EU finance ministers have approved a compromise that would expand the European Securities and Markets Authority’s powers while exempting some major trading venues from centralised oversight. The agreement reflects continuing resistance to transferring financial supervision from national authorities to Brussels.

European Union finance ministers have reached an agreement to expand centralised supervision of financial markets, but Germany has secured provisions allowing important parts of Deutsche Börse to remain under national oversight, substantially narrowing the European Commission’s original reform proposals.

The compromise, agreed at a meeting in Luxembourg on 9 October, would transfer responsibility for supervising selected trading venues, clearing houses and securities settlement institutions to the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA).

However, the agreement introduces exemptions and thresholds that reduce the number of institutions automatically subject to direct European supervision.

The result is a significant political compromise between governments seeking deeper financial integration and those reluctant to surrender oversight of nationally important market operators.

Berlin secures its exemption

The most contentious element of the negotiations concerned Deutsche Börse, the German financial-market group that operates the Frankfurt stock exchange and provides trading, clearing and other financial infrastructure services.

Germany opposed arrangements that would place all major market operators under direct ESMA supervision, arguing that institutions with predominantly domestic activities should continue to be regulated nationally.

The agreed compromise refines the criteria for determining which trading venues qualify for centralised oversight.

These conditions allow certain Deutsche Börse operations to remain outside the new supervisory regime.

The exemption had already become a point of contention during negotiations among European governments.

As EU Today reported in June, Berlin had sought to protect Deutsche Börse from mandatory European supervision despite Germany’s broader support for integrating EU capital markets.

The October agreement formalises a narrower approach within the Council’s negotiating position, although the legislation remains subject to approval by the European Parliament.

Europe’s fragmented financial markets

The European Commission has repeatedly argued that fragmented national supervision weakens the EU’s ability to compete with financial markets in the United States.

Although the Union operates a single market, many financial institutions continue to face differing regulatory interpretations, procedures and supervisory relationships across member states.

These differences can increase operating costs and discourage financial businesses from expanding across borders.

The Market Integration and Supervision Package is intended to simplify those arrangements and strengthen common oversight of financial infrastructure with significant cross-border activity.

Under the Council’s position, ESMA would assume direct supervision of selected trading platforms and institutions involved in clearing and securities settlement.

Such institutions perform essential functions in financial markets, including managing transactions, transferring securities and controlling risks between counterparties.

Differences in supervisory arrangements can complicate the operation of financial services that increasingly function across national borders.

The Commission argues that greater consistency would allow European capital to move more efficiently between member states and provide businesses with improved access to investment.

Compromise reduces original ambitions

The Commission’s original approach envisaged broader centralisation of supervisory responsibilities.

The Council agreement of 9 October introduces more restrictive criteria governing the institutions that would fall under ESMA’s direct authority.

In addition to the treatment of trading venues, ministers agreed that direct supervision of crypto-asset service providers should initially concentrate on businesses with the most significant cross-border operations.

The Council also supported changes to ESMA’s governance arrangements, including the creation of a full-time executive board.

The proposed board would strengthen the authority’s ability to make supervisory decisions independently of individual national regulators, while preserving mechanisms for cooperation with those authorities.

The compromise also introduces arrangements allowing national supervisors collectively to challenge certain decisions.

These provisions reflect concerns about concentrating regulatory powers within an institution that must oversee financial businesses operating under different national legal systems.

Why capital markets matter for European investment

The supervision reforms form part of the EU’s broader Savings and Investments Union initiative.

European policymakers want to increase the availability of private capital for companies investing in technology, defence, infrastructure and industrial development.

The Union has substantial household savings, but much of that money remains in bank deposits or is invested outside the European economy.

Companies seeking capital for expansion may consequently face higher financing costs or more limited investment opportunities than comparable businesses operating in larger and more integrated markets.

The Commission’s Savings and Investments Union programme seeks to improve access to finance and make cross-border investment more attractive.

Financial-market supervision represents only one element of that programme.

Differences in taxation, insolvency law, national investment products and corporate governance requirements also influence where investors allocate their money.

Nevertheless, regulators regard consistent supervision as an important condition for reducing fragmentation.

Parliament faces a political decision

The agreement reached by finance ministers does not conclude the legislative process.

The European Parliament must adopt its position before negotiations can determine the final provisions.

Parliamentary discussions could revisit the exemptions secured by Germany and the criteria determining which institutions fall under direct ESMA supervision.

The debate will expose differences over whether European financial integration should proceed through incremental reforms or a more substantial transfer of regulatory authority.

Governments supporting national exemptions argue that supervision should reflect the actual geographic scope of a company’s activities.

Supporters of broader European oversight contend that major trading businesses can influence financial markets beyond their home jurisdictions even when individual operations appear predominantly domestic.

The Deutsche Börse exemption has become a prominent example of the conflict between those positions.

Europe’s largest economies broadly support the objective of deeper capital markets, but remain divided over the institutional powers needed to achieve it.

The final legislation will determine whether the expanded responsibilities granted to ESMA are sufficient to reduce fragmentation or leave important parts of Europe’s financial infrastructure operating under substantially different national supervisory systems.

Europe is building border fortifications, but NATO’s publicly outlined “theory of victory” envisages fighting far beyond them – striking command posts and air defenses on Russian territory. Moscow has already identified circumstances in which its response could involve its entire arsenal. Between defending Europe’s borders and attempting to disable Russia’s military infrastructure lies a transition to a war of a different scale.

What Warsaw Put on the Table

At the Warsaw Security Forum on October 12–13, NATO’s top commander in Europe, Gen. Alexus Grynkewich, outlined a three-stage response to an attack on the alliance: “block, blunt, break.” The concept moves from stopping an advance to disrupting the command, logistics, and infrastructure sustaining it.

“Block, blunt, break.” NATO has three words for winning a war with Russia. Keeping that war limited will take more than a slogan

---

Polish Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski addressed the forces Europe might eventually field, saying he expected a combined European army by 2030, at least on the eastern flank.

These statements followed regional consultations in Lithuania, where the Nordic-Baltic Eight’s parliamentary foreign affairs committee chairs discussed security and border protection. Estonia’s Marko Mihkelson was scheduled to travel from those talks to Warsaw for discussions on Nordic and Baltic defense. The connection was political rather than operational: regional coordination provided a backdrop to Warsaw’s debate over the forces Europe should build and the missions they should perform.

Grynkewich’s concept gave that debate a concrete military scope. Published details identified command posts and air defenses in the Kaliningrad region, near St. Petersburg, and in Belarus as potential targets. Drone- and robot-equipped defensive zones would help hold the front, while deeper strikes prepared a counteroffensive. Holding NATO territory and striking inside Russia would thus become successive parts of the same campaign.

Grynkewich says NATO does not seek Russia’s strategic defeat. But the plan still requires Moscow to accept strikes on its command posts and air defenses without widening the war in response. That is not a condition NATO can dictate. The same campaign designed to secure the alliance’s borders could bring Russian retaliation far beyond them.

Moscow Has Stated Its Position

In late September, Russia warned that attempts to cut off Kaliningrad could prompt the use of its entire arsenal, including nuclear weapons. On October 13, Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Grushko described the warning as a preventive signal intended to avert armed confrontation. Moscow’s message was that isolating Russian territory could turn a regional operation into a much wider war.

That warning gave particular significance to a question put to NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte the following day in Tallinn: would the alliance close the Gulf of Finland to Russian ships in wartime? Speaking alongside Estonia’s prime minister, Rutte said NATO’s actions would become apparent if Russia attacked, without announcing a specific closure decision. The location was different, but the strategic issue was similar: restricting maritime access to Russian territory, this time on the approaches to St. Petersburg.

“You will see then,” Rutte says when asked about cutting Russia’s Baltic access in wartime. Apparently, escalation is a surprise best saved for the taxpayer

---

Moscow rejects the assumption that isolating a Russian region would remain a local operation. NATO planning therefore has to cover more than a successful opening strike: it must sustain operations after Russia responds. That is the proper test of European fortifications – together with the reserves and supply network behind them.

Fortifications Need Reinforcements

Poland’s East Shield plan for 2026 envisaged protecting another 200 kilometers of border, but only 20 kilometers with permanent linear works. The remainder would rely on pre-positioned construction materials.

Estonia plans 600 small bunkers by the end of 2027. Such positions must be occupied, supplied, and reinforced in time.

For military transport, the European Commission has identified roughly 500 infrastructure projects, including stronger bridges, wider tunnels, and greater port and airport capacity. It also identifies shortages of rail wagons and ferries for equipment. Around €1.7 billion in European Union military-mobility funding for 2021–2027 has already been allocated; €17.65 billion was proposed for the next budget period. But an allocation is not a completed transport route.

History illustrates the distinction. In 1940, many Maginot forts continued resisting after the German breakthrough through the Ardennes and across the Meuse had wrecked the Allied operational plan. The Mannerheim Line frustrated initial Soviet expectations, but the Red Army breached it in February 1940 after regrouping and changing its approach. Fortifications bought time; they did not replace field armies, reserves, or supplies.

Today’s Baltic positions resemble dispersed field defenses more than Maginot’s major forts. Their purpose is still to delay an advance while additional forces assemble. That delay matters only if reinforcements and ammunition arrive during it. Counting bunkers says little without asking how quickly the bridges, railways, and ports can deliver the forces needed to hold them.

---

The Plan Precedes the Systems

Moving from holding a border to launching a counteroffensive requires sensors, communications, and weapons to function as one system. Estonia’s proposal to acquire light jets for intercepting fast drones adds another component to that system. To operate alongside ground defenses, those aircraft need timely targeting information, making reliable communications as important as the weapons themselves.

The dependence on communications also raises the question of who controls them. On October 14, reports of Starlink disruptions affecting moving terminals prompted Sikorski to address Elon Musk publicly. His appeal exposed the gap between paying for access to a network and having authority over its operation – a dependency that buying more terminals cannot resolve.

Europe’s planned answer is to build its own satellite capabilities. Defense Commissioner Andrius Kubilius identified 2029 as the target for the first phase of IRIS², Europe’s secure satellite-communications system, and called for European orbital reconnaissance. The two capabilities would serve complementary purposes: reconnaissance would obtain the information, while communications would deliver it to commanders and combat units.

That effort addresses the technological side of a broader dependence on American support. The availability of U.S. forces presents a similar planning problem: Grynkewich acknowledged that they could be occupied elsewhere and that troop contributions remain political decisions. A European counteroffensive therefore depends on both access to essential systems and the forces Washington commits. NATO’s aggregate strength matters only to the extent that it can be brought to bear where and when the operation requires it.

If the War Continues

These dependencies converge in Europe’s rear areas. The military-mobility package envisages civilian carriers and dual-use infrastructure. Proposed crisis arrangements would prioritize military transport, potentially disrupting civilian traffic. Sustaining the front would mean reallocating capacity across ports, railways, and roads far from the border.

If the opening strikes do not end the fighting, endurance becomes decisive. Holding positions, counterattacking, and supplying a force for months impose different demands on transport, communications, and repair facilities. Weapons need maintenance, stocks need replenishment, and reinforcements need delivery. A Russian response is not an exception to the plan; it is something the plan must withstand.

Public promises of decisive action remove none of these dependencies. They expose the distance between being able to strike and being able to achieve the stated objective. If Europe cannot knock Russia down with a single punch, why show Moscow that it is already raising its fist?

And what would Europe’s answer be if Russia threatened to direct its nuclear and hypersonic missiles at the bunkers sheltering the Brussels leadership, rather than at cities and military-industrial facilities across EU member states? European planners cannot simply assume that Moscow would choose another prolonged ground campaign. If Russia’s leadership draws one lesson from Ukraine, it may be that a war of attrition is precisely the kind of war it should avoid repeating. Brussels is announcing how it intends to fight. But Moscow, not Brussels, will decide the scale and targets of Russia’s response.

---

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

• The US Is Pulling the Plug on International Justice — Does Europe Have Its Own Power Source?
• The Baltic Fuse: How Europe Is Building the Infrastructure for War With Russia
• Trump Turns to Russian Diesel. Can Britain Keep Zelensky Afloat?

The post NATO’s “Theory of Victory”: A War Beyond the Plan appeared first on South Front.

By Freddie Ponton | 21st Century Wire | October 12, 2026

For four years, Europe presented its energy break with Russia as a strategic and moral necessity, with Brussels expanding sanctions, promising to cut Moscow’s revenues and preparing a complete ban on Russian liquefied natural gas. Yet European companies bought more LNG from Russia’s Yamal project in the first nine months of 2026 than in the same period of 2025.

EU ports received a record 12.18 million tonnes of Yamal LNG between January and September 2026, an increase of 9.5% over the same period in 2025. The gas arrived in 167 cargoes, roughly one every 1.6 days. The EU received 85% of Yamal’s recorded deliveries by volume even as the project’s worldwide shipments fell by 1.3%.

Urgewald, a German environmental and human rights organisation, placed the estimated benchmark value of those deliveries at €7.88 billion, using cargo volumes and monthly European TTF gas prices rather than disclosed contract payments. European leaders spoke of economic separation while EU ports remained the destination for a multibillion-euro Russian LNG trade.

Sanctions that preserved trade

The EU’s ban on Russian LNG under existing short-term contracts took effect on 25 April 2026. Eligible long-term agreements signed before 17 June 2025 could continue supplying Europe through the end of 2026, with the prohibition taking effect on 1 January 2027. Brussels could announce the coming break while established contracts kept Russian cargoes moving.

Five months after the ban on imports under eligible short-term LNG contracts took effect, EU ports received 792,440 tonnes of Yamal LNG in September, slightly more than a year earlier.

Yamal sold most of its output under long-term contracts signed before the war. TotalEnergies agreed to buy 4 million tonnes a year directly from the project, CNPC contracted 3 million, Germany’s SEFE inherited a 2.9 million tonne agreement, and Spain’s Naturgy held another for 2.5 million tonnes. Novatek sold part of its own allocation through separate agreements with TotalEnergies, Shell and Gunvor, now known as Centalion Group Ltd, These contracts kept major European energy companies commercially tied to Yamal after the political rupture with Moscow, securing supplies that could be sold or traded through their international portfolios, with destination flexibility varying by agreement.

TotalEnergies chief executive Patrick Pouyanné confirmed that its Yamal agreements were linked to Brent crude. During periods of extreme volatility, those long-term contracts secured supplies that could cost less than replacement gas on the European spot market. When spot prices outpaced oil-linked purchase prices, the gap created an opportunity to earn more from selling the contracted cargoes.

Buyers could exploit that opportunity through global portfolios spanning ships, terminals, storage facilities and supplies from several producing countries. They could exchange cargoes, redirect available gas and meet customer obligations from alternative sources, freeing supplies for sale in markets offering stronger returns.

Russian officials acknowledged that portfolio buyers could swap Yamal supplies against gas from other sources and direct available cargoes towards the most lucrative markets. A Yamal cargo could fulfil one obligation while freeing another supply for sale elsewhere, allowing traders to earn from price differences across markets.

The contracts that bound companies to Russian suppliers also secured access to gas that could cost less than replacement cargoes bought at crisis prices. Keeping those agreements meant preserving both the supply and the trading opportunities it created.

The profits behind the policy

TotalEnergies owns 20% of Yamal LNG and holds 19.4% of Novatek, the project’s controlling shareholder. It also buys and markets Yamal cargoes, giving it commercial interests as both a shareholder and a cargo trader.

In July 2026, chief executive Patrick Pouyanné told analysts that lifting and selling Yamal cargoes generated an average of about $400 million annually. TotalEnergies had direct access to the cash booked through its UK trading entity. The income fluctuated with Brent crude prices because the contracts were linked to oil.

TotalEnergies also retained rights to dividends through its ownership positions, although sanctions limited its ability to transfer those funds from Russia to Europe. Pouyanné confirmed that some cash flows had been distributed without disclosing how much had been repatriated, while the company’s Novatek dividends, which he had valued at around $600 million annually in 2024, had previously remained stuck abroad.

The commercial incentive extended beyond the immediate Yamal income, as continued deliveries preserved access to contracted gas while removing Russian LNG before replacement supplies became available could drive prices higher across the wider market. Pouyanné warned at a French Senate hearing that replacing those supplies would force Europe to pay more, and told analysts in April 2024 that sanctions on Yamal would benefit TotalEnergies’ global portfolio by pushing LNG prices higher.

TotalEnergies had commercial interests under either outcome, as continued Yamal trade generated sales income while a sudden prohibition could tighten supply and raise the value of gas sold elsewhere in its portfolio. Continued access and greater scarcity offered different routes to income, leaving the company with a potential financial benefit even if Russian deliveries stopped.

A French Senate inquiry called in 2024 for France to lead efforts to sanction Russian LNG and end its own imports as soon as possible, yet two years later TotalEnergies was still earning about $400 million annually from Yamal sales.

Germany’s retained Russian contract

Germany’s state-owned energy group SEFE inherited a contract for about 2.9 million tonnes of Yamal LNG annually through the former Gazprom Marketing & Trading business, after Berlin nationalised its parent company, Gazprom Germania, in 2022. The group became Securing Energy for Europe, retaining the Russian supply agreement under German state ownership.

SEFE’s trading operation later attributed substantial profits across its LNG portfolio to contractual flexibility, freight optimisation and arbitrage, while its 2024 financial report recorded £411.2 million in EBITDA and £199.4 million in profit after tax. Those figures covered SEFE Marketing & Trading and its subsidiaries, without isolating the contribution from Yamal.

That flexibility extended to its Indian supply obligations, for which Reuters reported that the business had arranged cargoes from other sources to reduce freight costs. SEFE’s chief executive also explained that it could retain Yamal supplies in Europe and serve India from elsewhere in its portfolio when doing so was cheaper, although that account described an available trading option rather than documenting individual cargo swaps.

Under German state ownership, SEFE retained a long-term agreement for about 2.9 million tonnes of Yamal LNG annually, even as Europe sought to reduce its dependence on Russian energy. Berlin’s nationalisation changed the ownership of Gazprom’s former German business, but the Russian supply agreement remained in place, preserving its commercial ties to Yamal inside a state-owned international trader.

Shell’s phased withdrawal

On 8 March 2022, Shell announced a phased withdrawal from Russian hydrocarbons, including oil, gas and LNG, but later acknowledged that long-term contractual commitments remained despite the end of its spot purchases of Russian LNG.

Among those commitments was a 2015 agreement with Novatek for approximately 900,000 tonnes of Yamal LNG annually, with a term exceeding 20 years. In February 2023, a Shell spokesperson confirmed that the company was still receiving Russian LNG cargoes under that contract, almost a year after announcing its withdrawal.

Shell’s Yamal agreement sat within a global LNG portfolio, with its cargoes passing through a contractual transhipment point at Montoir-de-Bretagne in France. Across the wider business, Shell used its international operations to capture differences in regional demand and prices, and chief executive Wael Sawan attributed strong late-2023 trading results to arbitrage between eastern and western markets. Those results demonstrate the commercial value of portfolio flexibility, without identifying how much came from Yamal.

Naturgy and former Gunvor also retained access to Yamal supplies through long-term agreements, with Naturgy contracted for 2.5 million tonnes annually and Centalion Group Ltd,  for about 500,000 tonnes through Novatek. Reporting on Yamal’s portfolio buyers describes how companies could exchange those supplies with gas sourced elsewhere and direct cargoes towards more lucrative markets.

The contracts therefore carried commercial opportunities alongside their obligations, preserving access to gas that could be sold or exchanged within wider portfolios. Remaining in the trade could generate value even where companies presented their continuing purchases as a contractual constraint, although that potential should not be confused with a verified profit from each agreement.

Russian gas beyond Nord Stream

On 7 February 2022, then US President Joe Biden stood beside German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and said that a Russian invasion would bring Nord Stream 2 to an end. Asked how Washington could achieve that when Germany controlled the project, he maintained that the United States could ensure the outcome without explaining the mechanism.

Germany halted Nord Stream 2’s certification on 22 February 2022, preventing a pipeline that had never entered commercial service from beginning operations. Nord Stream 1 had already stopped delivering gas when explosions ruptured three of the system’s four pipeline strings on 26 September 2022, leaving only one Nord Stream 2 string intact. With the Nord Stream route out of operation, Russian LNG continued reaching European terminals through the contracts held by companies such as TotalEnergies, SEFE and Shell.

Yamal had begun exporting LNG in December 2017, almost five years before the Nord Stream explosions, and its seaborne supply network survived the loss of the pipelines. European companies continued buying Russian gas under long-term contracts, receiving by-sea supplies that remained commercially valuable even as the direct pipeline connection between Russia and Germany stood idle.

America captured the market

The decline of Russian pipeline supplies opened a larger European market for American LNG, and Washington worked with Brussels to expand the trade. In their 25 March 2022 agreement, the United States pledged to work towards at least 15 billion cubic metres of additional LNG for the EU that year, including supplies from international partners, while maintaining a regulatory environment that would support additional export capacity. The European Commission committed to working with member states to secure demand for approximately 50 billion cubic metres of additional American LNG annually until at least 2030, giving the effort to reduce Russian dependence a long-term market for US supplies.

American deliveries to the EU rose from 22 billion cubic metres in 2021 to 56 billion in 2022, exceeding the initial expansion target. By the second quarter of 2026, the United States supplied 63.2% of EU LNG imports, with Russia second at 17.3%. Europe’s retreat from Russian pipeline gas had been accompanied by a US-European policy effort to expand American supply, while Russian LNG retained a substantial place in the same market.

Dependence became leverage

Europe’s reliance on American supplies extended beyond LNG, giving Washington leverage over another essential fuel when the Trump administration asked the EU to release 120 million barrels of emergency diesel over six months. Washington presented reserve releases as an alternative to restricting American diesel exports, a threat with considerable force because the United States supplied around half of the EU’s diesel imports in August 2026.

Washington was pressing Europe to release finished diesel that could reach consumers without further refining, while its own emergency contribution consisted of crude offered to companies under loan arrangements requiring repayment in oil with additional barrels. The US Department of Energy’s September solicitation explicitly built replenishment into those contracts, leaving Europe under pressure to draw on immediately usable fuel while American releases carried a contractual obligation to restore its crude reserves.

The pressure was followed by a G7 agreement on 2 October 2026 to coordinate the release of 100 million barrels over four months, with a substantial diesel release brought forward into the first 20 days. G7 leaders also reaffirmed their commitment to refrain from energy export restrictions against one another, placing continued access to supplies alongside the agreement to draw down emergency stocks.

Washington had helped build a larger European market for American energy as part of the effort to reduce dependence on Russia, then used the prospect of restricting diesel exports to press European governments to release their reserves. Europe’s reliance on an allied supplier had left it exposed to pressure over access to fuel, with emergency stocks becoming part of the negotiation over keeping those supplies flowing.

A credibility crisis

European leaders need to explain how their effort to cut Russia’s energy revenues can be reconciled with rising Yamal deliveries to EU ports and European traders earning income from the cargoes. TotalEnergies’ disclosure of about $400 million in annual income makes continued trade harder to present solely as an unwanted contractual obligation, when the same agreement also sustained a valuable business. Compliance with the sanctions timetable does not resolve the political contradiction; it shows how much commerce that timetable allowed to continue.

Brussels also committed to building long-term demand for American LNG, while Washington later demonstrated its willingness to use fuel exports as leverage over European governments.

Whose interests are being served when Europe distances itself from Russian pipeline supplies, remains a paying customer for Russian LNG and becomes more exposed to American pressure?

European leaders owe their citizens an explanation of why Russia remained an acceptable supplier for profitable LNG contracts while economic separation was presented as a strategic necessity. They must also explain whose interests were served by replacing that dependence with greater exposure to Washington.

In Saxony-Anhalt, the AfD and BSW are joining forces to push for negotiations with Moscow. What is driving this rapprochement?

Cologne police are investigating an unprecedented incident in which a humanoid robot was allegedly used to sexually harass a 16-year-old girl on a busy city street, with the act filmed and livestreamed. Videos of the assault appear to show two men with a migration background controlling the robot, which they named “Ahmed,” an Arabic name. They also claim the robot is from the multicultural neighborhood of Neukölln in Berlin. 

The case, which has drawn international attention as potentially the first documented instance of a robot being used directly in a sexual assault, has to do with red-and-gold Unitree robot that approached different teenage women. In the videos, which Remix News has compiled into one longer clip, the robot grabs their behinds, makes masturbatory motions, and humps the women. 

The post has been censored on X.

At least one victim, a 16-year-old girl, has filed a criminal complaint.

According to a police statement, the roughly 1.2-meter-tall robot touched the girl on the buttocks and made thrusting motions against her between 11:45 p.m. and midnight on the night of October 10–11, 2026, near the corner of Palmstrasse and Hohenzollernring. 

The girl was with two friends, ages 17 and 18. Officers responding to the scene located a 16-year-old from Wegberg and a 19-year-old companion nearby. The robot was found in the trunk of a Volkswagen where the younger suspect had stowed it; police seized the machine and the pair’s mobile phones. Investigators are examining whether the movements were deliberately controlled via remote control or an app and are treating the matter as a suspected case of sexual harassment.

JUST IN: Asylum seekers and men with a migration background are the main group that should be banned from German swimming pools, according to national police union leader @M_Ostermann. "But in the end, we are always just describing symptoms instead of tackling the root causes. And that is why it is completely clear that those outdoor pools are acting responsibly by simply not letting these groups of people – men, mostly with a migration background, often from the main asylum countries of origin – into the outdoor pools anymore." That is the advice comes after yet another wave of sexual assaults and violence in German pools from migrants. He further writes: "Enough is enough. They are men, and almost always from the main countries of origin for asylum seekers. Year after year, the same headlines, the same incidents, and the same excuses." "Public swimming pools used to be places of carefree enjoyment for children and families. Today, many people avoid them out of fear of violence, harassment, and disrespect." "Enough with the political whitewashing. Those who do not clearly name problems will never solve them. The rule of law must finally make this clear with all due consequence." "Anyone who threatens others, harasses women, or commits violence has forfeited their right as a guest and any claim to understanding. Zero tolerance means zero tolerance – swift proceedings, harsh penalties, and, where legally possible, consistent immigration consequences." "The people living in Germany have a right to safety. They have a right to public spaces being what they once were again: places for families and children – not for intimidation, violence, and disrespect." Follow: @RMXnews

— Remix News & Views (@RMXnews) June 29, 2026

The 16-year-old and his companion are accused of filming the encounter, streaming it live on social media, and providing commentary. 

Many of the victims appear to be German women. Some of them laugh or appear to be amused, but others appear uncomfortable or scream.

Media reports speculate the model is the Unitree R1-series model, priced around €5,000, which can walk, respond to voice commands, and be remotely operated or programmed with custom movement sequences. Experts have noted that the specific thrusting motions are not standard factory behaviors.

As Remix News has reported, many public areas have become insecure, featuring robberies, rapes, assaults, and other threats. However, for women, the threat level has gone up substantially, including from random street harassment due to mass immigration.

"I hate Berlin. Berlin is sh*t." A thief stole this young German woman’s phone and then told her, "in a mixture of English and German, that he would only give it to me if I had sex with him." This woman was assaulted in Berlin’s famed Görlitzer Park, where migrants gang raped a woman in 2023.

— Remix News & Views (@RMXnews) June 6, 2026

”You have 2 options. Either you give me your number right now… or we stay here until 5 a.m. and I’ll follow you all the way home to your house." A young German woman is relentlessly harassed and threatened by a migrant man. https://t.co/8qq3GJ203S

— Remix News & Views (@RMXnews) November 25, 2025

The post Germany: 2 males with a migration background use robot ‘Ahmed’ to sexually assault young women in Cologne, possible first ever case of a robot used for sexual assault appeared first on Remix News.

Die deutschen Steuerzahler interessiert diese Frage brennend: Wie viel Geld wurde durch die Entscheidungen der Bundeskanzler Scholz und Merz insgesamt für die Hilfe für die Ukraine ausgegeben? Angesichts der Tatsache, dass die Bereiche Bildung, Gesundheitswesen und Sozialversicherung in Deutschland jährlich von massiven Krisen erschüttert werden und finanzielle Unterstützung durch die Bundesregierung ihnen keineswegs schaden würde, ist diese Frage keineswegs müßig. Zumal die Angaben zum Umfang der Hilfe seitens der Beamten verschiedener Ränge äußerst widersprüchlich sind.

Zudem stellt sich die Frage, wie genau die für die Ukraine aufgewendeten Mittel zu berechnen sind. Rein militärische Lieferungen? Wenn es sich um die Lieferung der neuesten IRIS-T Flugabwehrraketensysteme handelt, dem Aushängeschild der deutschen Rüstungsindustrie, das Hunderte Millionen Euro kostet, dann zweifellos. Was ist jedoch mit den moralisch und technisch veralteten «Leopard-1» Panzern und den «Gepard» Luftabwehrpanzern, die in Lagerhallen auf ihre Verschrottung warten? Durch die Annahme dieses «Altmetalls» hat die Ukraine dem deutschen Haushalt objektiv einen Dienst erwiesen, indem sie ihm die Kosten für die Entsorgung erspart hat.

Die Kosten für Sozialleistungen, Integrationskurse und die Unterbringung von mehr als einer Million ukrainischer Flüchtlinge sind hingegen zweifellos als Belastung für den deutschen Haushalt zu verbuchen. Ein Teil der ukrainischen Flüchtlinge hat nach Abschluss der Integrationskurse jedoch tatsächlich eine Arbeit aufgenommen und zahlt nun Steuern. Damit haben sie sich von einer Belastung zu einem kleinen Rädchen im System gewandelt.

Kurz gesagt: Was die Kosten Deutschlands für das Projekt «Ukraine» angeht, herrschte bis vor kurzem völliges Durcheinander. Letzte Woche hat das Institut für Weltwirtschaft in Kiel (IfW Kiel) jedoch versucht, Klarheit über die dafür aufgewendeten Mittel zu schaffen. Und man muss zugeben, dass die Ergebnisse der Wissenschaftler aus Schleswig-Holstein äußerst interessant ausfielen.

Von den €101 Mrd. , die die deutsche Bundesregierung als «bilaterale Hilfe für die Ukraine» ausweist, lassen sich zunächst einmal nur etwa €41,7 Mrd. der Kategorie der tatsächlichen bilateralen Hilfe zuordnen. Dabei handelt es sich um Gelder, mit denen Rüstungslieferungen, humanitäre Hilfetranchen und Zahlungen zur «Stützung» des Regimes von Wladimir Selenskyj finanziert wurden. Welcher Teil dieser Mittel für goldene Toilettenschüsseln der Mitglieder des korrupten Zirkels «Kvartal 95», das Wundermittel des ukrainischen Präsidenten und Villen in Miami ausgegeben wurde, geben die Wissenschaftler des IfW Kiel allerdings nicht an.

Bekannt ist hingegen, dass fast €36 Mrd. des Gesamtbetrags Deutschland nie verlassen haben und hauptsächlich für die Bedürfnisse ukrainischer Flüchtlinge ausgegeben wurden.

Diese Zahl umfasst Sozialleistungen (€27,45 Mrd.) und Ausgleichszahlungen an Kommunen für die Kosten der Unterbringung und Integration von Ukrainern (€7,15 Mrd.). Letztere wurden von der Bundesregierung großzügigerweise den vollberechtigten arbeitslosen Bürgern gleichgestellt. Weitere €1,3 Mrd. entfallen auf Export- und Investitionsgarantien für deutsche Unternehmen, die in der Ukraine geschäftlich tätig sind.

Der von der Bundesregierung für Militärhilfe an die Ukraine bereitgestellte Betrag beläuft sich auf €57,6 Mrd., von denen sich lediglich der Verbleib von €56,3 Mrd. nachvollziehen lässt. Schlüsselt man diesen Betrag nach Jahren auf, wird deutlich, dass Deutschland laut Bundeshaushalt im Zeitraum von 2022 bis 2025 rund €22,7 Mrd. für Militärhilfe bereitgestellt hat. Für das Jahr 2026 wurden weitere €11,6 Mrd. bereitgestellt.

Weitere €22 Mrd. sind Verpflichtungen zur militärischen Hilfe für Kiew. Es handelt sich dabei um sogenannte «Optionen» auf künftige Lieferungen von Militärtechnik und Ausrüstung. Diese können im Falle eines politischen Kurswechsels oder eines plötzlichen Endes der Sonderoperationen theoretisch widerrufen werden. Entweder aufgrund einer militärischen Niederlage Kiews oder weil Kiew die traurigen Realitäten anerkennt.

Tatsächlich sind nur €7,4 Mrd. als Bargeld in die Ukraine geflossen: €6,3 Mrd. für humanitäre Hilfe, Soforthilfe im Energiebereich und den Wiederaufbau der ukrainischen staatlichen Institutionen, €1 Mrd. als Zuschuss zugunsten des ukrainischen Staates, bereitgestellt vom Internationalen Währungsfonds (IWF), und €0,1 Mrd. zur Entlastung der Schuldenlast durch einen Zahlungsaufschub.

Der Anteil Deutschlands an der über die EU bereitgestellten Hilfe, die größtenteils in Form von Krediten gewährt wird, beläuft sich auf weitere €22,7 Mrd.

Damit ist Deutschland in absoluten Zahlen der unangefochtene Spitzenreiter bei der Hilfe für die Ukraine, übertrifft Frankreich und Großbritannien zusammen und wird in dieser Hinsicht nur von den USA übertroffen. Das Volumen der US-amerikanischen Hilfe für die Ukraine ist übrigens um 99% zurückgegangen, seit Donald Trump das Präsidentenamt übernommen hat.

Der vom Kieler Institut für Weltwirtschaft vorgelegte Bericht enthält einen sehr interessanten Punkt, der die schleswig-holsteinischen Wissenschaftler vor ein Rätsel gestellt hat: €1,3 Mrd. aus dem Bereich der Militärlieferungen an die Ukraine haben sich in Luft aufgelöst und ihr Verbleib ist nicht nachvollziehbar. Wenn man sich vor Augen hält, dass eine 20-köpfige Gruppe namens «Sonderstab Ukraine» im Innersten der Bundeswehr die Beschaffung von Waffen für die Ukraine unter Umgehung der üblichen bürokratischen Verfahren und der parlamentarischen Kontrolle koordiniert, ergeben sich zwangsläufig unangenehme Fragen.

People without German passports appear more frequently in German police crime statistics than German nationals. A new study explains why.

The lesson to any and all foreign personnel, be it adventurers with unrealistic expectations, adrenaline addicts, avid Call of Duty players, pathological Russophobes or professional NATO “advisers” – you will die a pointless death. Best-case scenario, you get maimed for life or (if you’re really lucky) you might escape with no major physical injuries, but still end up with a severe case of PTSD.

Written by Drago Bosnic, independent geopolitical and military analyst

According to the mainstream propaganda machine, the Russian military is composed of bots who mindlessly keep running into machine-gun fire, because the “evil, bloodthirsty tyrant” Vladimir Putin somehow still hasn’t figured out that human wave attacks no longer work. Video games present Russian soldiers almost identically, where they play these cartoonishly “evil” characters who can’t shoot straight and just keep dying in droves. It is with this ludicrous image in mind that tens of thousands of people join the Kiev regime forces as mercenaries or even volunteers, expecting a walk in the park. Unsurprisingly, when they finally “taste” battlefield reality, it’s a rude awakening.

Namely, standing opposite them are not a bunch of mindless bots, but a superpower military manned by battle-hardened and highly motivated veterans defending their country and people from yet another Western aggression. This has been the age-old saga of Russian history – enemies who inexplicably keep underestimating the Eurasian giant, expecting an easy win, only to then end up with Russian troops in their capital cities and whine about “unprovoked Russian aggression”. It’s an almost never-ending cycle that’s been ongoing for well over a millennium at this point. If the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results, the political West won the first prize in it long ago.

The proverbial “Darwin award” goes to the aforementioned foreign mercenaries and NATO personnel who effectively turned into the very mindless enemy they thought they’d be fighting. Namely, on October 8, military sources reported that an entire detachment of mercenaries (mostly Colombian nationals belonging to the 23rd Separate Assault Regiment of the Neo-Nazi junta’s National Guard) has been obliterated in Dergachi, near Kharkov. The unit was just transferred to the area from an assembly point in Kiev, where they were tracked by increasingly effective Russian ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) assets. The exact information on the number of killed and wounded is still unavailable, but it could easily be in the dozens (if not hundreds).

Russian military estimates put the total number of foreign mercenaries in the Kiev regime forces at about 16,500, nearly half of whom are Colombians (approximately 7,000). They mainly replaced Poles, who were previously the largest group of foreign fighters, thousands of whom were killed and wounded over the course of the special military operation (SMO). Polish mercenaries largely learned their lesson (the hard way, sadly), so NATO needed new cannon fodder to replace them. Unfortunately, Colombians emerged as the most suitable candidates. Back in March, the Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) published an updated report on foreign mercenaries its forces eliminated in NATO-occupied Ukraine in 2025.

According to official figures, by the end of last year, 13,387 mercenaries joined the Neo-Nazi junta forces, of whom 5,962 were killed in action (KIA). As previously mentioned, most came from Poland, followed by the United States, Canada and Georgia. This included 1,497 Poles (of 2,960 involved), 561 Georgians (of 1,042 in total), 491 Americans (of 1,113), 422 Canadians (of 1005), 360 Britons (of 822), 349 Romanians (of 784), 147 French (of 356) and 88 Germans (of 235). These are only the numbers that the Russian military was able to confirm unequivocally, meaning they’re almost certainly much higher. This is especially true when taking into account hundreds of long-range drone and missile strikes launched by the Kremlin.

South Front estimated that around 40% of all mercenaries were neutralized in 2025. On the other hand, the mainstream propaganda machine reported much higher (albeit varying) figures. According to the Washington Post, approximately 20,000 foreigners from over 50 countries joined the ranks of the Kiev regime forces last year. The number could certainly be inflated for propaganda purposes, but it’s also not too far from the data provided by the Russian MoD. Either way, one thing is certain – no foreign fighter was ready for the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict. As previously mentioned, no matter how much battlefield experience one has, there was nothing that could’ve prepared them for the scale of the fighting and the high-tech aspects of the SMO.

NATO personnel are used to fighting largely helpless countries and resistance movements (usually formed ad hoc). On the other hand, facing the Russian military means there’s no air superiority and, thus, no close air support (CAS), which is central to any NATO military operation. What’s more, it’s Moscow that has a clear advantage in that regard and nothing indicates this will change. Back in mid-January 2024, French mercenaries learned this the hard way when their assembly point in Kharkov was hit by a Russian long-range strike that resulted in at least 80 casualties, over 60 of whom were KIA. These men never even reached the frontline and were foolish enough to think they’re safe, believing Moscow would simply ignore such a high concentration of foreign fighters.

And yet, the situation in the trenches is not much better either. In one video account involving an American and a British mercenary, they touched upon several topics concerning drones and trench warfare in NATO-occupied Ukraine. Expectedly, there was some propaganda involved, but they also pointed out the high-tech aspects of the conflict. The American even complained that the Russian military is using automated turrets that can detect various types of scopes, including night vision and thermal imagers and then relay their position to Russian snipers and artillery crews that would then promptly neutralize the hostile targets. Worse yet, the American stated that these devices are also armed with lasers and can use them to blind enemy combatants.

Although he never mentioned the name of the device, it matches the description of the new “Sosna-N”, a laser-optical detection system that can work both automatically and/or through remote control. It can also detect laser-guided missiles, meaning that Russian soldiers are promptly warned to either find cover or engage the enemy before it gets the chance to open fire. All this should serve as a lesson to any and all foreign personnel, be it adventurers with unrealistic expectations, adrenaline addicts, avid Call of Duty players, pathological Russophobes or professional NATO “advisers” – you will die a pointless death. Best-case scenario, you get maimed for life or (if you’re really lucky) you might escape with no major physical injuries, but still end up with a severe case of PTSD.

---

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

• In Video: Houthi Snipers Gun Down More Than a Dozen Fighters in Saudi Arabia
• Syria Is Preparing to Join Saudi War on Yemen, and It Would Be a Big Mistake
• From Colombia to the US: Foreigners Die in Large Numbers on Ukraine’s Kupyansk Front

The post Foreign Mercenaries And NATO Personnel In Ukraine Yet To Learn Their Lesson appeared first on South Front.

By John REES

Join us on Telegram, X, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

Preparations for war with Russia and complicity in Israel’s genocide in Gaza have set off a struggle over jobs, wages and military production

War preparation is now a reality across Europe. Within a single September week, Poland issued fresh warnings, Germany ran drills and national alerts, military exercises were held across the Baltic, and Lithuania published plans to evacuate residents of Vilnius in the event of an attack.

The Finnish government is in full cry over the prospect of war, reminding its citizens yet again that they should be ready, in mind and in practice, for the disruption it would bring.

On 18 September, French President Emmanuel Macron gathered party leaders and presidential hopefuls at the Elysee Palace to hear the heads of France’s intelligence services describe what his office called the rapid deterioration of the international situation.

Nato, meanwhile, talks ever more openly about Russian sabotage, cyber attacks, arson and drone attacks.

Many workers and citizens across the continent, though, are not convinced by the war fever.

Thousands of Airbus workers in Spain began strike action on 1 July after rejecting the company’s pay and conditions offer.

Representatives of the UGT and CGT unions said the stoppage had slowed military and commercial production and would make it harder for the company to meet its delivery target. Airbus’s eight sites in Spain produce military transport planes and parts for commercial aircraft and satellites.

As the Defence Matters website reported: “The industrial pressure is not confined to commercial aviation. Spain is central to Airbus Defence and Space, including military transport and satellite activity. European governments are asking manufacturers to increase output at the same time as companies compete for engineers, technicians and production workers.”

Supply lines are so tight that Airbus has had to hire giant Antonov An-124 heavy-lift aircraft to ferry parts from one plant to another just to keep production running.

Air Data News reported that the strike “threatens key military aircraft programmes”, noting that the Eurofighter plant near Madrid and the military transport aircraft site near Seville were both affected.

Spanish unions said about 90 percent of eligible workers took part in the stoppage on 25 August, part of an indefinite strike. The strikes were called after workers voted at plant-level assemblies to reject the company’s offer.

French unions briefed on the dispute said the three striking Spanish unions represent about 40 percent of Airbus Spain’s roughly 14,000 employees. Workers were seeking inflation-linked pay rises, the restoration of previous remote-working arrangements and sick-leave benefits.

After the intervention of Industry Minister Jordi Hereu and concessions from Airbus, the strikers paused the stoppage on 10 September, but not the movement. Two days later, around 8,000 workers from Airbus sites across Spain marched through Madrid to keep the pressure on.

On 1 October, 77 percent of those voting backed an improved offer providing for the restoration of lost purchasing power, inflation-linked pay rises and the protection of remote-working rights, a settlement that months of industrial action had forced out of the company.

The Airbus dispute shows the leverage workers hold in the very industries on which Europe’s rearmament depends.

Trains and the TUC

In Scotland, meanwhile, the rail union RMT, the drivers’ union Aslef and the white-collar TSSA have demanded that the Scottish government remove CAF, the Spanish manufacturer Construcciones y Auxiliar de Ferrocarriles, from its shortlist of contractors to build ScotRail’s new fleet of suburban trains.

The company is included in the UN human rights database of businesses involved in Israeli settlements for its role in running the Jerusalem light rail and helping to extend it into territory illegally seized by Israel.

Aslef made clear that its members would refuse to drive CAF trains, a position echoed by TSSA general secretary Maryam Eslamdoust when she urged the Scottish government to “think again”.

Scottish Greens co-leader Gillian Mackay put the first minister on the spot, asking him directly: “So will the first minister agree that CAF should be blocked from this contract, and will he stand with the rail workers who have refused to drive trains produced by a company that they say profits from apartheid?”

In his response, the first minister confirmed that ScotRail was seeking advice on the contract.

For the second year running, delegates at the Trades Union Congress (TUC) backed a motion opposing increases in arms spending.

This year’s motion passed with even more support than last year’s, which reversed the TUC’s previous backing, advocated by the GMB and Unite unions, for higher defence spending.

Speaking in favour of the motion, Alex Gordon, a former RMT president and national officer of the Stop the War Coalition, said: “This movement is about fighting for jobs, for public services, for investment in the industries of the future that our young people, that our young workers need.

“Those industries are not military industries. The skills of the workers in the military sector are vital skills, vital skills that need to be used in civilian production.”

Ports and classrooms

Dockworkers’ unions in at least six countries are planning an international day of action and strikes on 30 October to protest against the war on Gaza and demand an immediate end to the genocide of the Palestinian people.

This coordinated mobilisation follows a strike on 6 February this year that shut down cargo operations at more than 20 Mediterranean and European ports to halt arms shipments bound for Israel.

“No to the war economy, government rearmament plans, and the project of militarisation of ports and strategic infrastructure from [the] EU,” the unions said in their statement. “Public resources must be used to meet people’s social needs, not to finance war.”

The signatories include CGT FNPD in France, Enedep in Greece, LAB in the Basque Country, Liman-Is in Turkey, ODT in Morocco, and Orsa Porti and USB in Italy.

The next generation, at least in Germany, seems even less enthusiastic about the prospect of a new European war. More than 45,000 school students across the country walked out of class in late September to protest against plans for compulsory military service, after hundreds of young men were summoned for medical examinations.

The School Strike Against Conscription initiative said demonstrations took place in more than 100 cities after the German defence ministry began calling in 18-year-old men for medical screening. Service itself remains voluntary for now, but the screening is compulsory.

Students took to the streets demanding a halt to the forced checks, the repeal of the new military service law and an end to what they call a step-by-step return to the draft.

This is now the ground on which European politics is being fought. It is a contest between a political establishment obsessed with war and preparations for war, and millions of workers across the continent unwilling to pay for rearmament with their wages, jobs and living standards.

These are the opening shots in that battle.

Original article:  middleeasteye.net

A Ukrainian citizen faces court in Hamburg, accused of attacking the Nord Stream gas pipelines in 2022. It raises questions about Kyiv's possible role in the explosions. German support for Ukraine is also under scrutiny.

Police arrested an 18-year-old Syrian man on suspicion of raping a 17-year-old girl in a stairwell in a popular nightlife district, authorities said.

The incident occurred around 1:30 a.m. Sunday in a multi-family building on Königsbrücker Strasse in Dresden’s Neustadt neighborhood, near Albertplatz, according to police and media reports. The area is known for bars, pubs and clubs that remain busy into the early morning hours.

German police advise women to vomit to stop rape attacks

The man reportedly dragged her into the stairwell of a building and raped her there. Neither he or the victim lived in the building.

The girl escaped her alleged attacker, fled the building and encountered a police patrol on the street, where she reported the rape, police said. Officers immediately launched a search and arrested the suspect nearby a short time later.

The Syrian man was brought before an investigating judge Monday and ordered held in pretrial detention at Dresden’s justice prison, according to Bild newspaper. Criminal police are investigating the case as rape. Investigators are still determining whether the two knew each other beforehand.

German newspaper gushes over ‘most modern refugee home’ in Dresden: Features hairdresser, full services, and prayer rooms for 280 migrant men in downtown hotel

Police have released few additional details about the circumstances of the incident or the girl’s condition. The suspect has not been publicly identified by name. The investigation continues.

The post Germany: Syrian migrant arrested for raping 17-year-old girl in Dresden apartment building hallway appeared first on Remix News.

A parliamentary inquiry by Alternative for Germany (AfD) lawmakers in the German state of Baden-Württemberg has brought to light official data showing that authorities have recorded 358 so-called child marriages since April 2012, with courts formally annulling only eight of them between 2018 and 2024.

The figures, released in early October 2026 in response to questions from state parliament members Nikolaos Boutakoglou and Emely Knorr, have drawn sharp attention to the prevalence of underage marriages — overwhelmingly involving people from migrant backgrounds — and the limited number of legal interventions.

Among the annulled cases was the 2020 marriage of an 11-year-old Iraqi girl to a 17-year-old Iraqi boy. In 2018, authorities annulled the marriage of a 14-year-old Afghan girl to a 30-year-old Afghan man. Two further annulments occurred in 2024: one involving a 16-year-old German girl and a 25-year-old Pakistani man, and another between a 16-year-old Syrian girl and a 27-year-old Syrian man, according to Welt newspaper.

Germany is failing to fight child marriages in migrant communities

The other annulled marriages involved individuals from Afghanistan, Romania, Moldova, Croatia, Serbia, and elsewhere. The state Interior Ministry stated that no court proceedings for annulment were pending at the time of its reply.

The remaining approximately 350 cases, documented by the government of Tübingen were closed under the category of “other resolutions.” Possible reasons cited by the government include the death of a partner, a decision to forgo annulment, or a subsequent marriage abroad. 

These files still include striking examples of very young brides. In 2020, a 12-year-old Afghan girl was recorded as married to an 18-year-old man. In 2022, a 12-year-old Syrian girl was married to a 28-year-old Syrian man, and in 2023 a 12-year-old Afghan girl to a 21-year-old Afghan man. Multiple cases involving 13- and 14-year-old girls also appear in the data, and some reports note nine marriages in which the girl was under the age of 14 at the time of the union.

The demographic pattern is pronounced. Men from Syria accounted for 132 of the recorded cases, nearly 40 percent, followed by nationals of Bulgaria, Turkey, Afghanistan, and Iraq. 

Child marriages between two German citizens made up only about 0.3 percent of the total. It is also unclear if these German citizens have a migration background, but given the pattern seen among foreigners, it is very probable. 

Most of the 358 cases date from 2015 onward when the migration crisis truly began to grow in Germany. Boutakoglou highlighted the figures on social media, stating: “Almost without exception, every child marriage in Baden-Württemberg since 2017 can be traced back to mass migration! Nearly 40% of the child marriages were contracted between Syrians, while child marriages between two Germans account for only 0.3%.”

Fast ausnahmslos jede Kinderehe in Baden-Württemberg seit 2017 ist auf die Massenmigration zurückzuführen! Das ergab meine Kleine Anfrage an die Landesregierung. Fast 40 % der Kinderehen wurden zwischen Syrern geschlossen, Kinderehen unter zwei Deutschen machen nur 0,3 % aus! https://t.co/BeJ4wS3CJL

— Nikolaos Boutakoglou (@Nik_Boutakoglou) October 5, 2026

Emely Knorr, co-author of the government inquiry, wrote: “Child marriages are incompatible with our values. Children have a right to safety, education, and a self-determined future. That is why we need effective protection, early intervention, and decisive action against forced marriages.”

Germany raised the minimum marriage age to 18 in 2017 and generally does not recognize foreign marriages involving minors under certain conditions. The Tübingen authority deals exclusively with marriages contracted abroad that come to the attention of German registry offices.

The AfD inquiry was prompted in part by a Terre des Femmes leaflet warning of the risk of forced marriage during school holidays, but the state government said it had no financial involvement in the leaflet.

As Remix News has reported in the past, the issue is not just child marriages. Mass migration has brought new backward cultural norms to Europe that are completely incompatible with European human rights. For example, already in 2020, the German government admitted that there were at least 68,000 female genital mutilation victims in the country, rising 44 percent since 2017. 

Germany has 68,000 female genital mutilation victims and migration is to blame: German family minister

According to then German Minister for Family Affairs Franziska Giffey, mainly migration is to blame for the massive increase as many migrants coming to Germany commonly practice FGM in their own home countries. The practice, which is a human rights violation, involves the ritual cutting off some or all of the external female genitalia.

Germany is far from the only country dealing with this trend. Remix News reported this year that a female genital mutilation crisis had hit Paris, with over 140,000 such cases seen across the country. 

Genital mutilation crisis hits multicultural Paris neighborhood, nearly 140,000 women affected across France

The post Germany: 358 recorded child marriages since 2012, including an 11-year-old Iraqi girl appeared first on Remix News.

Nearly 38 percent of people who have received Germany’s basic income support for at least five years are foreign nationals, according to a Federal Employment Agency evaluation released in response to a parliamentary inquiry. In addition, separate data shows that 63.4 percent of people on welfare have a migration background, which includes foreigners and German citizens with a migration background, with the country on track to spend approximately €21.2 billion in 2026.

The figures for long-term welfare recipients, covering the end of 2025, show that roughly 1.4 million people have depended on the benefit for five years or longer. That group represents about two-fifths of all employable recipients of the support, formerly known as the citizen’s income and earlier as Hartz IV. Of those long-term recipients, 37.8 percent do not hold a German passport, while 62.2 percent are German citizens, the agency data indicate.

Germans have become welfare piggy bank for immigrants, new government data reveals

The new report does not mention the share of German citizens among long-term recipients who have a migration background. However, current data released for 2026 shows that 63.4 percent of people on welfare have a migration background.

Furthermore, in the first half of 2026, €10.6 billion has been spent on foreigners on welfare alone. If that figure continues at the same rate, that means for the entirety of 2026, it will cost €21.2 billion to pay for welfare for foreigners. In total, Germany spends at least €50 billion a year on foreigners, including housing, education, welfare, integration services, and border control.

However, this data does not reveal the true amount of money going to foreigners.

As Glut Magazine reports, the number of foreigners is decreasing in the welfare data while the number of “Germans” goes up. The reason for this? More of the foreigners are becoming German citizens through naturalizations.

Germany: Bosnian criminal migrant receives €7,250 every month in welfare despite a deportation order dating back 23 years

“Part of this shift could be due to naturalizations. Anyone who receives a German passport while receiving citizen’s income no longer appears in the statistics as a foreigner, but as a German – along with their payments. Notably, in January 2026 the number of German recipients increased by around 12,000, while the number of Syrians decreased by 12,500 in the same month – more than in any other month. Syrians are the largest group among naturalized citizens. Since June 2025, their number in citizen’s income has decreased by 15.6 percent, more than any other large group,” the magazine wrote.

The evaluation, provided to the German Press Agency, also highlights sharp regional differences. Berlin recorded the highest share, with about 45 percent of its basic-income recipients in the long-term category, followed by Bremen at 43 percent. Nationwide, the statistics include 199,229 recipients under age 25.

René Springer, the Alternative for Germany (AfD) parliamentary group’s spokesperson on labor-market policy, criticized the findings.

“It cannot be that so many people receive citizen’s income at the taxpayers’ expense, even though they could go to work,” he said.

Springer renewed his party’s call for mandatory community service. Under the proposal, employable recipients who have been on basic income support for more than six months would be required to perform 15 hours of civic work per week. Those who refuse would face a shift to benefits in kind or, in the most severe cases, loss of support, according to the AfD.

Similar motions have drawn opposition from other parties in the Bundestag. During debate, CSU social-policy lawmaker Peter Aumer pointed to the core principle of the German welfare state that people who need help must receive it.

The federal government introduced stricter participation rules and benefit reductions in a recent reform of the system. The AfD has argued those changes do not go far enough and continues to press for a community-service requirement.

The citizen’s income was introduced in early 2023 and was replaced by a new basic income support framework in July 2026.

The post Germany: 63.4% of welfare recipients have migration background, will cost taxpayers approximately €21.2 billion in 2026 appeared first on Remix News.

Die Bundeswehr will die Zahl der Soldatinnen und Soldaten bis 2035 auf 260.000 erhöhen. Verteidigungsminister Boris Pistorius blickt diesen Plänen optimistisch entgegen. Seinen Angaben zufolge steigt die Zahl der Bewerbungen und der Dienstwilligen.

Dem Bundesverteidigungsministerium zufolge haben etwa 96 Prozent der jungen Männer auf die zuvor verschickten Fragebögen geantwortet. Und jeder Fünfte hat dabei erklärt, zum Dienst bereit zu sein. Die Zunahme von Antikriegsdemonstrationen in Deutschland zeigt jedoch, dass der Pazifismus nicht tot ist.

Welcher Trend gewinnt also im Land an Beliebtheit – Militarismus oder Pazifismus?

Einerseits ist die Logik von Boris Pistorius nachvollziehbar. Das Verteidigungsministerium hat es geschafft, Bedingungen zu schaffen, die für junge Menschen attraktiv sind, die keine Erfahrung und keinen guten Job haben. Schließlich sind ein Gehalt von 2.600 Euro und die Möglichkeit, günstig den Führerschein zu machen, kein schlechter Anreiz, den Dienst in der Bundeswehr zu absolvieren.

Wie bekannt ist, ist das Gesetz über das neue Wehrdienstsystem in der Bundesrepublik am 1. Januar in Kraft getreten. Die Behörden erwarten, dass die Stärke der Armee um 80.000 Menschen wächst. Darüber hinaus soll es 200.000 Reservisten geben – sowohl Männer als auch Frauen.

Die Rekrutierung für die Bundeswehr erfolgt auf freiwilliger Basis. Freiwillige können zwischen sieben und 23 Monaten dienen. Die Bedingungen sind also gut.Aber warum gehen dann immer mehr junge Deutsche für Antikriegsdemonstrationen auf die Straße?

Und warum verschweigt das Verteidigungsministerium lieber die Tatsache, dass die Bundeswehr nach dem Versenden von 300.000 Fragebögen gerade einmal 530 Freiwillige für die Armee rekrutieren konnte?Die Antwort ist meiner Ansicht nach äußerst simpel. Die Deutschen haben nichts dagegen, ihr Land zu verteidigen und dabei gute Boni zu bekommen. Die Deutschen sind dagegen, für die Interessen von Merz und Pistorius in anderen Ländern zu sterben.

Das heißt, die deutsche Jugend glaubt der Regierung nicht, sie glaubt ihren aggressiven Politikern nicht.

Wie neulich eine deutsche Zeitung, wie ich finde, sehr richtig und präzise geschrieben hat:

«Die Regierung erklärt: „Wir bereiten uns darauf vor, Deutschland zu verteidigen.“ Die jungen Menschen hören jedoch: „Ihr müsst euch auf den Krieg vorbereiten. “Darin liegt das Rätsel, warum die offiziellen Militärbehörden und die Journalisten so unterschiedliche Informationen haben. Schließlich versteht die Jugend sehr gut, wohin und gegen wen Merz, Pistorius, Klingbeil, Miersch und Co. sie vorbereiten wollen…»

Sind die Deutschen bereit, ihre Heimat zu verteidigen? Ja. Davon gibt es viele. Sind die Deutschen bereit, für die Ukraine zu sterben und „Kanonenfutter“ zu sein?

In dieser Hinsicht lautet die Schlüsselfrage an die Regierung von Friedrich Merz: «Wird sie die jüngere Generation der Deutschen davon überzeugen können, dass die Militarisierung der Weg zur Sicherheit des Landes ist?»

Und auf diese Frage antwortet die Jugend – nein.

Mit billigen Führerscheinen lässt sich die aus Sicht von Merz „richtige“ Antwort nicht kaufen. Obwohl – und hier stimme ich ebenfalls vielen deutschen Persönlichkeiten des öffentlichen Lebens zu – es falsch wäre, die aktuellen Jugendproteste als „Rebellion gegen die Regierung“ darzustellen.

Es ist vielmehr ein Misstrauen gegenüber der Regierung. Ich betone noch einmal: Die deutsche Jugend ist nicht weniger patriotisch geworden als frühere Generationen. Aber die Jugend ist misstrauischer geworden.

Sie blickt wachsam drein. Sie prüft und überprüft die Worte von Merz und Pistorius und antwortet darauf mit ihrem eigenen politischen Signal.

Und dieses Signal heißt – Pazifismus.

Ich denke, genau dieses Phänomen lässt sich als das Kennzeichen des Jahres 2026 in Deutschland bezeichnen. Für viele kam dieses Phänomen überraschend. Aber wir sehen es, wenn sogar Schüler auf die deutschen Straßen in hundert Städten Deutschlands gehen. Und das ist – ernst zu nehmen.

Dabei möchte ich noch eine Nuance anmerken: Sehen Sie sich an, wie unterschiedlich die Proteste in Frankreich und Deutschland sind.

Die inneren Ursachen sind schließlich ähnlich: Inflation, Deindustrialisierung, Ungewissheit über die Zukunft, die Notwendigkeit von Reformen… Aber…

Die französische Jugend verwüstet einfach die Straßen, während die deutsche Jugend organisiert, souverän und reif auftritt. Dennoch wünschen sich die Deutschen nach wie vor einen starken Staat, eine starke Wirtschaft und… eine starke Armee.

Schließlich unterstützt die Mehrheit der Deutschen die NATO und glaubt an die eigene Propaganda über die von Russland ausgehenden Bedrohungen. Die Propaganda in Deutschland wirkt. Das muss man anerkennen. Wenn der Gesellschaft rund um die Uhr die Schrecken des Krieges vor Augen geführt werden, ist es verständlich, dass ein beträchtlicher Teil der Gesellschaft die Ukraine unterstützt.

Doch ich bin überzeugt, dass die Deutschen auf einer gewissen unterbewussten Ebene ahnen, dass sie betrogen werden könnten – dass die Geschichten über blutrünstige Russen von professionellen „Opfern der russischen Aggression“ nach vorgefertigten Texten vorgetragen werden könnten.

Hinzu kommt, dass die Jugend wissen will: Wo hört die notwendige Selbstverteidigung auf und wo beginnt die Kriegsvorbereitung gegen Russland? Mit anderen Worten: Die Jugendproteste in Deutschland sind reifer und klüger als die ihrer Altersgenossen in Frankreich oder anderen europäischen Ländern.

Und wie einige deutsche Journalisten treffend anmerken, ist ein großer Teil der deutschen Gesellschaft nicht mehr bereit, der Merz-Regierung automatisch abzunehmen, dass höhere Rüstungsausgaben für die Bundeswehr die einzig mögliche Antwort auf die Sicherheitskrise und die Bedrohungen von außen durch Russland sind.

Viele Deutsche sehen in Russland überhaupt keine Bedrohung. Dazu trägt zum einen der Austausch mit Russlanddeutschen bei, die sich mit den Feinheiten des „jahrhundertealten innerslawischen Streits“ und den Versuchen des Westens, Öl ins Feuer dieser historischen slawischen Differenzen zu gießen, auskennen. Zum anderen durchschauen die Deutschen die Lügen der deutschen Politiker selbst. Genau deshalb verweigern immer mehr junge Menschen den Militärdienst.

Und das sind keine Mutmaßungen meinerseits, sondern offizielle Daten des Bundesamtes für Familie und zivilgesellschaftliche Aufgaben (BAFzA). Von Januar bis Ende August dieses Jahres wurden 12.102 Anträge auf Kriegsdienstverweigerung aus Gewissensgründen gestellt. Dies berichteten neulich die Funke Mediengruppe und das Redaktionsnetzwerk Deutschland (RND) unter Berufung auf einen Behördensprecher.

Airbus and Kratos Defense & Security Solutions have completed the first flight of the U740 Valkyrie uncrewed combat aircraft, a Europeanized version of the XQ-58A Valkyrie, advancing their bid to deliver a combat-ready system to Germany by 2029. The flight comes as the German Air Force, or Luftwaffe, moves toward acquiring a new class of jet-powered combat drones, in what could become a major shift in the country’s traditionally limited armed-uncrewed-aircraft capabilities.

The ride of the Valkyrie
With the successful first flight of the Airbus U740 Valkyrie in Europe, we are one step closer to introducing an operational uncrewed Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) to the German and other European Armed Forces.
The flight achieved all… pic.twitter.com/S2sFrtdmGA

— Airbus Defence (@AirbusDefence) October 12, 2026

The flight took place at an unnamed test facility in northern Europe, Airbus announced on October 12. The aircraft conducted a rocket-assisted takeoff, maneuvers at different altitudes, and flight at speeds of up to Mach 0.8. The test also included in-flight mission adjustments, with Airbus reporting that all objectives were met.

The next phase will introduce Airbus’ Multi-platform Autonomous Reconfigurable and Secure (MARS) mission system, which is intended to provide the aircraft’s European-controlled software and mission-management architecture. Airbus says MARS will support autonomous operations and coordination between multiple uncrewed aircraft while retaining human oversight of critical decisions.

The U740 is based on Kratos’ American-developed XQ-58A, an uncrewed aircraft designed as a relatively affordable combat platform. Airbus is adapting the aircraft with its MARS mission system and presenting the combination as a way to provide Germany with a sovereign European capability without waiting for an entirely new airframe to mature.

Published performance figures for the U740 include a maximum takeoff weight of around 3,000 kilograms (6,600 pounds). Airbus lists a range exceeding 5,000 kilometers (3,100 miles) and a service ceiling of 45,000 feet. It has an internal weapons bay and external payload stations beneath its wings.

One distinctive feature is the U740’s rocket-assisted launch capability, which reduces its dependence on conventional runways. The original Valkyrie design is primarily recovered by parachute, but newer versions can take off with rocket assistance and land on a runway, offering greater flexibility in how and where they operate. That could help the Luftwaffe disperse operations or launch aircraft from locations where established airfields are unavailable or under threat. The XQ-58 family has also shown some potential for scaling to different requirements, as detailed in these earlier reports on runway launch and recovery and further platform development. In particular, the U.S. Marine Corps has been exploring ways to expand the XQ-58’s flexibility, including further development of the Valkyrie to meet its own mission requirements.

If adopted, the rocket-assisted launch capability would provide an intriguing throwback to practical German studies during the Cold War, in which F-104G Starfighter fighter-bombers used the Zero-Length Launch (ZELL) system to take off from dispersed locations.

Airbus says the U740 will be able to operate autonomously or under the direction of crewed fighters such as the Eurofighter. The company sees it as a means of increasing the reach, firepower, and survivability of existing combat aircraft, with uncrewed platforms undertaking higher-risk missions.

With the MARS system, Airbus intends to give European customers control over mission applications, data, and key software functions, while enabling autonomous mission execution and coordination between aircraft. This is particularly relevant for Germany, which will likely want to integrate national weapons, sensors, and operational requirements without becoming dependent on a foreign-controlled mission architecture.

Since the underlying airframe is American, the degree of sovereignty Germany ultimately obtains will depend on the practical ability to control and modify software, integrate national systems, and support the aircraft throughout its service life.

The European flight is an important step for the Valkyrie program, but substantial work remains before it can be considered combat-ready. Mission-system integration, further testing, and the demonstration of effective cooperation with crewed aircraft will be central to meeting the companies’ 2029 target.

The effort is also unfolding as Germany develops its requirements for what has been described in press reports as a Jagdbomberdrohne, or fighter-bomber drone. The precise operational concept has yet to emerge publicly, including whether the Luftwaffe primarily wants an uncrewed aircraft to accompany crewed fighters or a platform capable of conducting independent long-range strike missions.

Germany has historically lagged behind several other major military powers in fielding armed uncrewed aircraft. Previous attempts to acquire larger reconnaissance drones encountered major technical and procurement difficulties, while political resistance to armed drones delayed the development of a strike capability for years.

The Luftwaffe’s current larger uncrewed aircraft fleet remains limited to five leased Israeli-made Heron TP medium-altitude, long-endurance drones. Germany is also participating in the Eurodrone program, while uncrewed systems were expected to form part of the wider Future Combat Air System (FCAS), before that Franco-German-led effort hit the buffers earlier this year.

Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and Germany’s subsequent military buildup have intensified pressure to address these gaps. Berlin has set a goal of being ready for war by 2029, and reports indicate that the Luftwaffe wants a new combat-drone capability on a similarly ambitious timeline.

As well as Airbus and Kratos, the emerging competition reportedly includes Anduril, General Atomics partnered with Germany’s INTEC, as well as Lockheed Martin. Boeing and Rheinmetall are meanwhile pitching the larger, Block 3 version of the Australian-developed MQ-28 Ghost Bat, while Helsing and Hensoldt are pursuing the homegrown CA-1 Europa.

The various proposals reflect a broader shift toward uncrewed aircraft that can deliver additional weapons, sensors, and electronic warfare capabilities without putting a pilot at risk. But Germany’s terminology raises an important question about the intended role.

A conventional collaborative combat aircraft, or CCA, would be designed to work alongside crewed fighters, extending their reach and providing additional combat mass. A platform intended to operate independently against targets deep inside enemy territory would place greater emphasis on range and survivability. These roles are not mutually exclusive, but the Luftwaffe’s final requirements will shape the aircraft it chooses.

Germany may not be looking for a single drone to do everything. One option might be a split high-low approach that could pair more capable, longer-range systems for deep-strike missions with cheaper, attritable collaborative combat aircraft that can fly alongside crewed fighters. At this point, it should also be noted that CCAs could also give older fourth-generation fighters a new lease on life, boosting their lethality and survivability by extending their sensor reach, adding weapons capacity, and allowing uncrewed aircraft to take on more dangerous tasks.

Meanwhile, Airbus is also working on its larger U760 Ravenstorm, intended for service in the early 2030s. The Ravenstorm gives Airbus a longer-term path toward a more advanced European-designed uncrewed combat aircraft as it pursues the nearer-term Valkyrie effort.

In the short term, the Luftwaffe will need to determine which capabilities must be available in an initial operational fleet and which can be introduced later. Even an aircraft based on an established design requires substantial integration, testing, training, and infrastructure before it can be employed effectively in combat.

Germany’s 2029 target leaves little time for a program that still has to integrate its mission system and demonstrate how the aircraft will be used operationally. That is a particular challenge for the Luftwaffe, which has little experience operating large uncrewed aircraft, let alone jet-powered systems intended for combat.

The European flight gives Airbus and Kratos a head start in testing the U740 for German requirements, but the next major milestone will be flying it with the MARS mission system. How quickly that work progresses will help determine whether the Valkyrie can meet the Luftwaffe’s timetable.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

The post European U740 Variant Of The XQ-58A Valkyrie Has Flown appeared first on TWZ.

European Union governments are entering a critical round of budget negotiations after the Irish presidency of the Council proposed cutting €141 billion from the European Commission’s long-term spending plans, exposing deep disagreements over how the bloc intends to finance its expanding responsibilities.

The revised proposal, circulated ahead of the European Council meeting scheduled for 15–16 October, would reduce the planned 2028–2034 financial framework by approximately eight per cent to around €1.6 trillion, calculated in constant prices.

Despite the reduction, the proposed budget remains approximately 30 per cent larger than the current seven-year framework. Germany, Sweden, the Netherlands and other governments concerned about national contributions have nevertheless argued that further restraint is necessary.

The compromise, detailed in negotiations over the EU’s next financial framework, reduces proposed spending across several areas while largely protecting the Union’s established agricultural and regional development programmes. The distribution of those cuts is becoming as contentious as the overall size of the budget.

Europe’s new priorities face the deepest reductions

Under the Irish proposal, agricultural and regional development allocations would decline by approximately three per cent compared with the Commission’s initial plans. By contrast, funding intended for competitiveness and security would be reduced by around 13 per cent, while external action and development cooperation face cuts of approximately 17 per cent.

The difference raises questions about whether the next EU budget can support the strategic ambitions repeatedly endorsed by European leaders.

The Commission has presented industrial competitiveness, technological development, defence readiness and economic resilience as central priorities for the remainder of the decade. Yet these sectors would absorb proportionately larger reductions under the revised framework than agricultural and cohesion programmes.

The consequences could extend to investments in advanced technologies, European industrial supply chains, research programmes and cross-border defence cooperation. They could also constrain the Union’s capacity to fund external partnerships and development initiatives.

The debate is particularly sensitive because the EU’s responsibilities have changed considerably since the previous budget was negotiated. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has increased defence requirements, while competition with China and the United States has intensified demands for industrial investment.

Germany and the net contributors demand restraint

The central disagreement concerns how much additional expenditure European governments are willing to finance through the common budget. Germany and other major net contributors face domestic fiscal constraints, rising borrowing costs and demands to increase national defence spending.

For these governments, accepting a substantially larger EU budget would add to financial commitments already being made through national budgets.

The Irish compromise therefore faces opposition from two directions. Some governments consider the reductions insufficient, while others fear that the remaining cuts will weaken programmes essential to their national economies.

Traditional recipients of agricultural and regional funding have an interest in protecting established expenditure. Governments seeking stronger European investment in defence, innovation and industrial competitiveness have different priorities.

The European Parliament is another obstacle. Its consent will be required before the final financial framework can enter into force, giving MEPs considerable leverage in negotiations with national governments.

New EU revenues remain controversial

The proposal also envisages approximately €55 billion in additional annual financing through new or revised EU revenue sources, including customs revenues, emissions-related income and corporate contributions.

The Commission’s framework for the next long-term budget reflects a broader debate over the extent to which the Union should develop independent financing mechanisms rather than rely predominantly on national contributions.

Such mechanisms would potentially give Brussels a more predictable revenue base. However, they also raise questions about fiscal sovereignty, the distribution of costs among member states and the political accountability of European taxation.

National governments remain reluctant to surrender substantial authority over revenue collection, particularly when proposed resources could impose costs on domestic industries or consumers.

Ukraine, enlargement and Europe’s strategic ambitions

The negotiations will influence the Union’s ability to respond to future enlargement. Ukraine and several Western Balkan countries are pursuing accession, but the financial implications of bringing additional members into the Union remain substantial.

Existing arrangements for agricultural subsidies and regional development assistance would require reconsideration if large new beneficiaries entered the budgetary system.

At the same time, the EU faces pressure to support Ukraine financially and strengthen defence production without depending indefinitely on extraordinary borrowing or ad hoc national contributions. These responsibilities cannot be addressed simply by preserving the structure of earlier budgets.

European Council President António Costa will seek to narrow the divisions among the 27 leaders, but agreement on the financial framework requires unanimity. Any government can withhold its consent if it considers the final distribution of costs unacceptable.

The forthcoming summit is therefore likely to establish the parameters of further negotiations rather than eliminate the underlying disagreements. The immediate political question is whether member states can reconcile their commitment to greater European strategic capacity with their reluctance to finance it collectively.

Following the sudden resignation of Bärbel Bas as Labor Minister and co-chair of the Social Democratic Party, accusations are flying in Chancellor Merz's coalition government.

The Alternative for Germany (AfD) has reached 40 percent support in Brandenburg for the first time in a new poll, twice the level of the governing Social Democrats (SPD) and enough to make any coalition without the party or its potential partners extremely difficult.

The Insa survey, conducted for the Märkische Allgemeine Zeitung, Märkische Oderzeitung and Lausitzer Rundschau and published this week, put the AfD at 40 percent, up 6 points from the institute’s previous Brandenburg poll in March.

BRANDENBURG | Sonntagsfrage Landtagswahl INSA/MAZ, MOZ, LR AfD: 40% (+6) SPD: 20% (-4) CDU: 9% (-5) LINKE: 9% (+2) BSW: 7% (-1) GRÜNE: 7% (+2) Sonstige: 8% Änderungen zur letzten Umfrage vom 21. März 2026 Verlauf: https://t.co/R7Fb0r9hmo #ltwbb https://t.co/Ww2EhzqHy6

— Deutschland Wählt (@Wahlen_DE) October 9, 2026

The Social Democrats of longtime Minister-President Dietmar Woidke stood at 20 percent, down four points. The Christian Democrats (CDU), the SPD’s current coalition partner, fell five points to 9 percent. The Left Party also reached 9 percent, while the Greens and the Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance (BSW) each stood at 7 percent.

It is important to note that the next regular state election is not due until autumn 2029, which means support could shift substantially in three years. Nevertheless, the result for the AfD mirrors nationwide trends, especially in the east of Germany, where the AfD recently won in neighboring Saxony-Anhalt by earning 43.8 percent of the vote in the September election.

Brandenburg’s AfD state leader René Springer called the result “a tremendous vote of confidence” that showed “how great the desire for a political new beginning in Brandenburg is.” He added that the party’s goal remained an absolute majority so it could govern the state alone.

Trouble forming a coalition

The numbers underscore the difficulty of forming a government that excludes both the AfD and the left-wing BSW.

German schools face increasing violence due to mass immigration. In the city of Cottbus, the public prosecutor has launched 18 criminal investigations into cases of serious violence in the migrant-dominated Regine Hildebrandt Primary School. A father from the school told reporters there were "at least two to three attacks" a week before he took his children out of school. He said that the names of the perpetrators were "for example, Ali, Mohammed and Ahmed." The school has drawn national attention due to extreme violence. In an open letter, parents reported physical attacks with serious injuries, including one student who suffered a concussion. In addition, students were using pepper spray, as well as fighting with kicks and punches. Dennis Hohloch, an Alternative for Germany (AfD) MP, said in response: "Immigration is the biggest problem, the biggest safety risk for our children in our schools. We had 3,209 violent offenses at our schools in 2024. If you take the 190 school days a year, that’s 17 violent offenses a day. This figure is 20% higher than 4 years ago. Violence in schools, especially here in Brandenburg, can no longer be minimized or glossed over, even if the SPD and the Ministry of Education keep trying." Brandenburg Interior Minister René Wilke affirmed that the list of criminal offenses in the just one school is "very, very long and varied." He described dangerous bodily harm, threats, insults, and coercion. Wilke described "aggressiveness and willingness to use violence being a prominent dimension." Cottbus Mayor Tobias Schick, who belongs to the far-left SPD, admitted during a press conference in August 2025 that the problem is a consequence "of partly unregulated, partly uncontrolled immigration in recent years."

— Remix News & Views (@RMXnews) January 16, 2026

The current SPD-CDU coalition would command only 29 percent. In the 2024 state election, the SPD won with 30.9 percent, the AfD finished second with 29.2 percent, the BSW took 13.5 percent and the CDU 12.1 percent.

After that vote, Woidke initially formed a coalition with the BSW; the alliance collapsed earlier this year following internal BSW disputes, including the departure of Finance Minister Robert Crumbach and other lawmakers, and the SPD later reached a new agreement with the CDU.

Given the poll results in Brandenburg, another possible government coalition would involve the BSW and AfD. Currently, in Saxony-Anhalt, both parties are in discussions to form a ruling government. If that government forms and manages to hold together, it could form a template for ruling governments in the east of the country, where AfD and BSW are strongest. At the same time, the AfD is rapidly growing in the west of the country as well, which is key to its national support, as the western states have far higher population numbers and political weight than the east.

The post Germany: AfD reaches record high 40% in Brandenburg as party continues to dominate in the east appeared first on Remix News.

Prosecutors have opened an investigation into a local Christian Democratic Union (CDU) mayoral candidate of Turkish origin who is accused of staging a racially motivated attack on his own car days before an election he lost badly.

The Itzehoe public prosecutor’s office is examining allegations that Baris Karabacak faked the incident, according to the German newspaper Bild. Authorities obtained and executed a search warrant against the politician and seized at least one electronic device.

Karabacak, an entrepreneur who had previously served as chair of the Uetersen city council, was the CDU’s candidate in the Sept. 27 mayoral election in the town of roughly 18,000 people in the Pinneberg district of Schleswig-Holstein. He finished a distant third with 10.7 percent of the vote. Incumbent Mayor Dirk Woschei of the Social Democrats was reelected in the first round with 51.3 percent; independent candidate Marvin Schöpp received 38.1 percent.

Stunning plot twist in German arson case: Antisemitism commissioner’s inner left-wing circle now top suspects after police raids

A few days before the vote, local media including public broadcaster NDR reported that the windows of Karabacak’s car had been smashed overnight. A campaign flyer bearing an added message in all capital letters reading “NO TURKS — ALL OUT” was left behind. Police initially investigated the matter as possible incitement to hatred.

At the time, state CDU General Secretary Lukas Kilian publicly backed his party colleague and expressed pride in the CDU’s diversity. Woschei also offered solidarity, stating that political competition must be conducted with arguments and that “violence, hate and racist messages are an attack on the city’s democratic culture.”

Court rejects appeal of disgraced German Green politician involved in far-right hate hoax

Kilian’s tone has since shifted sharply. He told Bild he was “stunned” by the new allegations.

“Anyone who fakes a racist crime abuses the solidarity of many people and mocks the victims of real racism. There is no place for that in the CDU,” Kilian said. The state party has said that if the accusations are confirmed, Karabacak will be asked to resign his membership; failure to do so would trigger expulsion proceedings.

The case remains under investigation, and no charges have been filed. Karabacak has not publicly commented on the prosecutor’s probe.

The episode has drawn attention in a town where Karabacak had earlier faced internal party and council criticism over his leadership style before resigning as city council chair earlier in 2026 and then securing the CDU’s mayoral nomination.

Another hate crime hoax proven false in court

This is also notably not the first alleged hate crime hoax from a German politician. In 2023, Remix News reported on Manoj Subramaniam, a 33-year-old former local Green councilor in the German town of Erkelenz, who claimed he had been subjected to sustained acts of harassment by anonymous right-wing extremists. He showed police evidence of the abuse he had received, which included a threatening letter with a razor blade inserted and a swastika drawn onto his vehicle in red paint.

The case made national headlines last year with several prominent politicians offering their solidarity with Subramaniam for the alleged abuse he had received.

German police raid home of 14-year-old boy for posting banned hashtag on TikTok

“Right-wing extremists are threatening political volunteers to silence them. Thank you, Manoj Subramaniam, for not being silent and raising your voice,” stated Lamya Kaddor, a member of the Bundestag.

Federal police took protective measures for the politician’s safety, and an intensive investigation was initiated by state security, all at considerable cost to the taxpayer. The only issue, however, was that Subramaniam had made it all up.

“The defendant actually wrote this note himself,” revealed Justus Wassenberg, the press spokesman for the public prosecutor’s office.

German man reported to ‘hate speech’ office and slapped with court fine after posing a question to a leftist X account

It transpired that Subramaniam had also drawn SS runes and a swastika onto the doorbell panel outside his house.

Subramaniam subsequently resigned from his position as a local councilor, and the Erkelenz District Court issued the disgraced politician a penalty order of €3,600 for faking criminal offenses, a fine he appealed.

He reportedly cried during his trial when his appeal failed.

2026 firebombing not an anti-Semitic attack after all

The investigation into the early 2026 firebombing of Brandenburg Antisemitism Commissioner Andreas Büttner’s home stunned the public.

While the case was initially treated as an Islamist or antisemitic hate crime, the German Public Prosecutor General’s Office now identifies two men from Büttner’s “own circle,” which belongs to the left, as the primary suspects.

German domestic intelligence is running hundreds of fake right-wing extremist social media accounts

One of the men is also linked to the threatening letter sent to Büttner. Meanwhile, Büttner said he was shocked and described it as the biggest betrayal of his life. He also stated that if the two were responsible, the act had nothing to do with antisemitism in his view. So far, the prosecutor’s office has continued to list Büttner as a witness or injured party, not a suspect. News outlets have highlighted that there was a €3,000 transfer from Büttner to one of the men shortly before the incident, which he called a loan, and other joint activities.

These details prompted public questions and speculation in some outlets about possible staging or a “false-flag” element, but no official finding has supported the claim that Büttner ordered or knew of the act in advance. The case still reportedly remains under investigation.

The post ‘NO TURKS – ALL OUT’ – CDU candidate with Turkish background allegedly faked hate crime attack right before local German election appeared first on Remix News.

Die EU verlängert ihre Russland-Sanktionen um drei Jahre. Damit wird der Wirtschaftskrieg zum Geschäftsmodell: zugunsten US-amerikanischer Energiekonzerne und Fonds – und zulasten der Europäer. Wer sich in diesen Tagen die Entscheidung der EU anschaut, die Strafmaßnahmen gegen Russland für volle drei Jahre zu verlängern, muss sich unwillkürlich an Julian Assanges Diktum erinnert fühlen:

„Das eigentliche Ziel ist ein endloser Krieg, kein erfolgreicher Krieg.“

Denn der völkerrechtswidrige Wirtschaftskrieg gegen Russland mittels einseitiger Sanktionen, der in kolonialer Absicht formal auf eine Verhaltensänderung Moskaus gerichtet ist, wird zum Selbstzweck.

Ungeachtet der Zerstörungen, die die Sanktionen in der Wirtschaft der EU-Mitgliedstaaten selbst anrichten, schält sich immer deutlicher heraus: Die Verewigung der EU-Sanktionen, die bisher halbjährlich oder jährlich verlängert wurden, dient vor allem der Interessendurchsetzung von US-Energiekonzernen sowie der Profitmaximierung von US-Investmentfonds wie BlackRock. Durch die Sanktionen erlangen sie unter anderem eine Monopolstellung bei der Energieversorgung Europas und können zu viel höheren Preisen verkaufen als eine mögliche russische Konkurrenz.

Die Investmentfonds profitieren wiederum von der begleitenden Hochrüstungspolitik – nicht nur in den USA, sondern auch durch ihre Beteiligungen an deutschen Rüstungsschmieden wie Rheinmetall.

Es gibt also ein Profitinteresse sowohl daran, den Wirtschaftskrieg zu verlängern, als auch daran, die Situation gegenüber Russland zu eskalieren. Dieses Interesse schlägt über die Europäer voll durch.

Es mag paradox klingen, aber ein erfolgreicher Wirtschaftskrieg würde dieses Bereicherungsmodell rasch beenden. Dass man jetzt für die kommenden drei Jahre Sanktionen verhängt, zeigt denn auch, dass man kein Interesse an einer schnellen Beendigung des Stellvertreterkrieges des Westens in der Ukraine hat. Mit einer Verhaltensänderung wird nicht gerechnet. Die Sanktionen sind zum Modell geworden, die Europäer auszurauben. Sie sind nichts anderes als ein Unterwerfungsakt unter die Vorgaben aus den USA. Der Vasallenstatus der Europäer wird so weiter vertieft – bis hin zur Gefahr, dass man die Bereitschaft zeigt, sich selbst für Washington aufzuopfern.

Es ist denn auch kein Widerspruch dazu, dass man, während man die Sanktionen gegen 3.000 Personen und Organisationen verlängert, zwei russische Oligarchen jetzt davon ausnehmen will. Die Aufhebung der EU-Strafmaßnahmen gegen Alischer Usmanow und Michail Fridman dient den Interessen einzelner Mitgliedstaaten und ist offenbar der verzweifelte Versuch, Russland zum eigenen Vorteil destabilisieren zu wollen.

Grönland als Vertragsmodell

Immer deutlicher wird hingegen, dass sich die Europäer dem aktualisierten US-Kolonialmodell unterordnen. Während der deutsche Kanzler Merz das Abkommen über Grönland zwischen Dänemark und den USA als Erhalt der Souveränität feiert, spricht der Text der Vereinbarung eine ganz andere Sprache.

Das Abkommen von 1951 war an die NATO gebunden und an dänische Mitwirkung gekoppelt. Der neue Deal gilt ohne Enddatum und überdauert sogar eine mögliche Unabhängigkeit Grönlands. Die USA sichern sich dauerhafte Stützpunkte, können weitere Basen mit dem Schutz des amerikanischen Kontinents begründen und müssen über das Prinzip neuer Standorte nicht mehr verhandeln, sondern nur noch über deren Ausführung. US-Truppen bewegen sich frei zu Land, zu Wasser und in der Luft – nun auch unter Wasser –, ohne dass dänische Behörden in Grönland dafür noch die Regeln setzen.

Hinzu kommt ein Vetorecht: gegen militärische Präsenz von Nicht-NATO-Staaten und gegen Investitionen von außerhalb der westlichen Blöcke in sensible Sektoren und Ressourcen. Formal bleibt die Souveränität Dänemarks und das Selbstbestimmungsrecht Grönlands bestätigt. Tatsächlich entstehen quasi extraterritoriale Entitäten, in denen Kopenhagen und Nuuk nichts zu sagen haben. Die USA bestimmen die zentralen Bereiche der Politik auf der Insel und sichern sich ein privilegiertes Ausbeutungsrecht.

Ein Modell für die ganze Hemisphäre

Zugleich wurde ein Vertragsmodell geschaffen, das auch für andere Gegenden der westlichen und der nördlichen Hemisphäre gelten soll: von Venezuela über die Kanalzone in Panama bis hin zu den Küsten Kanadas.

Es ist zugleich das Modell für eine Zerschlagung Russlands, die als Folge des Abnutzungskriegs in der Ukraine angestrebt wird, um gegenüber China wieder in die Vorhand zu kommen und den eigenen Niedergang aufzuhalten.

Moral des Völkermords

Die Moral dieser Ordnung hat US-Präsident Donald Trump vor der UN mit seiner Auslöschungsdrohung gegenüber dem Iran zusammengefasst. Sollte der Iran nicht den Vorgaben aus Washington zustimmen, dann „treibe ich sie in die Hölle“. Es ist die Moral des Völkermords.

Es liegt auf der Hand, dass der immer höhere Einsatz des Westens im Versuch, die Welt zu kolonisieren, die entsprechenden Gegenkräfte auf den Plan rufen wird. Allein in Europa wird man diese bei einer Kompradorenbourgeoisie vergeblich suchen.

Originalbeitrag NachDenkSeiten