviichuk, Head of the 2022 Nobel Peace Prize Centre for Civil Liberties.
Scheduled from 15.00 to 16.30, the exchange will focus on the importance, if peace is to be sustainable, of ensuring that human rights priorities are integrated into discussions on a potential peace arrangement in Ukraine and of supporting international justice for ensuring accountability of perpetrators of aggression, war crimes and other breaches of international humanitarian law. The debate will be an opportunity to recall that Russian Federation’s breaches of human rights – such as torture, enforced disappearance, deportation, rape and acculturation of children – are not only a domestic issue but have profound implications for peace and security, in Ukraine and beyond the region. It is organised by the DROI subcommittee in association with the two delegations.
On 10 April 2025, the AFET and BUDG Committees will hold a second Ukraine Facility Dialogue in the framework of the Article 37 of the Ukraine Facility Regulation. The Ukraine Facility is a EUR 50 billion instrument, disbursed in stages, which represents one of the cornerstones of the EU’s strategy for the recovery, reconstruction and modernisation of Ukraine in the wake of Russia’s war of aggression.
Members will have the opportunity to discuss with Commissioner Marta Kos the state of play of the implementation of the Facility, in particular the Ukraine Plan and related reforms, Ukraine’s progressive alignment to the EU acquis, as well as the payments made. Ukraine Facility Dialogues shall be held at least every four months.
NEW YORK, April 02, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Affiliate Credo, a leading platform in health and fitness reviews, has released an updated overview of TestoPrime, a widely discussed natural testosterone support supplement for men looking to improve strength, performance, and energy levels in 2025.
The review provides timely insights into how TestoPrime continues to gain popularity among athletes, bodybuilders, and aging individuals seeking to support their testosterone levels through plant-based and clinically studied ingredients.
With a focus on transparency, safety, and research-backed components, TestoPrime reflects a growing trend in natural supplementation for hormone support and muscle enhancement.
Key Benefits of TestoPrime:
Naturally increases testosterone production
Supports lean muscle growth and strength
Enhances endurance and training performance
Reduces post-workout fatigue and supports recovery
Improves mental focus and drive
Pros:
Natural, clean formula backed by research
No prescription required
Produced in FDA-approved, GMP-certified facilities
Lifetime money-back guarantee
Noticeable results in strength, stamina, and recovery
Cons:
Requires daily use for best effects
Higher cost compared to generic supplements
Why TestoPrime Is Being Noticed in 2025
According to recent analysis conducted by Affiliate Credo, TestoPrime remains one of the most talked-about testosterone support supplements in the natural wellness space. Its formula includes:
D-Aspartic Acid – promotes the release of luteinizing hormone
Ashwagandha Extract – helps manage cortisol levels for improved recovery
Fenugreek – linked to enhanced performance and stamina
Panax Ginseng, Zinc, and Vitamin D – support hormonal balance and energy metabolism
These ingredients work synergistically to support lean muscle development, post-workout recovery, and overall vitality.
Supplementation and Fitness Trends
Affiliate Credo’s 2025 supplement outlook shows that more consumers are seeking hormone-support formulas that do not rely on synthetic hormones or prescriptions.
TestoPrime is positioned as a product that aligns with this demand, offering a blend that supports testosterone levels naturally while appealing to both younger athletes and older adults managing age-related decline.
You can learn more about the product breakdown and detailed ingredient insights by visiting our website.
“Our goal at Affiliate Credo is to deliver reliable supplement reviews based on performance, scientific validation, and user feedback,” said the editorial team. “TestoPrime has maintained strong consumer interest due to its transparent formulation and consistent results.”
About Affiliate Credo
We are involved in affiliate marketing and create reviews of health-related products.
The information provided in this article has not been reviewed or approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
TestoPrime is not designed to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any medical condition or illness.
Results may differ from person to person. It’s strongly recommended to consult with a licensed healthcare provider before beginning any supplement routine, especially if you are under medical care, pregnant, nursing, or taking prescribed medications.
Mentions of scientific studies or institutions are shared solely for general educational purposes related to men’s health and well-being. They do not serve as an endorsement of TestoPrime.
The European Investment Bank Group’s advisory services are helping projects get off the ground worldwide and have contributed to mobilising close to €200 billion of investment in 2024, according to the annual EIB Advisory Report released today. Advisory staff work with clients to prepare projects, support strategic planning and market development, and offer training to the public and private sectors.
In 2024, the demand for EIB Group advisory services continued to be especially high in Southern and Eastern Europe. Most advisory assignments targeted cohesion regions, with an increased focus on climate adaptation, environmental sustainability, innovation and digitalisation. In total, EIB Advisory worked on more than 500 new advisory assignments in 2024 and managed around 1,430 ongoing advisory assignments.
Beyond the European Union, EIB Advisory helps clients of EIB Global, the international arm of the European Investment Bank, to identify and prepare projects. In 2024, advisory assignments helped to rebuild infrastructure in Ukraine, supported growth in the Western Balkans, encouraged deeper partnerships with countries close to the European Union, and promoted sustainable investments to meet the Global Gateway agenda in developing countries.
EIB Group President Nadia Calviño commented: “Our advisory services are helping to unlock investments that make a real difference across all regions – for people, economies and the environment. Providing the right advice and supporting our local partners to get projects off the ground is a vital part of our work at the EIB Group.”
The report presents EIB Advisory work for each of the EIB Group’s eight core strategic priorities and provides a series of case studies. The report is available in digital format here.
Following is the text of UN Deputy Secretary-General Amina Mohammed’s video message at the opening of the Global Disability Summit in Berlin today:
I am truly sorry that I could not join you in person today, but it is a true honour to open this third Global Disability Summit. More than that, I want to thank you for your leadership and commitment to shape a more just world.
Expanding hope and opportunities for people with disabilities is close to my heart — and that of the Secretary-General. It is a matter of dignity, of humanity, of human rights. It is a test of our common values. And it is also plain common sense.
When persons with disabilities can fully participate in society, societies are stronger. When we unlock potential and recognize talents, economies and communities thrive. When we advance human rights, all of humanity moves forward.
Disability rights are human rights — and everyone one wins when we make them real. And so I thank the International Disability Alliance and the Governments of Germany and Jordan for bringing us together.
You are meeting at a crucial time — with the five-year clock ticking on the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. I was involved in the shaping of that agenda — and saw firsthand how so many of you helped put the rights and hopes of persons with disabilities front and centre.
In doing so, you gave deeper meaning to the promise of leaving no one behind — and laid the foundation for the progress we strive to advance today.
The Pact for the Future, adopted last year, reinforces that call for a more peaceful, inclusive, accessible and equitable world — with persons with disabilities a full and equal part of our shared effort to advance sustainable development, climate action and digital transformation.
Yet today, we face a sobering truth.
Progress is not just slow — in some cases, we are moving backward. The UN Disability and Development Report found that about 98 per cent of the SDG [Sustainable Development Goal] indicators for persons with disabilities are off track.
This is far more than a statistic — it is a wake-up call. Persons with disabilities are being left behind. The world is failing them.
We are seeing growing and stark inequalities across the board — with higher poverty, greater unemployment, deeper food and health insecurity and more limited access to digital technologies.
Women, Indigenous Peoples, rural residents with disabilities, and persons with intellectual or psychosocial disabilities face even greater exclusion.
Not to mention those in humanitarian and emergency situations. In Gaza, Ukraine, Sudan and elsewhere, countless civilians have sustained permanent injuries and deep psychological trauma. Children with disabilities are especially vulnerable. Gaza alone has the highest number of child amputees in modern history.
Too often, persons with disabilities also face inaccessible evacuation routes, shelters, and services — an assault on their human rights and dignity. Many are deprived of the assistive devices critical to their survival. When I think of people with disabilities in conflict, I think of people like Mai. Mai was a young Palestinian, and a proud employee of the United Nations, living and working in Gaza. Mai did not let her muscular dystrophy or her wheelchair confine her dreams.
She was a top student, became a software developer and devoted her skills to working on information technology for the United Nations. When given the opportunity, she excelled — bringing skill and determination to all she did. Unfortunately, she was killed along with her family in November 2023. Her story still weighs heavily on our hearts.
I share it not only to honour her memory, but because it reminds us both of what is possible when barriers are removed and of the terrible truth that persons with disabilities are often among the first casualties in conflict.
Despite the challenges, we have much to build upon. The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities has led to significant legislative progress worldwide. Yet, implementation is lagging.
The problem is not always a lack of will, but a lack of resources. Nearly 90 per cent of developing countries have laws or policies protecting education for persons with disabilities — yet only about one third of those countries have accessible schools.
Meanwhile, almost half of all persons with disabilities in these countries face inaccessible transportation. Behind these figures are people. Children shut out of classrooms.
Adults who cannot get to work. Families denied essential services. This must change. And we must all be part of it. The United Nations is committed to leading by example.
Our UN Disability Inclusion Strategy is striving to drive action across the system. We are working to strengthen institutional capacities, mainstream disability inclusion across our work, and expand employment opportunities for persons with disabilities.
At the country level, we are working to ensure that our cooperation frameworks with Governments are fully inclusive of the needs and rights of persons with disabilities.
And we are committed to supporting Member States turn global commitments into local progress — for and with persons with disabilities. This Summit presents opportunities to strengthen cooperation with all partners — and reaffirm the leadership of organizations of persons with disabilities.
Development assistance for disability inclusion has been growing — but it is still far from enough. And in today’s troubling context, it is under increasing threat. So too, perversely, is the very concept of accessibility.
Developed countries in particular have a responsibility to step up support. Now is the time to recommit to the 2030 Agenda by securing decent work and dignified livelihoods, fostering inclusive education and career opportunities, building accessible and affordable housing, promoting equitable health systems and harnessing technologies that enable autonomous living for all.
That means investing in inclusive public institutions, empowering representative organizations as full partners in policy and implementation, and integrating disability inclusion into national development plans backed by clear targets and real funding.
I know so many of you have spent years, even decades, breaking down barriers and opening doors — for all of us. Let this Summit help drive that action forward.
As we look ahead to the Second World Summit for Social Development in Qatar and beyond, let’s together send a clear message: Inclusion is not optional. Rights are not negotiable. Accessibility is essential. Promises made must be promises kept. Let’s keep fighting for the inclusive, just, sustainable future for all that our world needs.
Source: United States Senator for North Dakota John Hoeven
04.01.25
WASHINGTON – Senator John Hoeven (R-North Dakota) joined Senators Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Connecticut) and 49 bipartisan senators in introducing legislation to impose primary and secondary sanctions against Russia and actors supporting Russia’s aggression in Ukraine. These sanctions would go into effect if Russia refuses to engage in good faith negotiations for a lasting peace with Ukraine or initiates another effort, including military invasion, that undermines the sovereignty of Ukraine after peace is negotiated.
“Our legislation sends a clear message that if Russia rejects peace or escalates its aggression, there will be serious repercussions,” said Hoeven. “The sanctions and tariffs on those supporting Russia’s actions aim to foster peace by holding all aggressors accountable.”
Joining Senators Hoeven, Graham and Blumenthal in cosponsoring the legislation are Senators Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska), Dick Durbin (D-Illinois), Katie Britt (R-Alabama), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-Rhode Island), Todd Young (R-Indiana), Angus King (I-Maine), Pete Ricketts (R-Nebraska), Tim Kaine (D-Virginia), Kevin Cramer (R-North Dakota), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minnesota), John Curtis (R-Utah), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Tom Cotton (R-Arkansas), Maggie Hassan (D-New Hampshire), Deb Fischer (R-Nebraska), Angela Alsobrooks (D-Maryland), Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Roger Wicker (R-Mississippi), Jeanne Shaheen (D-New Hampshire), Thom Tillis (R-North Carolina), Peter Welch (D-Vermont), Markwayne Mullin (R-Oklahoma), Chris Coons (D-Delaware), Tim Sheehy (R-Montana), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-New York), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Mark Kelly (D-Arizona), Jon Husted (R-Ohio), Elissa Slotkin (D-Michigan), Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), John Hickenlooper (D-Colorado), John Cornyn (R-Texas), Michael Bennet (D-Colorado), Shelley Moore Capito (R-West Virginia), Ruben Gallego (D-Arizona), John Fetterman (D-Pennsylvania), John Boozman (R-Arkansas), Chris Van Hollen (D-Maryland), James Lankford (R-Oklahoma), Martin Heinrich (D-New Mexico), Rick Scott (R-Florida), Adam Schiff (D-California), Jim Justice (R-West Virginia), Elizabeth Warren (D-Massachusetts), Steve Daines (R-Montana) and Jack Reed (D-Rhode Island).
CAMP ARIFJAN, KUWAIT – The ongoing conflict in Ukraine has provided essential lessons in logistics and supply chain management, including agility, flexibility, and real-time visibility. As the Army reduces its forward troop presence globally and the primary and secondary threats remain high, modernizing Army Prepositioned Stock (APS) is crucial to keep pace with Army 2040 and maintain deterrence relevance amidst increasing global projection requirements. Leveraging new technologies such as autonomous drones, augmented reality lenses, predictive fleet management technology, and smart warehousing will help meet the demands of a future operational environment characterized by increased complexity, uncertainty, and competition.
Source: France-Diplomatie – Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Development
Today, April 1, 2025, France takes over the presidency of the United Nations Security Council for a period of one month.
The Security Council has the primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security and, as a permanent member, France is committed to working with its partners to enable it to respond to current challenges and conflicts.
France succeeds Denmark, which effectively assumed the presidency of the UNSC last month, and precedes Greece, which will take up this function in May, and the French presidency of the Council is therefore at the heart of a “European quarter” of the presidency of the Security Council, through which we mark, together, our commitment to effective multilateralism and respect for the Charter of the United Nations and international law.
In the face of current challenges, the guiding principle of our presidency will be to make multilateral dialogue prevail over power relations.
The war of aggression waged by Russia against Ukraine since February 2022, in defiance of the most fundamental principles of international law, will be at the heart of our mobilization, and France will continue its efforts in favour of a just and lasting peace for Ukraine, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.
The situation in the Middle East will be the subject of a ministerial meeting at the end of the month, chaired by the Minister for Europe and Foreign Affairs, to which international and regional partners will be invited, which will illustrate France’s commitment to peace in that region, and will be part of the preparations for the international conference on the two-state solution co-organised in New York by France and Saudi Arabia.
Given the seriousness of the ongoing conflicts, France will pay particular attention to the situation in the Great Lakes, those in Sudan and South Sudan, as well as in Haiti.
The French presidency will also be at the initiative with meetings devoted to peacekeeping operations and the protection of humanitarian workers, two strong commitments to support those who, on the ground, provide assistance to vulnerable populations, and to ensure effective multilateralism, France will continue to demonstrate its commitment to the reform of the Security Council in order to improve its representativeness.
Throughout its presidency, France will have as its sole compass its commitment to multilateralism, the United Nations system and respect for international law for the maintenance of international peace and security.
Source: United States Senator for Arkansas – John Boozman
WASHINGTON––U.S. Senator John Boozman (R-AR) joined Senators Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and a bipartisan collection of more than three dozen other senators to introduce primary and secondary sanctions against Russia and actors supporting Russia’s aggression in Ukraine.
These sanctions would be imposed if Russia refuses to engage in good faith negotiations for a lasting peace with Ukraine or initiates another effort, including military invasion, that undermines the sovereignty of Ukraine after peace is negotiated. The legislation also imposes a 500 percent tariff on imported goods from countries that buy Russian oil, gas, uranium and other products.
“In 1994, as part of the Budapest Memorandum, Ukraine gave up approximately 1,700 nuclear weapons with a promise from the U.S., Russia and United Kingdom that Ukraine’s sovereignty would be honored in the future. This failed to deter Russian aggression. In 2014 and 2015, the Minsk agreements were reached to end Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, but again, it did nothing to deter future aggression. In 2022, Russia invaded Ukraine once more, leading to deaths of hundreds of thousands of people and the displacement of millions.
“It is our hope that in 2025, President Trump and his team will achieve what has eluded the world in the past: ending Russian aggression against Ukraine permanently and ensuring the survivability of a free and democratic Ukraine. These sanctions against Russia are at the ready and will receive overwhelming bipartisan, bicameral support if presented to the Senate and House for a vote.
“We support an immediate ceasefire to secure a lasting, honorable peace,” the senators said.
The sanctions are cosponsored by U.S. Senators Dan Sullivan (R-AK), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Katie Britt (R-AL), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Todd Young (R-IN), Angus King (I-ME), Pete Ricketts (R-NE), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Kevin Cramer (R-ND), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), John Curtis (R-UT), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Tom Cotton (R-AR), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Deb Fischer (R-NE), Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD), Joni Ernst (R-IA), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Roger Wicker (R-MS), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Thom Tillis (R-NC), Peter Welch (D-VT), Markwayne Mullin (R-OK), Chris Coons (D-DE), Tim Sheehy (R-MT), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Mark Kelly (D-AZ), Jon Husted (R-OH), Elissa Slotkin (D-MI), Chuck Grassley (R-IA), John Hickenlooper (D-CO), John Cornyn (R-TX), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), Ruben Gallego (D-AZ), John Hoeven (R-ND), John Fetterman (D-PA), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), James Lankford (R-OK), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Rick Scott (R-FL), Adam Schiff (D-CA), Jim Justice (R-WV), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Steve Daines (R-MT) and Jack Reed (D-RI).
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
Press release
“New partnership” between defence and private sector set to boost UK defence sector
Major venture capitalists from across Europe can help unlock billions of pounds of private investment into UK technology and defence firms, as part of a “new partnership” between defence and private investors, the Defence Secretary has said today.
Defence Secretary John Healey at a table speaking with investors.
Influential investors convened in London to discuss future routes to defence financing.
Government’s record spending uplift and reforms will help unlock private-sector investment into UK defence, Defence Secretary said.
Defence “is an ethical investment” as Government set to back Britain’s high-growth companies with new innovation funding.
Comes alongside up to £250 million of Government investment into UK firm to help boost missile defence.
In a first-of-its-kind meeting between venture capital firms and a UK Defence Secretary, John Healey MP spoke at a breakfast roundtable at Plural’s offices in central London. The meeting was convened by Plural co-founder Khaled Helioui, and Grace Cassy of Ten Eleven Ventures who has supported the development of the Strategic Defence Review as part of the Defence Review Team.
In a changing world, with increasing threats and war in Europe, the group discussed how to incentivise greater private investment into defence and deep technology, to help deter Britain’s adversaries, secure the UK economy, protect the incomes of hard-working families up and down the country and support European security.
The Defence Secretary set out how the Government’s largest sustained increase in defence spending since the Cold War – with 2.5% of GDP spend by April 2027 and a commitment to hit 3% in the next Parliament – coupled with defence reforms, can unlock private sector investment into high-growth British firms – boosting jobs and delivering on the Government’s Plan for Change by making defence an engine for growth across the UK. This includes:
A new ambition to unlock more private defence investment, supported by long-term certainty of rising Government defence investment over the next decade, alongside the new Government direct expenditure target for SMEs including start-ups and scale-ups to give high-growth companies more certainty and sight of future investment.
Turbocharging innovation with a new £400 million ringfenced budget for UK Defence Innovation, announced by the Chancellor last week, alongside a commitment to spend 10% of the MOD equipment budget on novel technologies.
Making clear that “defence is an ethical investment” in deterring conflict and preventing the huge human and economic costs caused by conflicts such as Ukraine. It comes as some funds look to renegotiated Limited Partner Agreements to better enable investment into defence.
In a sign of the Government backing British firms with long-term public investment, the meeting comes as the Government confirms up to £250 million investment across the next six years with UK defence tech firm Roke – supporting around 150 jobs and delivering analysis, trials and technology development against ballistic and hypersonic missile threats.
Roke – based in Hampshire and focused on innovation and AI development – have been awarded a contract up to six-years in length, known as Science and Technology Oriented Research and development in Missile defence (STORM). The framework streamlines crucial research into innovative technologies, helping enhance the UK’s ability to detect, identify, and defeat ballistic and hypersonic missile threats – work that is essential to safeguarding the UK and its allies.
Defence Secretary, John Healey MP said:
In this new era of rising threats, national security isn’t just a military imperative. It’s the foundation for economic growth, securing Britain’s future and our Government’s Plan for Change.
As Defence Secretary, I am determined to bring together investors, innovators and industry in a new partnership that drives British jobs and growth. We want to mobilise private investors to take a fresh look at defence, alongside the certainty of our Government’s record long-term uplift in defence spending.
With countries across Europe facing new threats stepping up to take more responsibility for our continent’s defence is an ethical investment, and it’s good to see increasing numbers of private investors recognising that. There is no more important investment than in our European security.
As a government we are determined to tackle any blockers which are preventing private finance from flowing into UK defence, which is why today’s landmark meeting is so important.
The Defence Secretary also said the government is bringing “a clear mandate to bring innovative technology to the frontline at speed and enable the defence sector to create high-growth British success stories that deliver investor returns and national security.”
His Majesty King Abdullah II bin Al Hussein, King of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan,
H.E. Mr. Olaf Scholz, Federal Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany,
Mr. Nawaf Kabbara, Chair and President, International Disability Alliance,
Excellencies, Dear friends,
I am truly sorry that I could not join you in person today but it is a true honor to open this third Global Disability Summit.
More than that, I want to thank you for your leadership and commitment to shape a more just world.
Expanding hope and opportunities for people with disabilities is close to my heart – and that of the Secretary-General.
It is a matter of dignity… of humanity… of human rights.
It is a test of our common values.
And it is also plain common sense.
When persons with disabilities can fully participate in society, societies are stronger.
When we unlock potential and recognize talents, economies and communities thrive.
When we advance human rights, all of humanity moves forward.
Disability rights are human rights – and everyone one wins when we make them real.
And so I thank the International Disability Alliance and the Governments of Germany and Jordan for bringing us together.
You are meeting at a crucial time – with the 5-year clock ticking on the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
I was involved in the shaping of that agenda – and saw firsthand how so many of you helped put the rights and hopes of persons with disabilities front and center.
In doing so, you gave deeper meaning to the promise of leaving no one behind – and laid the foundation for the progress we strive to advance today.
The Pact for the Future, adopted last year, reinforces that call for a more peaceful, inclusive, accessible and equitable world – with persons with disabilities a full and equal part of our shared effort to advance sustainable development, climate action and digital transformation.
Yet today, we face a sobering truth.
Progress is not just slow – in some cases, we are moving backward.
The UN Disability and Development Report found that about 98 per cent of the SDG indicators for persons with disabilities are off track.
This is far more than a statistic – it is a wake-up call.
Persons with disabilities are being left behind.
The world is failing them.
We are seeing growing and stark inequalities across the board – with higher poverty, greater unemployment, deeper food and health insecurity and more limited access to digital technologies.
Women, Indigenous Peoples, rural residents with disabilities, and persons with intellectual or psychosocial disabilities face even greater exclusion.
Not to mention those in humanitarian and emergency situations.
In Gaza, Ukraine, Sudan and elsewhere, countless civilians have sustained permanent injuries and deep psychological trauma.
Children with disabilities are especially vulnerable.
Gaza alone has the highest number of child amputees in modern history.
Too often, persons with disabilities also face inaccessible evacuation routes, shelters, and services – an assault on their human rights and dignity.
Many are deprived of the assistive devices critical to their survival.
When I think of people with disabilities in conflict, I think of people like Mai.
Mai was a young Palestinian, and a proud employee of the United Nations, living and working in Gaza.
Mai did not let her muscular dystrophy or her wheelchair confine her dreams.
She was a top student, became a software developer and devoted her skills to working on information technology for the United Nations.
When given the opportunity, she excelled – bringing skill and determination to all she did.
Unfortunately, she was killed along with her family in November 2023.
Her story still weighs heavily on our hearts.
I share it not only to honour her memory, but because it reminds us both of what is possible when barriers are removed – and of the terrible truth that persons with disabilities are often among the first casualties in conflict.
Excellencies,
Ladies and gentlemen,
Despite the challenges, we have much to build upon.
The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities has led to significant legislative progress worldwide.
Yet, implementation is lagging.
The problem is not always a lack of will, but a lack of resources.
Nearly 90 per cent of developing countries have laws or policies protecting education for persons with disabilities – yet only about one-third of those countries have accessible schools.
Meanwhile, almost half of all persons with disabilities in these countries face inaccessible transportation.
Behind these figures are people.
Children shut out of classrooms.
Adults who cannot get to work.
Families denied essential services.
This must change.
And we must all be part of it.
The United Nations is committed to leading by example.
Our UN Disability Inclusion Strategy is striving to drive action across the system.
We are working to strengthen institutional capacities, mainstream disability inclusion across our work, and expand employment opportunities for persons with disabilities.
At the country level, we are working to ensure that our cooperation frameworks with governments are fully inclusive of the needs and rights of persons with disabilities.
And we are committed to supporting Member States turn global commitments into local progress – for and with persons with disabilities.
This Summit presents opportunities to strengthen cooperation with all partners – and reaffirm the leadership of organizations of persons with disabilities.
Development assistance for disability inclusion has been growing – but it is still far from enough.
And in today’s troubling context, it is under increasing threat.
So too, perversely, is the very concept of accessibility.
Developed countries, in particular, have a responsibility to step up support.
Now is the time to recommit to the 2030 Agenda by:
Securing decent work and dignified livelihoods;
Fostering inclusive education and career opportunities;
Building accessible and affordable housing;
Promoting equitable health systems;
And harnessing technologies that enable autonomous living for all.
That means investing in inclusive public institutions;
Empowering representative organizations as full partners in policy and implementation;
And integrating disability inclusion into national development plans – backed by clear targets and real funding.
Dear friends,
I know so many of you have spent years, even decades, breaking down barriers, and opening doors – for all of us.
Let this Summit help drive that action forward.
As we look ahead to the Second World Summit for Social Development in Qatar and beyond, let’s together send a clear message:
Inclusion is not optional.
Rights are not negotiable.
Accessibility is essential.
Promises made must be promises kept.
Let’s keep fighting for the inclusive, just, sustainable future for all that our world needs.
Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation FBI Crime News (b)
CEO and Commercial Manager of Iranian Company Charged in Connection with Conspiracies to Provide Material Support, Violate Export Control Laws and Commit Money Laundering
BROOKLYN, NY – Earlier today, in federal court in Brooklyn, a complaint was unsealed charging Iranian nationals Hossein Akbari and Reza Amidi, and an Iran-based Rah Roshd Company (“Rah Roshd”), with conspiring to procure U.S. parts for Iranian Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (“UAVs”), also known as drones, conspiring to provide material support to the IRGC, a designated foreign terrorist organization, and conspiring to commit money laundering. Akbari is the Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) of Rah Roshd. Amidi is the company’s commercial manager and was previously the commercial manager of Qods Aviation Industries (“QAI”), an Iranian state-owned aerospace company. They are both citizens of Iran and remain at large.
John J. Durham, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, Sue Bai, head of the Justice Department’s National Security Division, and Christopher G. Raia, Assistant Director in Charge, Federal Bureau of Investigation, New York Field Office (FBI), announced the charges.
“As alleged in the complaint, the defendants conspired to obtain U.S.-origin parts needed to manufacture drones for military use in Iran and send those parts to Iran in violation of export control laws,” stated United States Attorney Durham. “The charges filed today demonstrate the commitment by my Office and our law enforcement partners to dismantle illicit supply chains and prosecute those who unlawfully procure U.S. technology in support of a foreign terrorist organization. The IRGC and Qods Aviation Industries have been core players in the Iranian military regime’s production of drones, which threaten the lives of civilians, U.S. personnel, and our country’s allies. These charges should serve as a warning to those who violate U.S. export control laws and who unlawfully seek to aid Iran’s drone program.”
Mr. Durham expressed his appreciation to the FBI and the Department of Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”) for their work on the case. Today, OFAC sanctioned Akbari, Rah Roshd, and other companies and individuals for their roles in the sanctions-evasion scheme described in the complaint. OFAC previously sanctioned Amidi.
“Today’s charges lay bare how U.S.-made technology ended up in the hands of the Iranian military to build attack drones,” stated Sue J. Bai, head of the Justice Department’s National Security Division. “The Justice Department will continue to put maximum pressure on the Iranian regime. We will relentlessly dismantle illicit supply chains funneling American technology into the hands of Iran’s military and terrorist organizations and pursue those complicit in operations that threaten our country.”
“Hossein Akbari and Reza Amidi allegedly engaged in a multi-year conspiracy to obtain U.S. technology for use in Iranian made drones in violation of export laws and to provide material support to the IRGC—a designated terrorist organization,” stated FBI Assistant Director in Charge Raia. “The Iranian government has repeatedly demonstrated they are willing to violate the laws of our nation—this time utilizing dishonest businessmen who deliberately misrepresented themselves—in order to further their treacherous goals. The FBI will continue to protect the national security and interests of the United States through vigorous enforcement of export control laws put in place to prevent sensitive U.S. technology from being obtained by hostile foreign governments.”
As set forth in the complaint, Akbari and Amidi operate Rah Roshd, which procures and supplies advanced electronic, electro-optical, and security systems to the Government of Iran and designs, builds, and manufactures ground support systems for UAVs. Akbari serves as the CEO and Managing Director of Rah Roshd, and Amidi serves as the Commercial Manager. Rah Roshd’s clients include the IRGC and several Iranian state-owned aerospace companies and drone manufacturers, including QAI, Iran’s Ministry of Defense and Armed Forces Logistics (“MODAFL”), Shahed Aviation Industries Research Center (“SAIRC”), and Shahid Bakeri Industrial Group (SBIG).
Between January 2020 and the present, Amidi and Akbari used Rah Roshd in furtherance of a scheme to evade U.S. sanctions and procure U.S.-origin parts for use in Iranian-manufactured UAVs, including the Mohajer-6 UAV. At least one of those parts was manufactured by a Brooklyn, New York-based company (“Company-1”). In September 2022, the Ukrainian Air Force shot down an Iranian-made Mohajer-6 drone used by the Russian military in Ukraine. The drone recovered by the Ukrainian Air Force contained parts made by several U.S. companies, including Company-1.
To facilitate their scheme, Amidi and Akbari falsely purported to represent companies other than Rah Roshd, including a company based in the United Arab Emirates (“Company-2”) and a company based in Belgium (“Company-3”). The defendants used a “spoofed” email address with a misspelled version of Company-2’s name to communicate regarding the procurement of parts, including parts manufactured by U.S. companies. The defendants also used various “front” or “shell” companies to pay for UAV parts and to obfuscate the true end destination and the true identities of the sanctioned end users, including QAI and the IRGC, which were acquiring U.S.-made parts through Rah Roshd. Amidi and Akbari also used aliases to obfuscate their true identities in furtherance of the scheme.
Additionally, the defendants conspired to provide material support to the IRGC by providing goods and services for the benefit of the IRGC’s military campaign. This included constructing military shelters, providing cameras and drone field hangers, and conspiring to procure drone parts as well as parts to operate drones, including “servo motors,” “pneumatic masts,” which are a component of the operation of the Mohajer-6 drone, and engines. The investigation uncovered correspondence from the IRGC, signed by the head of the UAV Command for the IRGC’s Aerospace Force, thanking Rah Roshd for its work on behalf of the IRGC and praising Rah Roshd’s achievements in designing and manufacturing servo motors for defense equipment. The letter included a quote from the Supreme Leader of Iran regarding the importance of self-sufficiency and domestic production to strengthen Iran’s economy and “disappoint the enemies of the Islamic Republic.” The letter also noted continued efforts of Rah Roshd “in strengthening the defensive capabilities of the Islamic Republic of Iran.” Both Amidi and Akbari possessed documents indicating that they had purchased servo motors for delivery to Iran, including a servo motor contained in the Mohajer-6 drone. Akbari also emailed supply companies located in China and noted that he was purchasing parts for drones to be shipped to Iran.
Finally, Amidi and Akbari conspired to commit money laundering. They used at least three shell companies, all based in the United Arab Emirates, to pay a China-based company that sent invoices to Rah Roshd for the sale of motors. Those payments were processed through U.S.-based correspondent bank accounts. The defendants also used two of these shell companies to pay a separate China-based company for the sale of pneumatic masts.
Today’s actions were coordinated through the Justice and Commerce Departments’ Disruptive Technology Strike Force. The Disruptive Technology Strike Force is an interagency law enforcement strike force co-led by the Departments of Justice and Commerce designed to target illicit actors, protect supply chains, and prevent critical technology from being acquired by authoritarian regimes and hostile nation states.
The charges in the complaint are allegations and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
The government’s case is being handled by the Office’s National Security and Cybercrime Section. Assistant United States Attorneys Nina C. Gupta and Lindsey R. Oken are in charge of the prosecution with the assistance of Paralegal Specialist Rebecca Roth, along with Trial Attorney Scott Claffee of the National Security Division’s Counterintelligence and Export Control Section and Trial Attorney Charles Kovats of the National Security Division’s Counterterrorism Section.
The Defendants:
HOSSEIN AKBARI (also known as “Danial Yousef” and “Danial White”) Age: 63 Iran
REZA AMIDI (also known as “Ali Rahmani”) Age: 62 Iran
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
World news story
Ukraine Donor Platform confirms support for Ukraine’s recovery and reconstruction
The Ukraine Donor Platform’s Steering Committee held its thirteenth meeting today, gathering for the second time in person in Ukraine’s capital Kyiv.
The meeting brought together senior representatives of Platform members, observers and international financial institutions.
The UK reiterated our absolute commitment to securing a just and lasting peace in Ukraine and is engaging with key allies in support of this effort. The UK reaffirmed our unwavering support for Ukraine and our determination to contribute to Ukraine’s long-term economic stability, resilience, and recovery.
Budget financing needs
Finance Minister Marchenko confirmed Ukraine’s external financing needs for 2025, projected at USD 39.3 billion. Through joint efforts, including the financing being mobilised by the Extraordinary Revenue Acceleration (ERA) loan initiative, resources have been secured to cover its external budget financing needs for 2025.
Since the start of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the UK’s total military, economic and humanitarian support for Ukraine amounts to £15 billion: £10 billion in military support (including our £2.26 billion ERA Loan contribution), and £5 billion in non-military support. The UK’s non-military support comprises £4.1 billion in fiscal support through World Bank loan guarantees to bolster Ukraine’s economic stability and support vital public services, and £977million in bilateral support, including £477million in humanitarian assistance to Ukraine and the region since the start of the full-scale invasion.
Recovery and reconstruction of Ukraine
Ukraine presented its top recovery and reconstruction priorities for 2025, based on the fourth Rapid Damage and Needs Assessment and the Single Project Pipeline established by the Government of Ukraine: energy, heating, water supply and sanitation, housing and transport. Delivering effective support for Ukraine’s recovery and reconstruction is a key priority for the Platform and donors committed to further strengthen their engagement on this track. The UK emphasised the importance of long-term planning for recovery and reconstruction, including efforts to support social recovery which will be vital for underpinning economic recovery.
Ukraine has withstood the winter season, surmounting the impact of Russia’s attacks on energy infrastructure, with the strong support of the donor community. The UK will continue to support Ukraine in realising its vision of a cleaner, more modern, decentralised energy system.
The UK and other partners noted the importance of insurance for Ukraine’s recovery and reconstruction and for supporting international trade and investment. Work continues on facilitating a return of global reinsurance businesses to Ukraine.
Reforms driving sustainable growth and progress towards EU accession
Many participants welcomed Ukraine’s strong and continuing progress on reforms, including on the implementation of the Ukraine Plan, which are essential to improve the business climate, attract foreign direct investment and support economic development, and support Ukraine’s Euro-Atlantic trajectory.
Enhancing public investment management for recovery and reconstruction
Ukraine updated on its progress towards an effective, transparent and well-coordinated public investment management system, which is crucial for its successful recovery and reconstruction. An integral part will be the two project preparation facilities under development – the Ukraine PPF, to be administered by the Government of Ukraine with support from the World Bank, and Ukraine FIRST, to be administered by the European Investment Bank and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. The facilities are expected to be operational by the 2025 Ukraine Recovery Conference (URC 2025), which will take place in Rome on 10-11 July, hosted by the Governments of Italy and Ukraine.
Stakeholder engagement
The Steering Committee discussed the Business Advisory Council’s latest input and commended its members’ efforts to identify concrete steps to boost private sector investment in Ukraine. It also held a productive exchange of views with representatives of Ukrainian civil society, with a focus on human capital. This discussion also served as a preparatory event for the human dimension of URC 2025.
RAF to protect European skies on NATO’S eastern flank
UK jets will protect the skies of NATO’s eastern flank once again, working for the first time with Sweden to protect Polish airspace.
Defence Minister Lord Coaker at a ceremony in Poland to kick off the enhanced air policing mission.
UK jets will protect the skies of NATO’s eastern flank once again, working for the first time with Sweden to protect Polish airspace.
British built Typhoon jets arrived in Eastern Poland today, to take part in a NATO enhanced air policing mission.
RAF pilots will join up with Swedish Airforce Gripen fighter jets, as Europe steps up together to defend NATO airspace. The deployment is the first time that Swedish fighter jets will take part in air policing on the territory of another NATO Ally since they joined the alliance in 2024.
Touching down in Poland on Tuesday (1 April), Defence Minister Lord Coaker met with Polish Deputy Prime Minister Władysław Marcin Kosiniak-Kamysz and Swedish Defence Minister Pal Jonson, to outline the UK’s commitment to European security and to mark the start of the operation.
Defence Minister Lord Coaker said:
The UK is unshakeable in its commitment to NATO. With threats increasing and growing Russian aggression, it is vital that we stand shoulder to shoulder with our allies.
This latest air policing mission in Poland displays the UK’s ability to operate effectively with NATO’s newest member in Sweden and deter our common adversaries across the alliance’s airspace, keeping us secure at home and strong abroad.
The mission comes as European NATO allies are stepping up on European security and defence spending. NATO remains the cornerstone of UK Defence and this government will continue to pursue a “NATO first” defence policy and take on a leadership role in the alliance.
Keeping the country safe is the Government’s first priority, and an integral part of its Plan for Change. The work of defence is critical to the security and stability of the UK, keeping us secure at home and strong abroad, whilst supporting all of the Government’s five missions as a foundation of its plan.
Poland is also a key UK defence and security partner, NATO Ally and partner in the European Group of Five (E5). Our nations have both been large supporters of Ukraine and have the led the way in increasing defence spending in Europe.
In last week’s Spring Statement, the Chancellor announced an additional £2.2 billion for defence in 2025/26. This comes on top of the announcement of the largest sustained increase in defence spending since the Cold War, as the government will hit 2.5% of GDP spend by April 2027, and has a commitment to hit 3% in the next Parliament.
This mission follows on from 2024’s successful air policing missions across the continent. In April 2024, six Typhoon fighter jets with over two hundred personnel were stationed in Romania defending NATO’s eastern border. Followed on by an August 2024 deployment of four cutting edge F-35B jets to Iceland, defending NATO airspace in the high north.
This time, six British built typhoons from II (AC) Squadron will be patrolling Polish airspace, having travelled from RAF Lossiemouth.
RAF Typhoons and Voyagers also conduct NATO air policing in the UK through the Quick Reaction Alert Force, based at RAF Coningsby, Lossiemouth and Brize Norton, protecting UK airspace 24/7, 365 days a year.
The war in Ukraine is often marked by specific dates, like February 24, 2022 – the day of the full-scale invasion. But for many Ukrainians, that February never really ended. For me, then a 22-year-old master’s student in construction engineering, that day shattered everything I understood about my future. I was glued to my phone, refreshing news updates in a frantic attempt to make sense of the chaos.
The distant echoes of explosions rumbled through the city, shaking windows and setting off endless car alarms. Air raid sirens wailed, their sound slicing through the early morning stillness. Outside, people hurried past with suitcases, their faces pale and tense, while others lined up at pharmacies and ATMs, their hands trembling as they stocked up on essentials.
My family and friends sent frantic messages (Are you safe? Are you leaving? What do we do?) but no one had an answer. Fear settled in like a second skin, thick and suffocating. The streets, once familiar, now felt unrecognisable, transformed by the weight of uncertainty.
We were all touched by the war, including my family. My father, who is a scientist and professor of Mykolaiv University of Shipbuilding, voluntarily joined the military forces to fight for Ukraine and give my family the possibility to work and study while the war raged outside.
Meanwhile, my hometown, Mykolaiv – previously a strategically important shipbuilding and port city on the Black Sea – became a key stepping-stone for Russian forces on the road to Odesa. It is very close to currently occupied territories and the frontline.
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.
Controlling access to the city and its bridges was crucial in the battle for Ukraine. The destruction of these bridges cut off vital supply routes, leaving Mykolaiv isolated and struggling to hold the line. What were once ordinary crossings became symbols of survival, as the city fought to stay connected and withstand the siege.
As my home was attacked, I realised something fundamental: bridges were not just engineering projects. They were lifelines.
Engineering hope
Rebuilding bridges and roads is about more than repairing physical structures; it is about restoring security, economic stability and vital connections between communities. A collapsed bridge isolates people from essential services, disrupting supply chains and deepening vulnerability. The war has exposed just how critical Ukraine’s infrastructure is for survival.
Mykolaiv is one of the hardest-hit regions. According to the Ukrainian government, more than 20 bridges were destroyed or severely damaged by Russian attacks, including the Inhul Bridge, a vital artery for the city.
The Snihurivka Bridge, another key crossing, was also wiped out, leaving thousands stranded without reliable access to healthcare and supplies. For months, humanitarian aid and commerce were forced onto alternative, unreliable routes, further isolating communities. The reconstruction of key bridges in my home region has allowed life to resume, but the scale of the challenge across the country remains immense.
Elsewhere, the destruction has been just as devastating.. The Irpin Bridge, north-west of Kyiv, which once carried 40,000 vehicles a day, became a symbol of both loss and survival. Ukrainian forces had to destroy the bridge to stop Russian advances on Kyiv. Thousands of civilians fled across its wreckage under fire.
Science: a light in the dark
Fast forward to the autumn of 2022. Ukraine’s power grid was under relentlessattack. Entire cities were plunged into darkness. I sat at my desk in Lviv, in western Ukraine, where I have been working on my PhD thesis. My laptop battery was draining and a single candle flickered beside me. I was writing a research paper on strengthening methods for buildings and infrastructure. Yet, all around me real infrastructure was collapsing, making my work feel disconnected from reality.
Laptop battery draining and a single candle flickers during one of the regular power cuts. Nadiia Kopiika
The city had endured weeks of missile strikes targeting critical infrastructure and power cuts became part of daily life. Simple tasks like boiling water for tea, charging a phone, or even sending an email became unpredictable challenges. The hum of generators filled the streets and people lined up at charging stations trying to stay connected. The darkness wasn’t just outside, it seeped into everything, a constant reminder that the war was never far away.
At that moment, a question struck me: what if science could help rebuild Ukraine? Could research, something that had once felt so theoretical, actually make a difference in the aftermath of war?
The project aimed to not only repair what was damaged but to build better infrastructure: homes that are more resilient, more sustainable and ready for future crises. Mitoulis recalled that the whole idea for BridgeUkraine was born out of a deeply personal moment:
I first thought of BridgeUkraine when I spoke with my former MSc student, Marat Khodzhaiev, who was in Ukraine when the war started. He was stranded in his house and at risk of missing the opportunity to graduate from his MSc course in the UK. All bridges around him had collapsed, there was no escape route. His wife was pregnant at the time. That call made me realise the urgent need, not only to rebuild infrastructure, but also to support and empower Ukrainian engineers to build their future. BridgeUkraine became more than just a research alliance, it became a mission that ensures that Ukraine’s recovery will be driven by its own people, equipped with the best knowledge and tools to rebuild their country.
The KSE Institute estimates that more than 300 bridges across Ukraine require urgent reconstruction, with damages exceeding US$2.6 billion. But this isn’t all about infrastructure; it is about securing Ukraine’s independence and ensuring that its economy and society can function even under the most difficult conditions. Every bridge rebuilt is a step toward recovery, a restored connection between families and communities, and a symbol of resilience.
To address these challenges, rebuilding Ukraine’s infrastructure cannot follow conventional methods. The sheer scale of destruction demands a new approach, one that not only restores what was lost but strengthens the country for the future.
At BridgeUkraine, we are developing solutions that prioritise resilience over quick fixes. Instead of rebuilding vulnerable structures, we are integrating sustainable materials, climate-adaptive engineering, and strategic planning to ensure that Ukraine’s transport networks are built to last.
Rebuilding fairly and efficiently
A comprehensive assessment conducted by the government of Ukraine, the World Bank Group, the European Commission, and the United Nations estimates that the total cost of Ukraine’s reconstruction and recovery stands at approximately €506 billion (US$524bn) over the next decade. This underscores the necessity for continued and enhanced international support to address the extensive needs arising from the conflict.
There are no academic guidelines on how to rebuild after such destruction. What is the most effective way to approach reconstruction in this context? We quickly came to the realisation that conventional methods were too slow and rigid to address the urgent and widespread damage.
Our research team wanted to re-imagine how to rebuild infrastructure and homes that are resilient to future challenges, from war-related destruction to climate-induced disasters. As Mitoulis told me:
Rebuilding infrastructure is not just about restoring roads and bridges, it’s about rebuilding lives. Our approach is centred on people, ensuring that the infrastructure is designed by Ukrainians, for Ukrainians. It must not only reconnect communities but also support economic recovery and long-term resilience.
But such ethical reconstruction must be inclusive, sustainable and community-driven, ensuring that those who depend on infrastructure have a say in how it is rebuilt.
Reconstruction must be a participatory, creative effort – one that rebuilds cities with beauty and meaning, connecting them to their past while preparing for the future. Too often, post-war recovery efforts have been dictated by external donors, prioritising short-term economic gains over long-term resilience.
People like me, who have grown up in these places, understand the culture, the rhythm of daily life, and the importance of preserving identity as well as buildings. We want to see our cities restored in a way that reflects our history and spirit.
For example, in post-second world war Warsaw, reconstruction efforts initially ignored the city’s historical character in favour of Soviet-style urban planning. It was only through the persistence of local architects and historians that parts of the Old Town were painstakingly restored to reflect their original designs.
Ukraine cannot afford such myopic, profit-driven decision-making. Instead, it must empower local communities, integrating their knowledge, needs and skills into the reconstruction process.
This vision started to take shape through workshop discussions with experts in geography and urban planning. Everyone agreed on the need for an adaptable transportation system where modular designs and relocatable, prefabricated bridges (like the Mabey bridge in US) could respond to evolving demands and disruptions.
Similarly, at the ReBuild Ukraine 2024 conference leading engineers, policymakers and researchers showcased groundbreaking technologies designed to accelerate reconstruction while reducing long-term environmental and economic risks (for example, nature-based solutions, 3D-printing, Virtual Reality and Building Informational Modelling).
Revolutionising damage assessment with AI, radar and satellite imagery
But to effectively plan for recovery and reconstruction, it’s crucial to first accurately characterise the damage. A clear picture of what has been destroyed allows for smarter decisions, prioritising the most urgent repairs and using resources effectively.
Our latest research, published in Automation in Construction, introduces a faster, more precise way to assess damage to key infrastructure, particularly bridges. Bringing together expertise from a large multidisciplinary team, we developed a new approach that combines satellite images and radar and artificial intelligence to swiftly and accurately analyse damage.
This technology allowed us to assess the condition of bridges remotely, without having to be onsite in dangerous or inaccessible areas. By providing rapid, data-driven insights, our method helps ensure that reconstruction efforts start where they are needed most, speeding up recovery and making rebuilding efforts more effective.
We tested this approach on numerous bridges in the Irpin region of Ukraine, and the results were striking. It significantly improved both the speed and accuracy of damage assessments. Using Sentinel-1 SAR images (radar satellite images from the European Space Agency’s Copernicus program), crowdsourced data (photos and reports from people on the ground), and high-resolution imagery, we developed a comprehensive approach for damage detection and classification.
This approach works on multiple levels: it provides a big-picture view of damage across entire regions while also zooming in on specific structural issues in individual bridge components. By combining satellite data with detailed images, our method makes damage assessments more precise, faster and safer, ensuring that reconstruction efforts focus on the most critical areas first.
These findings can play a crucial role in damage and needs assessment such as those conducted by the World Bank.
Sustainable infrastructure
In war zones, destruction often affects vital humanitarian and evacuation corridors, making it essential to prioritise reconstruction based on factors such as the national importance of a bridge, its role in border crossings, and its impact on social services.
But rebuilding after a disaster is also an opportunity to create something stronger, smarter, built to last – and with a sustainable focus.
From the first day of the invasion, Nadiia began volunteering at Lviv Polytechnic National University helping to weave camouflage nets. @kathryn_moskalyuk
Given Ukraine’s commitment to net-zero emissions and resilience, we expanded our research [and published a study] which introduced an innovative model for rebuilding infrastructure that can withstand future hazards while minimising carbon emissions. At its core, the model features a “smart prioritisation system” that helps decision-makers allocate resources effectively. It assesses key factors such as repair urgency, community impact and long-term durability, ensuring that rebuilding efforts provide the greatest benefits where they are needed most.
For example, when assessing damaged structures, the system prioritises projects that will provide the most long-term benefits. That might mean restoring energy systems to prevent future blackouts or repairing bridges that serve as key evacuation routes and economic lifelines.
As Stanislav Gvozdikov, deputy director of Euro-integration Process at Ukraine’s State Road Research Institute, told me: “Every bridge we restore, every road we reopen, isn’t just about infrastructure, it’s about restoring life, reconnecting families and ensuring that communities have the resilience to withstand whatever comes next.”
This is already a reality near my home town, Mykolaiv, where newly rebuilt bridges have restored transport links and also revived local economies, giving people hope for the future.
But no one rebuilds a country alone.
The UK-Ukraine 100-year agreement, announced in February 2025, underscored a deep commitment to Ukraine’s security, economic resilience, and post-war reconstruction. The partnership recognises the importance of cooperation between the UK and Ukraine to strengthen technological innovation and to increase collaboration in transport more widely.
I’ve also had the privilege of working with some of the brightest minds in the field, including more than 50 practitioners, consultants, academics, institutions and international bodies. This alliance of experts was united by a shared vision: to change the way the world approaches post-war reconstruction.
A key part of this mission is training engineers, equipping them with the latest knowledge in damage assessment, resilience-based and people-centred design and international standards to lead Ukraine’s reconstruction.
We come from different backgrounds – engineering, economics, policy, humanitarian efforts, and governmental bodies. But we all share the same motivation in wanting to help our country.
Leading researchers from Ukraine specialising in AI technologies, infrastructure engineering, sustainable and energy-saving buildings or climate change, are also members of BridgeUkraine. AI-specialist, Ivan Izonin has spoken passionately about how he believes that the collaborative efforts we have started “will lay the foundation for large-scale scientific projects that will be pivotal in post-war reconstruction…”. While Natalya Shakhovska , also a specialist in AI, recalled: “My activity in the BridgeUkraine alliance gave me the opportunity to align my research to critical infrastructure assessment, enabled by my AI modelling…Today I really feel included, I understand that my expertise is helping [my country’s recovery]”
Another enthusiastic Ukrainian researcher, Khrystyna Myroniuk, who specialises in building physics, told me how the collaboration had given her the opportunity to continue her “research on sustainable housing solutions for Ukraine”.
Stopping the brain drain
One of the most critical challenges facing Ukraine today, aside from the physical destruction, is the brain drain – the mass exodus of skilled professionals who left the country in search of safety and better opportunities abroad.
This trend has had a significant impact on the country’s ability to rebuild. Engineers, architects and other highly trained specialists have long been a pillar of Ukraine’s development. But the war has forced many to leave, with no clear path back to contribute to the reconstruction effort. BridgeUkraine is helping to reverse this trend by offering a compelling reason for these skilled professionals to return.
Our engagement with Ukrainian engineers then sparked another idea: what if we trained local professionals to apply our expertise, equipping them to drive this transformation within their engineering communities?
This ensures that Ukraine’s recovery is driven by its own people, equipped with the latest global knowledge. By bridging the knowledge gap and integrating the best methods and ideas from across Europe, Ukraine can position itself as a leader in resilient infrastructure design.
Our research was taken up by the Ministry of Restoration of Ukraine. Stanislav Gvozdikov collaborated with us to launch a joint programme of Continuing Professional Development seminars for engineers designed to help them stay up to date with the latest knowledge and skills in their field. To date, our expertise has been shared with over 1,500 Ukrainians.
Argyroudis emphasised to me how critical the role of engineers will be in Ukraine’s reconstruction, saying: “It’s about rebuilding Ukrainian identity as a country.”
The ultimate goal is to build a culture of innovation and self-reliance among local professionals who have the expertise and passion to drive this change.
Professionals can now contribute to projects and be part of a larger community of practice, which brings together engineers, academics and international partners.
I am, personally, incredibly proud to have had the privilege, over the past two years, to help empower Ukrainians to develop world-leading research that accelerates their country’s recovery.
Shaping tomorrow
My hometown, Mykolaiv, still bears the scars of war. Returning there, I saw firsthand what was lost. But also what could be rebuilt. War has taken, and continues to take so much, but it has also forged a new generation of engineers who understand that our profession is no longer just about calculations and designs. It is about resilience, survival and national recovery.
Three years ago, I would have imagined a very different career for myself. But today, I know that engineering is more than my profession, it is my mission.
I am committed to ethical and inclusive infrastructure recovery in Ukraine, because science must be the foundation of national resilience. Ethical reconstruction must prioritise people over profits, creating systems that empower and strengthen communities.
Ukraine’s recovery is about setting a global precedent for post-conflict reconstruction. Our research, training programs and commitment to innovation are laying the groundwork for a stronger, more connected Ukraine, offering a paradigm shift to the war-torn world. Because rebuilding is about more than replacing the past. It is about creating a future that can withstand whatever comes next.
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.
Nadiia Kopiika receives funding from British Academy. She is affiliated with University of Birmingham, UK and Lviv Polytechnic National University, Ukraine.
On 11 April the United Kingdom and Germany will convene the Ukraine Defence Contact Group at NATO HQ.
Media representatives with an annual accreditation to NATO for 2025 do not need to request accreditation for this event. All other media representatives wishing to cover the meeting should accredit via the NATO accreditation portal by 3 April 1300 CEST.
Media opportunities will be set out in due course. For more details please contact:
On 10 April 2025, the AFET and BUDG Committees will hold a second Ukraine Facility Dialogue in the framework of the Article 37 of the Ukraine Facility Regulation. The Ukraine Facility is a EUR 50 billion instrument, disbursed in stages, which represents one of the cornerstones of the EU’s strategy for the recovery, reconstruction and modernisation of Ukraine in the wake of Russia’s war of aggression.
Members will have the opportunity to discuss with Commissioner Marta Kos the state of play of the implementation of the Facility, in particular the Ukraine Plan and related reforms, Ukraine’s progressive alignment to the EU acquis, as well as the payments made. Ukraine Facility Dialogues shall be held at least every four months.
On 8 April, Members will vote on the INTA position on two key legislative proposals: the revision of the foreign investment screening regulation and on the suspension of the EU Safeguard Regulation vis-à-vis Ukraine. Members will hold an in camera debate with DG Trade Director-General Sabine Weyand on EU-US trade relations following the announcement of US reciprocal tariffs of 2 April. Members will also exchange with the Commission on the state of play of EU-China trade and investment relations.
On 10 April 2025, the AFET and BUDG Committees will hold a second Ukraine Facility Dialogue in the framework of the Article 37 of the Ukraine Facility Regulation. The Ukraine Facility is a EUR 50 billion instrument, disbursed in stages, which represents one of the cornerstones of the EU’s strategy for the recovery, reconstruction and modernisation of Ukraine in the wake of Russia’s war of aggression.
Members will have the opportunity to discuss with Commissioner Marta Kos the state of play of the implementation of the Facility, in particular the Ukraine Plan and related reforms, Ukraine’s progressive alignment to the EU acquis, as well as the payments made. Ukraine Facility Dialogues shall be held at least every four months.
2. Conclusions of the European Council meeting of 20 March 2025 (debate)
European Council and Commission statements: Conclusions of the European Council meeting of 20 March 2025 (2024/2980(RSP))
António Costa (President of the European Council) and Ursula von der Leyen (President of the Commission) made the statements.
The following spoke: Manfred Weber, on behalf of the PPE Group, Iratxe García Pérez, on behalf of the S&D Group, Kinga Gál, on behalf of the PfE Group, Nicola Procaccini, on behalf of the ECR Group, Valérie Hayer, on behalf of the Renew Group, Terry Reintke, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Manon Aubry, on behalf of The Left Group, Alexander Sell, on behalf of the ESN Group, Dolors Montserrat, Raphaël Glucksmann, Jean-Paul Garraud, Patryk Jaki, Billy Kelleher, Virginijus Sinkevičius, Pasquale Tridico, Zsuzsanna Borvendég, Ruth Firmenich, Siegfried Mureşan, Paolo Borchia, Nicolas Bay, Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy, Hannah Neumann, Li Andersson, Katarína Roth Neveďalová, Željana Zovko, Alex Agius Saliba, Anna Bryłka, Charlie Weimers, Hilde Vautmans, Reinier Van Lanschot, Paulo Cunha, who also answered a blue-card question from João Oliveira, Christel Schaldemose, Gilles Pennelle, Carlo Fidanza, Svenja Hahn, Tom Berendsen (the President spoke about Siegbert Frank Droese’s behaviour following Hannah Neumann’s speech), Javier Moreno Sánchez, Harald Vilimsky, Johan Van Overtveldt, Marie-Pierre Vedrenne, Reinhold Lopatka, Dan Nica, Emmanouil Fragkos, Ľubica Karvašová, Danuše Nerudová, Marta Temido, Anna Zalewska, Karlo Ressler, Elio Di Rupo, François-Xavier Bellamy, Aodhán Ó Ríordáin and Brando Benifei.
The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Dariusz Joński, Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis, Anna Maria Cisint, Sebastian Tynkkynen, João Oliveira, Siegbert Frank Droese, Lukas Sieper, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Bruno Gonçalves and Seán Kelly.
The following spoke: Maroš Šefčovič (Member of the Commission) and António Costa.
The debate closed.
3. Russia’s war crimes in Ukraine: standing with Ukraine and upholding justice (debate)
Statement by the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy:Russia’s war crimes in Ukraine: standing with Ukraine and upholding justice(2025/2635(RSP))
The President said that there would be only one round of political group speakers and no catch-the-eye procedure or blue-card questions.
Kaja Kallas (Vice President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy) made the statement.
The following spoke: Sandra Kalniete, on behalf of the PPE Group, Thijs Reuten, on behalf of the S&D Group, Anders Vistisen, on behalf of the PfE Group, Michał Dworczyk, on behalf of the ECR Group, Petras Auštrevičius, on behalf of the Renew Group, Villy Søvndal, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Martin Schirdewan, on behalf of The Left Group, and René Aust, on behalf of the ESN Group.
The following spoke: Kaja Kallas.
The debate closed.
4. Amendment of the agenda
In accordance with Rule 164(2), the President proposed the following amendment of the agenda, with the agreement of the political groups:
Wednesday/Thursday
The vote on ‘Energy-intensive industries’ (item 24 on the agenda) would be held over until voting time on Thursday.
Parliament agreed to the proposal.
The agenda was amended accordingly.
(The sitting was suspended at 11:54.)
IN THE CHAIR: Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS Vice-President
5. Resumption of the sitting
The sitting resumed at 12:01.
6. Voting time
For detailed results of the votes, see also ‘Results of votes’ and ‘Results of roll-call votes’.
6.1. Amending Directives (EU) 2022/2464 and (EU) 2024/1760 as regards the dates from which Member States are to apply certain corporate sustainability reporting and due diligence requirements ***I (vote)
Amending Directives (EU) 2022/2464 and (EU) 2024/1760 as regards the dates from which Member States are to apply certain corporate sustainability reporting and due diligence requirements (COM(2025)0080 – C10-0038/2025 – 2025/0044(COD)) – JURI Committee
REQUEST FOR AN URGENT DECISION by the PPE Group (Rule 170(6))
Approved
The following tabling deadlines had been set:
– amendments: Wednesday 2 April 2025 at 13:00 – requests for separate votes and split votes: Wednesday 2 April 2025 at 19:00.
Vote: 3 April 2025.
The following had spoken:
Tomas Tobé, on behalf of the PPE Group (the author of the request), and Manon Aubry against.
Detailed voting results
6.2. Request for waiver of the immunity of Jana Nagyová (vote)
Report on the request for the waiver of the immunity of Jana Nagyová [2024/2035(IMM)] – Committee on Legal Affairs. Rapporteur: Krzysztof Śmiszek (A10-0029/2025)
6.3. Request for waiver of the immunity of Petr Bystron (vote)
Report on the request for waiver of the immunity of Petr Bystron [2024/2048(IMM)] – Committee on Legal Affairs. Rapporteur: Dominik Tarczyński (A10-0030/2025)
6.4. Request for waiver of the immunity of Maciej Wąsik (vote)
Report on the request for the waiver of the immunity of Maciej Wąsik [2024/2043(IMM)] – Committee on Legal Affairs. Rapporteur: Mario Furore (A10-0031/2025)
6.5. Request for waiver of the immunity of Mariusz Kamiński (vote)
Report on the request for the waiver of the immunity of Mariusz Kamiński [2024/2046(IMM)] – Committee on Legal Affairs. Rapporteur: Mario Furore (A10-0032/2025)
6.6. Partial renewal of a member of the Court of Auditors – Lucian Romașcanu (vote)
Report on the nomination of Lucian Romașcanu as a Member of the Court of Auditors [05958/2025 – C10-0010/2025 – 2025/0801(NLE)] – Committee on Budgetary Control. Rapporteur: Tomáš Zdechovský (A10-0039/2025)
(Majority of the votes cast) (Secret ballot (Rule 133(3)))
The list of Members voting is annexed to these minutes (minutes of 1.4.2025 Annex 1)
Detailed voting results
6.7. Common data platform on chemicals, establishing a monitoring and outlook framework for chemicals ***I (vote)
Report on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a common data platform on chemicals, laying down rules to ensure that the data contained in it are findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable and establishing a monitoring and outlook framework for chemicals [COM(2023)0779 – C9-0449/2023 – 2023/0453(COD)] – Committee on the Environment, Climate and Food Safety. Rapporteur: Dimitris Tsiodras (A10-0018/2025)
Dimitris Tsiodras (rapporteur), after the vote on the Commission’s proposal, to request that the matter be referred back to the committee responsible, for interinstitutional negotiations, in accordance with Rule 60(4).
Detailed voting results
6.8. Re-attribution of scientific and technical tasks to the European Chemicals Agency ***I (vote)
Report on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2011/65/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the re-attribution of scientific and technical tasks to the European Chemicals Agency [COM(2023)0781 – C9-0448/2023 – 2023/0454(COD)] – Committee on the Environment, Climate and Food Safety. Rapporteur: Dimitris Tsiodras (A10-0019/2025)
Dimitris Tsiodras (rapporteur), after the vote on the Commission’s proposal, to request that the matter be referred back to the committee responsible, for interinstitutional negotiations, in accordance with Rule 60(4).
Detailed voting results
6.9. Re-attribution of scientific and technical tasks and improving cooperation among Union agencies in the area of chemicals ***I (vote)
Report on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulations (EC) No 178/2002, (EC) No 401/2009, (EU) 2017/745 and (EU) 2019/1021 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the re-attribution of scientific and technical tasks and improving cooperation among Union agencies in the area of chemicals [COM(2023)0783 – C9-0447/2023 – 2023/0455(COD)] – Committee on the Environment, Climate and Food Safety. Rapporteur: Dimitris Tsiodras (A10-0020/2025)
Dimitris Tsiodras (rapporteur), after the vote on the Commission’s proposal, to request that the matter be referred back to the committee responsible, for interinstitutional negotiations, in accordance with Rule 60(4).
Detailed voting results
6.10. Macro-financial assistance to Jordan ***I (vote)
Report on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on providing macro-financial assistance to the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan [COM(2024)0159 – C9-0146/2024 – 2024/0086(COD)] – Committee on International Trade. Rapporteur: Céline Imart (A10-0038/2025)
Michael McGrath (Member of the Commission), before the vote, to make a statement.
6.11. Macro-financial assistance to Egypt ***I (vote)
Report on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on providing macro-financial assistance to the Arab Republic of Egypt [COM(2024)0461 – C10-0009/2024 – 2024/0071(COD)] – Committee on International Trade. Rapporteur: Céline Imart (A10-0037/2025)
– Michael McGrath (Member of the Commission), before the vote, to make a statement.
– Céline Imart (rapporteur), after the vote on the Commission’s proposal, to request that the matter be referred back to the committee responsible, for interinstitutional negotiations, in accordance with Rule 60(4).
6.12. Customs duties on imports of certain products originating in the USA ***I (vote)
Report on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2018/196 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 February 2018 on additional customs duties on imports of certain products originating in the United States of America [COM(2025)0027 – C10-0007/2025 – 2025/0012(COD)] – Committee on International Trade. Rapporteur: Bernd Lange (A10-0034/2025)
8. Approval of the minutes of the previous sitting
The minutes of the previous sitting were approved.
9. CFSP and CSDP (Article 36 TUE)(joint debate)
Report on the implementation of the common foreign and security policy – 2024 annual report [2024/2080(INI)] – Committee on Foreign Affairs. Rapporteur: David McAllister (A10-0010/2025) Report on the implementation of the common security and defence policy – annual report 2024 [2024/2082(INI)] – Committee on Foreign Affairs. Rapporteur: Nicolás Pascual de la Parte (A10-0011/2025)
David McAllister and Nicolás Pascual de la Parte introduced the reports.
The following spoke: Kaja Kallas (Vice President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy).
The following spoke:Michael Gahler, on behalf of the PPE Group, Sven Mikser, on behalf of the S&D Group, Kinga Gál, on behalf of the PfE Group, Adam Bielan, on behalf of the ECR Group, Urmas Paet, on behalf of the Renew Group, Marc Botenga,on behalf of The Left Group,Stanislav Stoyanov, on behalf of the ESN Group,Rasa Juknevičienė, Tobias Cremer, António Tânger Corrêa, Alberico Gambino, Bart Groothuis, Hannah Neumann,Özlem Demirel, Marcin Sypniewski, Monika Beňová, Łukasz Kohut, Yannis Maniatis, Pierre-Romain Thionnet,Rihards Kols, Hilde Vautmans, Jaume Asens Llodrà, Lynn Boylan, Hans Neuhoff, Francisco José Millán Mon,Nacho Sánchez Amor, Afroditi Latinopoulou, Nathalie Loiseau, Hanna Gedin, Salvatore De Meo, Hana Jalloul Muro,Claudiu-Richard Târziu, Petras Auštrevičius,Davor Ivo Stier, who also answered a blue-card question from Diana Iovanovici Şoşoacă, Tonino Picula, Lucia Yar, Vangelis Meimarakis, who also answered a blue-card question from Petras Gražulis, Thijs Reuten, Marta Wcisło, Riho Terras, Antonio López-Istúriz White, Mārtiņš Staķis, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, and Sebastian Tynkkynen.
The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Tomislav Sokol, João Oliveira, Željana Zovko, Lukas Sieper and Michał Szczerba.
The following spoke: Kaja Kallas, David McAllister and Nicolás Pascual de la Parte.
The debate closed.
Vote: 2 April 2025.
10. Human rights and democracy in the world and the European Union’s policy on the matter – annual report 2024 (debate)
Report on human rights and democracy in the world and the European Union’s policy on the matter – annual report 2024 [2024/2081(INI)] – Committee on Foreign Affairs. Rapporteur: Isabel Wiseler-Lima (A10-0012/2025)
Isabel Wiseler-Lima introduced the report.
The following spoke: Kaja Kallas (Vice President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy).
The following spoke: Abir Al-Sahlani (rapporteur for the opinion of the FEMM Committee), Antonio López-Istúriz White, on behalf of the PPE Group, Francisco Assis, on behalf of the S&D Group, Christophe Bay, on behalf of the PfE Group, Arkadiusz Mularczyk, on behalf of the ECR Group, Barry Andrews, on behalf of the Renew Group, Catarina Vieira, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Kathleen Funchion, on behalf of The Left Group, Petr Bystron, on behalf of the ESN Group, Reinhold Lopatka, Elisabeth Grossmann, Silvia Sardone, Sophie Wilmès, Mounir Satouri, Alvise Pérez, Liudas Mažylis, Marco Tarquinio, András László, who also answered a blue-card question from Catarina Vieira, Loucas Fourlas, Chloé Ridel, who also answered a blue-card question from João Oliveira, Hermann Tertsch, Emmanouil Kefalogiannis, Evin Incir and Alice Teodorescu Måwe.
The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Sunčana Glavak, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Lukas Sieper and Michał Wawrykiewicz.
The following spoke: Kaja Kallas.
IN THE CHAIR: Roberts ZĪLE Vice-President
The following spoke: Isabel Wiseler-Lima.
The debate closed.
Vote: 2 April 2025.
11. Presentation of the new European Internal Security Strategy(debate)
Commission statement: Presentation of the new European Internal Security Strategy (2025/2608(RSP))
Magnus Brunner (Member of the Commission) made the statement.
The following spoke: Tomas Tobé, on behalf of the PPE Group, Birgit Sippel, on behalf of the S&D Group, Fabrice Leggeri, on behalf of the PfE Group, Assita Kanko, on behalf of the ECR Group, Malik Azmani, on behalf of the Renew Group, Saskia Bricmont, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Giuseppe Antoci, on behalf of The Left Group, Mary Khan, on behalf of the ESN Group, Jeroen Lenaers, Thijs Reuten, Jorge Buxadé Villalba, Alessandro Ciriani, Moritz Körner, who also answered a blue-card question from Lukas Sieper, Lena Düpont, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Petra Steger, Mariusz Kamiński, François-Xavier Bellamy, Marieke Ehlers, Charlie Weimers, Javier Zarzalejos, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, who also declined to take a blue-card question from Dariusz Joński, Paulo Cunha, who also answered a blue-card question from João Oliveira, Elena Donazzan, Maciej Wąsik and Gheorghe Piperea.
The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Dariusz Joński, José Cepeda, João Oliveira, Sunčana Glavak, Diana Iovanovici Şoşoacă, Ana Miguel Pedro and Lukas Sieper.
The following spoke: Henna Virkkunen (Executive Vice-President of the Commission).
The debate closed.
12. EU Preparedness Union Strategy (debate)
Commission statement: EU Preparedness Union Strategy (2025/2641(RSP))
Hadja Lahbib (Member of the Commission) made the statement.
The following spoke: Lena Düpont, on behalf of the PPE Group.
IN THE CHAIR: Pina PICIERNO Vice-President
The following spoke: Yannis Maniatis, on behalf of the S&D Group, Roberto Vannacci, on behalf of the PfE Group, Beata Szydło, on behalf of the ECR Group, Grégory Allione, on behalf of the Renew Group, Diana Riba i Giner, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Ana Miranda Paz, on the language used by a Member during this debate (the President agreed), Merja Kyllönen, on behalf of The Left Group, Christine Anderson, on behalf of the ESN Group (the President reminded the House of the rules on conduct), Lukas Mandl, Christophe Clergeau, Christophe Bay, Elena Donazzan, Anna-Maja Henriksson, Ville Niinistö, Catarina Martins, Cecilia Strada, who referred to the speech of Roberto Vannacci (the President reiterated the need to respect the rules on conduct), Kostas Papadakis, who also answered a blue-card question from João Oliveira, Tomislav Sokol, Heléne Fritzon, Barbara Bonte, Adrian-George Axinia, who also declined to take a blue-card question from Alvise Pérez, Nathalie Loiseau, Lena Schilling, Luke Ming Flanagan, Massimiliano Salini, Annalisa Corrado, Juan Carlos Girauta Vidal, who also declined to take a blue-card question from Grégory Allione, Michał Dworczyk, Nicolás Pascual de la Parte, Leire Pajín, Matej Tonin, Tobias Cremer, Victor Negrescu and Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis.
The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Hélder Sousa Silva, Laura Ballarín Cereza, Ana Miranda Paz, Cecilia Strada, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, João Oliveira and Maria Zacharia.
The following spoke: Hadja Lahbib.
The debate closed.
13. Improving the implementation of cohesion policy through the mid-term review to achieve a robust cohesion policy post 2027 (debate)
Council and Commission statements: Improving the implementation of cohesion policy through the mid-term review to achieve a robust cohesion policy post 2027 (2025/2648(RSP))
Adam Szłapka (President-in-Office of the Council) and Raffaele Fitto (Executive Vice-President of the Commission) made the statements.
The following spoke: Andrey Novakov, on behalf of the PPE Group, Mohammed Chahim, on behalf of the S&D Group, Rody Tolassy, on behalf of the PfE Group, Denis Nesci, on behalf of the ECR Group, Ľubica Karvašová, on behalf of the Renew Group, Cristina Guarda, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Elena Kountoura, on behalf of the The Left Group, Gabriella Gerzsenyi, Marcos Ros Sempere, Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza, Ciaran Mullooly, Gordan Bosanac, who also answered a blue-card question from Lukas Sieper.
IN THE CHAIR: Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS Vice-President
The following spoke: Dan-Ştefan Motreanu, Victor Negrescu, Antonella Sberna, Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle, Christian Doleschal, Carla Tavares, who also answered a blue-card question from Ana Miranda Paz, Elsi Katainen, Elena Nevado del Campo, who also answered a blue-card question from Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle, Estelle Ceulemans, Joachim Streit, Jacek Protas and Hannes Heide.
The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Nikolina Brnjac, Rosa Serrano Sierra, Ana Miranda Paz, Diana Iovanovici Şoşoacă, Francisco José Millán Mon, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Paulo Do Nascimento Cabral and Maria Grapini.
The following spoke: Raffaele Fitto and Adam Szłapka.
The debate closed.
14. Safeguarding the access to democratic media, such as Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (debate)
Statement by the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy:Safeguarding the access to democratic media, such as Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty(2025/2630(RSP))
Marta Kos (Member of the Commission) made the statement on behalf of the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.
The following spoke: Sebastião Bugalho, on behalf of the PPE Group, Nils Ušakovs, on behalf of the S&D Group, António Tânger Corrêa, on behalf of the PfE Group, Małgorzata Gosiewska, on behalf of the ECR Group, Irena Joveva, on behalf of the Renew Group, Virginijus Sinkevičius, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Milan Uhrík, on behalf of the ESN Group, Andrey Kovatchev, Francisco Assis, Hermann Tertsch, Alexandr Vondra, Dan Barna, Mary Khan, who also answered a blue-card question from Tomáš Zdechovský, Erik Kaliňák, who also answered a blue-card question from Veronika Cifrová Ostrihoňová, Ondřej Kolář, Robert Biedroń, Virginie Joron, Rihards Kols, Veronika Cifrová Ostrihoňová, Petar Volgin, Fidias Panayiotou, Rasa Juknevičienė, Hannes Heide, Csaba Dömötör, who also answered a blue-card question from Gabriella Gerzsenyi, Claudiu-Richard Târziu, Laurence Farreng, Elena Yoncheva, Isabel Wiseler-Lima, Evin Incir, who also answered a blue-card question from Fidias Panayiotou, and Julien Sanchez.
IN THE CHAIR: Antonella SBERNA Vice-President
The following spoke: Helmut Brandstätter, Mika Aaltola, Michał Kobosko, Alice Teodorescu Måwe and Tomáš Zdechovský.
The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Radan Kanev, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Diana Iovanovici Şoşoacă and Gabriella Gerzsenyi.
The following spoke: Marta Kos.
The debate closed.
15. Crackdown on democracy in Türkiye and the arrest of Ekrem İmamoğlu (debate)
Statement by the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy:Crackdown on democracy in Türkiye and the arrest of Ekrem İmamoğlu(2025/2642(RSP))
Marta Kos (Member of the Commission) made the statement on behalf of the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.
The following spoke: Emmanouil Kefalogiannis, on behalf of the PPE Group, Nacho Sánchez Amor, on behalf of the S&D Group, Susanna Ceccardi, on behalf of the PfE Group, Assita Kanko, on behalf of the ECR Group, Malik Azmani, on behalf of the Renew Group, Vladimir Prebilič, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Giorgos Georgiou, on behalf of The Left Group, Michalis Hadjipantela, Kathleen Van Brempt, Mathilde Androuët, Bernard Guetta, Mélissa Camara, Özlem Demirel, Reinhold Lopatka, Joanna Scheuring-Wielgus, Željana Zovko, Nikos Papandreou, Elissavet Vozemberg-Vrionidi and Dario Nardella.
The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Sebastian Tynkkynen, Ana Miranda Paz, Hanna Gedin, Maria Zacharia, Lefteris Nikolaou-Alavanos, Lukas Sieper and Fidias Panayiotou.
The following spoke: Marta Kos.
The debate closed.
16. Dramatic situation in Gaza and the need for an immediate return to the full implementation of the ceasefire and hostage release agreement (debate)
Statement by the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy:Dramatic situation in Gaza and the need for an immediate return to the full implementation of the ceasefire and hostage release agreement(2025/2644(RSP))
Kaja Kallas (Vice President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy) made the statement.
The following spoke: Hildegard Bentele, on behalf of the PPE Group, Evin Incir, on behalf of the S&D Group, Fabrice Leggeri, on behalf of the PfE Group, Bert-Jan Ruissen, on behalf of the ECR Group, Hilde Vautmans, on behalf of the Renew Group, Villy Søvndal, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Irene Montero, on behalf of The Left Group, Alice Teodorescu Måwe, Sebastiaan Stöteler, Hana Jalloul Muro, Barry Andrews, Ana Miranda Paz, Giorgos Georgiou, Ondřej Kolář, who also answered a blue-card question from Rima Hassan, and Matjaž Nemec.
IN THE CHAIR: Ewa KOPACZ Vice-President
The following spoke: Tomáš Kubín, Leoluca Orlando, Danilo Della Valle, Céline Imart, who also answered a blue-card question from Benedetta Scuderi, Marta Temido, Saskia Bricmont, Estrella Galán, Aodhán Ó Ríordáin, Mimmo Lucano, and Marit Maij and Benedetta Scuderi, on the language sometimes used during this debate (the President took note).
The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Davor Ivo Stier, Daniel Attard, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Vladimir Prebilič and Marc Botenga.
The following spoke: Kaja Kallas.
The debate closed.
17. Targeted attacks against Christians in the Democratic Republic of the Congo – defending religious freedom and security (debate)
Council and Commission statements: Targeted attacks against Christians in the Democratic Republic of the Congo – defending religious freedom and security (2025/2612(RSP))
Kaja Kallas (Vice President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy) made the statement.
The following spoke: Lukas Mandl, on behalf of the PPE Group, Marit Maij, on behalf of the S&D Group, Thierry Mariani, on behalf of the PfE Group, Patryk Jaki, on behalf of the ECR Group, Hilde Vautmans, on behalf of the Renew Group, Mounir Satouri, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group, Marc Botenga, on behalf of The Left Group, Tomasz Froelich, on behalf of the ESN Group, Wouter Beke, Francisco Assis, György Hölvényi, Alexander Sell, Nikolaos Anadiotis, Reinhold Lopatka, Anja Arndt, Ingeborg Ter Laak and Davor Ivo Stier.
The following spoke under the catch-the-eye procedure: Margarita de la Pisa Carrión, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Saskia Bricmont, Bert-Jan Ruissen and Sebastian Tynkkynen.
The following spoke: Kaja Kallas.
Motions for resolutions tabled under Rule 136(2) to wind up the debate: minutes of 3.4.2025, item I.
The debate closed.
Vote: 3 April 2025.
18. Explanations of vote
18.1. Written explanations of vote
Explanations of vote submitted in writing under Rule 201 appear on the Members’ pages on Parliament’s website.
19. Agenda of the next sitting
The next sitting would be held the following day, 2 April 2025, starting at 09:00. The agenda was available on Parliament’s website.
20. Approval of the minutes of the sitting
In accordance with Rule 208(3), the minutes of the sitting would be put to the House for approval at the beginning of the afternoon of the next sitting.
21. Closure of the sitting
The sitting closed at 22:07.
LIST OF DOCUMENTS SERVING AS A BASIS FOR THE DEBATES AND DECISIONS OF PARLIAMENT
I. Documents received
The following documents had been received from committees:
– Report on Parliament’s estimates of revenue and expenditure for the financial year 2026 (2024/2111(BUI)) – BUDG Committee – Rapporteur: Matjaž Nemec (A10-0048/2025)
The Joint Communication[1] remains valid in the areas that it covers. Its implementation continues to deliver on its goals and objectives.
While climate change remains the most comprehensive threat to the Arctic, the overall security and geopolitical context has changed significantly as a consequence of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022.
In this context, the question of an updated EU Arctic policy becomes relevant. However, such a decision would require careful reflection and any potential process to review and update the Arctic Joint Communication in the future will take time[2]. The question of further enhancing the EU’s presence is relevant.
The EU is a major player in areas such as Arctic sustainable fisheries[3], environmental protection, sustainable blue economy development, science and research, and regional development in the European Arctic.
Since 2021, the EU has been increasing its presence in other areas, including municipal cooperation, and support to Indigenous peoples and the youth[4].
In relation to Greenland, the EU operates long-standing relations with Greenland based on its status as an Overseas Country/Territory[5]. The Commission opened an office in Nuuk in 2024.
In areas such as hybrid threats, critical infrastructures and demographic trends affecting also Arctic regions, the EU’s actions are anchored in competences and policies set out in the Treaties.
EU relations with Norway, Iceland and Greenland are based on existing agreements and arrangements[6]. Changes to those agreements and arrangements will require decisions in each country in line with their national rules and procedures.
[2] The decision must also take into account the civilian nature of the EU´s engagement in Arctic matters and available resources.
[3] This includes the implementation of the Central Arctic Ocean Fisheries Agreement, to which the Commission is part on behalf of Member States, as well as EU fleets fishing in the Barents Sea or the deployment since 2023 of an inspection vessel to that area. The EU is also reflecting about additional areas where more presence could be of an added value.
[4] This includes two new initiatives, namely the Arctic Youth Dialogue and the Arctic Urban and Regional Cooperation network.
[5] In December 2024, the EU signed a new protocol of a duration of six years under the existing Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreement concluded in 2021
[6] E.g. European Economic Area, Schengen area and other areas of cooperation as well as Greenland’s association with the EU as an Overseas Country and Territory (OCT).
MEPs adopted their priorities for the 2026 EU budget on Wednesday, emphasising defence, prosperity and sustainability.
MEPs endorsed Parliament’s guidelines for the 2026 EU budget by 441 votes in favour, 173 against, and with 70 abstentions, saying that next year’s budget should focus on strategic preparedness and security, economic competitiveness and resilience, sustainability, climate, and the single market. They want to see additional investment in research, innovation, enterprises, health, energy, migration, border protection, digital and green transitions, job creation and opportunities for young people.
In the adopted text, MEPs call for improved EU security, cybersecurity and defence capabilities, and funding for dual-use transport infrastructure. They demand proper support for farmers and also stress the importance of implementing the Asylum and Migration Pact. The text states that the EU’s economic resilience and sustainability depends on boosting public and private investment, increasing innovation, closing the skills gap and stepping up industrial production in Europe.
Health, Ukraine and debt repayment
Among other investment priorities, the guidelines call for continued support for health programmes and crisis preparedness, educational and cultural programmes to empower young people, and proper use of EU funds while upholding the rule of law.
MEPs also underline the need for sufficient resources given the sudden drop in international funding, and pledge unconditional and full support for Ukraine. They are concerned that repayment of the borrowing costs of the NextGenerationEU recovery plan must not lead to a reduction in EU programmes and funds.
Finally, while the 2026 budget has limited flexibility, as it is second to last in the 2021-2027 long-term EU budget, MEPs argue that, amid significant geopolitical changes and the worsening effects of climate change, the EU budget remains crucial in ensuring stability for Europeans, supporting established policies and providing for strategic priorities such as defence and security.
“After tough negotiations between our political groups, we have produced well-balanced guidelines that respect the values and ideals of all the groups. Our compromise underlines key priorities, including defence, security, energy, competitiveness, agriculture, economic resilience, crisis response, health, democracy, and a stronger Union in a changing world. We have delivered a strong position, showing the Commission and the Council that Parliament is a serious player, fully prepared to defend the priorities of our citizens,” said rapporteur Andrzej Halicki (EPP, PL).
Next steps
The Commission is expected to present its proposal for next year’s budget in June 2025. Parliament’s negotiators will use the guidelines as the basis for their discussions with the Council and the Commission. The budget needs to be agreed between the Council and the Parliament by the end of this year.
Background
The annual budget lays down all the EU’s expenditure and revenue for one year within the limits fixed by its seven-year budget. The budget guidelines set out what Parliament expects the Commission to take into account when drawing up its budget proposal.
NEW YORK, April 02, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Marex Group plc (Nasdaq: MRX) (‘Marex’), the diversified global financial services platform, provides a Q1 trading update at its Investor Day, being held today at the Nasdaq Marketsite in New York City.
Marex reports a strong start to the year with positive momentum and supportive market conditions continuing through the first quarter of 2025. Client activity has remained strong across the platform with high levels of exchange volumes driven by volatility. Agency and Execution has benefited from strong performance in the Prime Services business and continued progress in the Energy business.
As a result, first quarter 2025 revenues are expected to be in a range of $449.3 to $464.3 million (Q1 2024: $365.8 million) and Adjusted Profit Before Tax2 in a range of $92.3 to $97.3 million (Q1 2024: $67.7 million).
Ian Lowitt, CEO, stated: “Very robust levels of client activity across our businesses and positive market conditions have continued into 2025 and led to a strong performance in the first quarter of the year, building on our performance in 2024. These benefits more than outweighed the impact of lower net interest income partly arising from the interest rate environment, compared to the fourth quarter of 2024. This demonstrates the successful execution of our strategy to diversify our business and deliver sustainable growth through a variety of market conditions by expanding our geographic footprint and product capabilities, increasing our relevance to a growing client base.”
Preliminary Q1 2025 results range
We have not yet completed our closing procedures for the three months ended March 31, 2025. The table below are certain estimated preliminary unaudited financial results for the three months ended March 31, 2025:
3 Months ended March 31, 20251
3 Months ended March 31, 2024
Unaudited ($m)
Estimated Low
Estimated High
Actuals
Revenue
449.3
464.3
365.8
Reported Profit Before Tax
94.4
102.1
58.9
Tax
24.5
26.5
15.3
Reported Profit After Tax
69.9
75.6
43.6
Adjusted Profit Before Tax2
92.3
97.3
67.7
Profit After Tax Margin
16%
16%
12%
Adjusted Profit Before Tax Margin2
21%
21%
19%
Basic Earnings per Share ($)3
0.94
1.02
0.60
Diluted Earnings per Share ($)3
0.88
0.96
0.56
Adjusted Basic Earnings per Share ($)2,3
0.94
0.99
0.74
Adjusted Diluted Earnings per Share ($)2,3
0.88
0.93
0.69
Figures reflect certain estimated preliminary unaudited financial results for the three months ended March 31, 2025. Estimates represent results that are preliminary and subject to change. Actual results will not be finalized until after we complete our normal quarter-end accounting procedures, including the execution of our internal control over financial reporting. These estimates reflect our management’s best estimate of the impact of events during this quarter.
These are non-IFRS financial measures. See Appendix 1 “Non-IFRS Financial Measures and Key Performance Indicators” for additional information and for a reconciliation of each such IFRS measure to its most directly comparable non-IFRS measure.
Weighted average number of shares have been restated as applicable for the Group’s reverse share split (refer to Appendix 1 for further detail).
Investor Day
Marex is hosting an Investor Day today, April 2, 2025 starting at 9:30am E.T. The event will feature presentations from Marex’s business heads, to provide a greater understanding of Marex’s operations and growth strategy, as well as a question and answer session with senior leadership including Ian Lowitt, CEO, Rob Irvin, CFO and Paolo Tonucci, Chief Strategist and CEO Capital Markets.
An audio livestream of the event will be available under the ‘events and presentations’ section on ir.marex.com. The webcast will also be available for replay, after the completion of the event.
https://edge.media-server.com/mmc/p/qbimzrae/
About Marex Group:
Marex Group plc (NASDAQ: MRX) is a diversified global financial services platform providing essential liquidity, market access and infrastructure services to clients across energy, commodities and financial markets. The Group provides comprehensive breadth and depth of coverage across four core services: Clearing, Agency and Execution, Market Making and Hedging and Investment Solutions. It has a leading franchise in many major metals, energy and agricultural products, with access to 60 exchanges. The Group provides access to the world’s major commodity markets, covering a broad range of clients that include some of the largest commodity producers, consumers and traders, banks, hedge funds and asset managers. Headquartered in London with more than 40 offices worldwide, the Group has over 2,300 employees across Europe, Asia and the Americas. For more information visit www.marex.com.
Enquiries please contact:
Marex
Investors – Robert Coates +44 7880 486 329 / rcoates@marex.com
Media – Nicola Ratchford, Marex / FTI Consulting US / UK + 44 7786 548 889 / nratchford@marex.com / +1 919 609 9423 / +44 7776 111 222 | marex@fticonsulting.com
Forward Looking Statements
This press release contains forward-looking within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. All statements contained in this press release that do not relate to matters of historical fact should be considered forward-looking statements, including expected outlook regarding Q1 2025 financial results. In some cases, these forward-looking statements can be identified by words or phrases such as “may,” “will,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “aim,” “estimate,” “intend,” “plan,” “believe,” “potential,” “continue,” “is/are likely to” or other similar expressions.
These forward-looking statements are subject to risks, uncertainties and assumptions, some of which are beyond our control. In addition, these forward-looking statements reflect our current views with respect to future events and are not a guarantee of future performance. Actual outcomes may differ materially from the information contained in the forward-looking statements as a result of a number of factors, including, without limitation: subdued commodity market activity or pricing levels; the effects of geopolitical events, terrorism and wars, such as the effect of Russia’s military action in Ukraine or the on-going conflicts in the Middle East, on market volatility, global macroeconomic conditions and commodity prices; changes in interest rate levels; the risk of our clients and their related financial institutions defaulting on their obligations to us; regulatory, reputational and financial risks as a result of our international operations; software or systems failure, loss or disruption of data or data security failures; an inability to adequately hedge our positions and limitations on our ability to modify contracts and the contractual protections that may be available to us in OTC derivatives transactions; market volatility, reputational risk and regulatory uncertainty related to commodity markets, equities, fixed income, foreign exchange; the impact of climate change and the transition to a lower carbon economy on supply chains and the size of the market for certain of our energy products; the impact of changes in judgments, estimates and assumptions made by management in the application of our accounting policies on our reported financial condition and results of operations; lack of sufficient financial liquidity; if we fail to comply with applicable law and regulation, we may be subject to enforcement or other action, forced to cease providing certain services or obliged to change the scope or nature of our operations; significant costs, including adverse impacts on our business, financial condition and results of operations, and expenses associated with compliance with relevant regulations; and if we fail to remediate the material weaknesses we identified in our internal control over financial reporting or prevent material weaknesses in the future, the accuracy and timing of our financial statements may be impacted, which could result in material misstatements in our financial statements or failure to meet our reporting obligations and subject us to potential delisting, regulatory investments or civil or criminal sanctions, and other risks discussed under the caption “Risk Factors” in our Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2024 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) and our other reports filed with the SEC.
The forward-looking statements made in this press release relate only to events or information as of the date on which the statements are made in this press release. Except as required by law, we undertake no obligation to update or revise publicly any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, after the date on which the statements are made or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events.
In addition, statements that “we believe” and similar statements reflect our beliefs and opinions on the relevant subject. These statements are based upon information available to us as of the date of this press release, and while we believe such information forms a reasonable basis for such statements, such information may be limited or incomplete, and our statements should not be read to indicate that we have conducted an exhaustive inquiry into, or review of, all potentially available relevant information. These statements are inherently uncertain, and investors are cautioned not to unduly rely upon these statements.
Appendix 1
Non-IFRS Financial Measures and Key Performance Indicators
In addition to our results determined in accordance with IFRS Accounting Standards (IFRS), we believe the following non-IFRS measures provide useful information both to management and investors in measuring our financial performance for the reasons outlined below. These measures may not be comparable to similarly titled measures presented by other companies, and they should not be construed as an alternative to other financial measures determined in accordance with IFRS. The Group changed the labelling of its non-IFRS measures during 2024 to simplify the naming to better align to the equivalent IFRS reported metric for better understanding and communication and enhance transparency and comparability.
Adjusted Profit Before Tax (formerly labelled Adjusted Operating Profit)
We define Adjusted Profit Before Tax as profit after tax adjusted for (i) taxation charge (ii) acquisition costs, (iii) bargain purchase gains, (iv) owner fees, (v) amortisation of acquired brands and customer lists, (vi) activities in relation to shareholders, and (vii) IPO preparation costs. Items (i) to (vii) are referred to as “Adjusting Items.” Adjusted Profit Before Tax is an important measure used by our management to evaluate and understand our underlying operations and business trends, forecast future results and determine future capital investment allocations. Adjusted Profit Before Tax is the measure used by our executive board to assess the financial performance of our business in relation to our trading performance and hence it is our segments performance measure presented under IFRS Accounting Standards. Adjusted Profit Before Tax is also presented on a consolidated basis because our management believes it is important to consider our profitability on a basis consistent with that of our operating segments. When presented on a consolidated basis, Adjusted Profit Before Tax is a non-IFRS measure. The most directly comparable IFRS measure is profit after tax.
We define Adjusted Profit Before Tax Margin as Adjusted Profit Before Tax (as defined above) divided by revenue. We believe that Adjusted Profit Before Tax Margin is a useful measure as it allows management to assess the profitability of our business in relation to revenue. The most directly comparable IFRS Accounting Standards measure is profit margin, which is profit after tax divided by revenue.
Adjusted Profit After Tax Attributable to Common Equity (formerly labelled Adjusted Operating Profit after Tax Attributable to Common Equity)
We define Adjusted Profit After Tax Attributable to Common Equity as profit after tax adjusted for the items outlined in the Adjusted Profit Before Tax paragraph above. Additionally, Adjusted Profit After Tax Attributable to Common Equity is also adjusted for (i) tax and the tax effect of the Adjusting Items to calculate Adjusted Profit Before Tax and (ii) profit attributable to AT1 note holders, which is the coupons on the AT1 issuance and accounted for as dividends adjusted for the tax benefit of the coupons. Common equity is a non-IFRS measure and we define Common Equity as being the equity belonging to the holders of the Group’s share capital.
Adjusted Basic Earnings per Share and Adjusted Diluted Earnings per Share
Adjusted Basic Earnings per Share is defined as the Adjusted Profit After Tax Attributable to Common Equity for the period divided by weighted average number of ordinary shares for the period. We believe Adjusted Basic Earnings per Share is a useful measure as it allows management to assess the profitability of our business per share. The most directly comparable IFRS metric is basic earnings per share. This metric has been designed to highlight the Adjusted Profit After Tax Attributable to Common Equity over the available share capital of the Group. Adjusted Diluted Earnings per Share is defined as the Adjusted Profit After Tax Attributable to Common Equity for the period divided by the diluted weighted average shares for the period. We believe Adjusted Diluted Earnings per Share is a useful measure as it allows management to assess the profitability of our business per share on a diluted basis. Dilution is calculated in the same way as it has been for diluted earnings per share. The most directly comparable IFRS metric is diluted earnings per share.
Reconciliation
The following table reconciles: (1) Adjusted Profit Before Tax and Adjusted Profit after Tax Attributable to Common Equity from the most directly comparable IFRS Accounting Standards measure, which is profit after tax, (2) Adjusted Profit Before Tax Margin from the most directly comparable IFRS Accounting Standards measure, which is profit margin (which is profit after tax divided by revenue), (3) Adjusted Basic Earnings per Share from the most directly comparable IFRS measure, which is basic earnings per share, and (4) Adjusted Diluted Earnings per Share from the most directly comparable IFRS measure, which is diluted earnings per share, in each case, for the periods presented below.
Reconciliation of Non-IFRS Financial Measures and Key Performance Indicators:
3 months ended March 31, 2025
3 months ended March 31, 2025
3 months ended March 31, 2024
Estimated Low
Estimated High
Actuals
$m
$m
$m
Profit After Tax
69.9
75.6
43.6
Taxation charge
24.5
26.5
15.3
Profit Before Tax
94.4
102.1
58.9
Bargain purchase gains1
(3.4)
(6.1)
—
Acquisition costs2
—
—
0.2
Amortisation of acquired brands and customer lists3
1.3
1.3
0.8
Activities relating to shareholders4
—
—
2.4
Owner fees5
—
—
1.7
IPO preparation costs6
—
—
3.7
Adjusted Profit Before Tax
92.3
97.3
67.7
Tax and the tax effect on the Adjusting Items7
(22.8)
(24.1)
(15.5)
Profit attributable to AT1 note holders8
(3.3)
(3.3)
(3.3)
Adjusted Profit after Tax Attributable to Common Equity
66.2
69.9
48.9
Profit After Tax Margin
16%
16%
12%
Adjusted Profit Before Tax Margin9
21%
21%
19%
Basic Earnings per Share ($)10
0.94
1.02
0.60
Diluted Earnings per Share ($)11
0.88
0.96
0.56
Adjusted Basic Earnings per Share($)10
0.94
0.99
0.74
Adjusted Diluted Earnings per Share ($)11
0.88
0.93
0.69
A bargain purchase gain is expected to be recognised as a result of the Group’s acquisition of Darton Group Limited.
Acquisition costs are costs, such as legal fees incurred in relation to the business acquisitions.
This represents the amortisation charge for the period of acquired brands and customers lists.
Activities in relation to shareholders primarily consist of dividend-like contributions made to participants within certain of our share-based payments schemes.
Owner fees relate to management services fees paid to parties associated with the ultimate controlling party based on a percentage of our EBITDA in each year, presented in the income statement within other expenses.
IPO preparation costs related to consulting, legal and audit fees, presented in the income statement within other expenses.
Tax and the tax effect on the Adjusting Items represents the tax for the period and the tax effect of the other Adjusting Items removed from Profit After Tax to calculate Adjusted Profit Before Tax. The tax effect of the other Adjusting Items was calculated at the Group’s effective tax rate for the respective period.
Profit attributable to AT1 note holders are the coupons on the AT1 issuance, which are accounted for as dividends.
Adjusted Profit Before Tax Margin is calculated by dividing Adjusted Profit Before Tax (as defined above) divided by revenue for the period.
The weighted average numbers of shares used in the calculation for the three months ended March 31, 2025 range estimates and three months ended March 31, 2024 actuals were 70,541,771 and 65,683,374 respectively. Weighted average number of shares have been restated as applicable for the Group’s reverse share split.
The weighted average numbers of diluted shares used in the calculation for the three months ended March 31, 2025 range estimates and three months ended March 31, 2024 actuals were 74,942,291 and 70,383,309 respectively. Weighted average number of shares have been restated as applicable for the Group’s reverse share split.
Labor has called for an “economically sustainable real wage increase” for almost 3 million workers who depend on the award system for their wages.
In a submission to the Fair Work Commission’s Annual Wage Review on Wednesday, Labor said a real wage increase above inflation would provide cost-of-living relief for lower-income workers – especially in the early childhood, cleaning and retail sectors.
Opposition Leader Peter Dutton has said he’s not opposed to an increase in minimum wages. Several major business groups have also tentatively endorsed an increase.
But the size of the wage boost is in contention. The Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry wants an increase to be no higher than headline inflation, saying:
[an] increase in minimum and modern award wages of no more than 2.5% is fair and reasonably responsible in the current economic environment.
The federal government doesn’t set minimum and award wages directly. That job falls to the Fair Work Commission, Australia’s independent national workplace relations tribunal.
Each year, the commission receives submissions for the Annual Wage Review from “interested parties” such as business groups, trade unions and governments.
Governments almost always make submissions, typically informed by economic logic, to the annual review.
Labor’s submission is consistent with that approach. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said businesses would benefit overall, because when low-wage workers receive a wage increase, they typically spend rather than save it.
Could a real wage boost fuel inflation?
Labor’s proposal has already attracted concern.
Some economists have argued it could increase inflation. That could make it harder for the Reserve Bank of Australia to deliver further interest rate cuts.
However, this concern was addressed in the OECD’s 2023 Economic Outlook paper, which argued:
in several sectors and countries, there is room for profits to absorb some further increases in wages to mitigate the loss of purchasing power at least for the low paid without generating significant additional price pressures.
In other words, with inflation falling in Australia and other parts of the world, there is scope for wages to increase without a significant risk this will generate inflationary pressure.
The OECD has also stated that much of the recent high global inflation was generated by the impact of the Ukraine war on rising food and energy prices, rather than wages.
Wage growth without productivity growth
A second concern relates to boosting wages in the context of Australia’s languishing levels of labour productivity – output per worker or per hour worked.
On Tuesday, Reserve Bank Governor Michele Bullock said without an increase in productivity:
the rate of nominal wages growth that can be sustained and be in line with the inflation target is lower.
However, as Mark Bray and Alison Preston found in their interim report from the review of the Secure Jobs, Better Pay laws, labour productivity growth has been consistently higher than capital productivity.
According to Bray and Preston:
It is, therefore, difficult to argue that industrial relations systems have a significant, dominant effect on national productivity outcomes.
If anything, a wages boost might be good for productivity. There is evidence to suggest measures to improve the quality of employment – including by increasing wages – can boost productivity.
If workers feel they are paid fairly, they are more likely to be satisfied and work harder, and less likely to leave their employer.
Staff turnover, on the other hand, requires employers to recruit and train new employees, which is time-consuming and resource-intensive, and can sap productivity.
What about inequality?
It’s important we don’t overlook another important factor in the minimum wage debate. Since its 2022 election victory, addressing inequality has been central to the Albanese government’s labour market reforms.
Before 2022, wages growth was persistently weak for several years, despite the lowest unemployment rate in almost five decades.
Low unemployment is generally assumed to stimulate wages growth, but this didn’t eventuate. This worsened workforce shortages, making it hard for employers to attract and retain workers.
This includes addressing gender-based pay inequalities.
Improving job quality – particularly by raising wages – in low-paid sectors is essential to advancing gender equality. The minimum wage and award-reliant segments of the Australian labour market are highly feminised. These include vital frontline roles in the care, cleaning and hospitality sectors.
The latest Workplace Gender Equality Agency scorecard, drawing on ABS Labour Force Survey data, shows wage growth in these sectors over the past two years has contributed significantly to reducing the national gender pay gap to its lowest point on record.
Lifting wages and job quality is not only crucial for attracting and retaining workers in these essential frontline roles. It also supports broader labour force participation, particularly for working parents.
An “economically sustainable” boost to the minimum wage is therefore unlikely to drive up inflation, or adversely impact productivity. However, it will provide cost-of-living relief to Australia’s lowest-paid workers.
Chris F. Wright has received funding from the Australian Research Council, the Canadian Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, the UK Economic and Social Research Council, the International Labour Organization, the Australian and NSW governments, and various business and trade union organisations.
Source: United States Senator Kevin Cramer (R-ND)
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Since taking office, President Donald Trump and his administration have prioritized negotiating a ceasefire agreement between Russia and Ukraine. While Ukraine announced its willingness to support a 30-day ceasefire proposal, Russia has not.
U.S. Senator Kevin Cramer (R-ND) joined U.S. Senators Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), and 50 of their colleagues, to introduce the bipartisan Sanctioning Russia Act of 2025. This bill would impose primary and secondary sanctions against Russia and actors backing Russia’s aggression if the country refuses to engage in good-faith negotiations for a lasting peace with Ukraine or undermines the sovereignty of Ukraine after peace is negotiated.
The legislation also imposes a 500 percent tariff on imported goods from countries that buy Russian oil, gas, uranium, and other products.
“The Sanctioning Russia Act of 2025 will issue decisive consequences aimed at deterring Russian aggression,” said Cramer. “This bill sends a clear message: bullies have a price to pay for their actions. Vladimir Putin and Russia must face serious consequences for their destructive and unprovoked war on Ukraine.”
Members who cosigned the legislation include U.S. Senators Dan Sullivan (R-AK), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Katie Britt (R-AL), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Todd Young (R-IN), Angus King (I-ME), Pete Ricketts (R-NE), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), John Curtis (R-UT), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Tom Cotton (R-AR), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Deb Fischer (R-NE), Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD), Joni Ernst (R-IA), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Roger Wicker (R-MS), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Thom Tillis (R-NC), Peter Welch (D-VT), Markwayne Mullin (R-OK), Chris Coons (D-DE), Tim Sheehy (R-MT), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Mark Kelly (D-AZ), Jon Husted (R-OH), Elissa Slotkin (D-MI), Chuck Grassley (R-IA), John Hickenlooper (D-CO), John Cornyn (R-TX), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), Ruben Gallego (D-AZ), John Hoeven (R-ND), John Fetterman (D-PA), John Boozman (R-AR), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), James Lankford (R-OK), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Rick Scott (R-FL), Adam Schiff (D-CA), Jim Justice (R-WV), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Steve Daines (R-MT) and Jack Reed (D-RI).
Click here for bill text.
Every year, consumers and businesses pour staggering amounts of money into IT devices- desktop PCs, laptops, tablets, mobile phones, and printers. While annual spending has fluctuated since 2021, the past three years have seen steady growth, pushing the market toward a record-breaking $810 billion in 2025. This massive figure will push the total spending over the past decade to shocking highs.
According to data presented by Techgaged.com, the world has spent a jaw-dropping $8.5 trillion on IT devices in a decade, surpassing the combined economies of Germany and the United Kingdom.
If IT device spending were a country, it would be the third-largest economy in the world
The surging popularity of AI applications, IoT devices, and hybrid work models has fueled the need for high-performance devices, and this trend will only speed up in 2025. According to the new survey, global spending on IT devices hit $735 billion in 2024, or 6% more than the year before that. However, 2025 is set to witness an even bigger growth, with the annual spending surging by 10.3% to a record $810.2 billion. Moreover, this means 2025 will see the second-largest spending increase in a decade, trailing only the COVID-19-driven boom in 2021, when it soared by 15%.
Even the world’s wealthiest billionaires wouldn’t have enough to cover this bill, as $810 billion is more than the combined net worth of Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg. But this shocking figure is just a fraction of the total amount the world spent on IT devices over the past decade. With a record $810 billion in spending in 2025, the cumulative 10-year figure will hit a jaw-dropping $8.5 trillion.
To put this into perspective, If IT device spending were a country, it would be the world’s third-largest economy, following China and the United States. Also, the ten-year spending of $8.5 trillion outpaces three years’ worth of global defense budgets, and it is enough money to fund NASA for 85 years, with its annual budget being around $100 billion.
The world spends 25% more on IT devices annually than a decade ago
The data also revealed how much annual spending on IT devices has increased over the past ten years. Back in 2014, consumers and companies spent $646 billion on IT devices. The next three years saw similar annual spending before it hit over $700 billion for the first time in 2017. The next major leap came in 2021 when the pandemic fueled a massive surge in tech purchases, reaching over $808 billion that year.
According to the latest forecast, with a projected $810 billion in 2025, the world is now spending 25% or $164 billion more on PCs, tablets, and smartphones per year than a decade ago. For context, that $164 billion increase is more than the entire GDP of a country like Kuwait and close to that of Ukraine. In other words, in just ten years, global IT device spending has grown larger than the entire GDP of a mid-sized economy.