Turkey Tries to Leverage Its NATO Muscle
Live on Bloomberg TV
CC-Transcript
00:00So, I mean, for a long time we've been talking about the potential accession process of Turkey into the EU. Is that conversation back on the table again? Just like you said, Joumanna, I think up until a few weeks ago discussing Turkey and EU relations or Turkey's membership to the bloc was not taken quite seriously. But the US administration's policy direction is making EU officials, I think, revisit that membership bid. That was apparent in a press conference yesterday between Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, where both leaders highlighted the importance of having Turkey part of the bloc. President Erdogan has repeatedly said over the last few days that an EU without Turkey is unthinkable and that Turkey can provide benefits to the bloc in terms of security and defence. And I think Turkey's narrow membership and its strategic location, as well as having the second largest army and NATO's, definitely making EU officials rethink their security alliances and their strategic alliances. Yeah, I mean, it's it's also a part of NATO's. And also Turkey has emerged as a major powerbroker within the Middle East region as well. And you've got Donald Trump testing that transatlantic alliance. So would you say it actually makes sense for closer ties between the EU and Turkey right now? I think there are a lot of factors for the EU Turkey relations to deepen. Like like we both mentioned. Turkey is a NATO member and has the second largest army. And under President Erdogan, Turkey's defence capabilities have flourished over the past two decades, with the president really pushing for locally produced arms, whether that be, you know, drones or armoured vehicles or missiles. So the defence abilities are definitely one of his strong cards in terms of its location. So Turkey has traditionally straddled the east and the West and it has maintained good relations with both the Western allies as well as with Russia and China. And we've seen in the past how this geographical location made sense. It was a key actor in having Ukrainian grain be transported to international markets, for example. And Turkey and the EU would have a big economic relationship as well. The EU is Turkey's largest trade partner. Yeah, but that's not to say I think the relationship doesn't come without its challenges. We've seen a judicial crackdown in Turkey and that has in the past drawn the ire of the EU and has been a concern.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNBC
an hour ago
- CNBC
Klarna CEO wants to turn the platform into a 'super app' with help from AI
Key Points Klarna CEO Sebastian Siemiatkowski wants to make the platform more of an all-encompassing financial "super app" that's personalized and can offer non-financial services. "With AI, you can abstract and adopt the experience much more to the specific user you're dealing with," Siemiatkowski told CNBC in an interview this week. On Wednesday, Klarna is set to announce the launch of mobile phone plans in the U.S. via a partnership with telecom services startup Gigs. Klarna's CEO is so bullish about artificial intelligence that he sees it changing the way the fintech's 100 million users bank every day. On Wednesday, Klarna — a pioneer of the popular "buy now, pay later" (BNPL) payment method — is announcing the launch of mobile phone plans in the U.S. via a partnership with telecom services startup Gigs. The move follows in the footsteps of rival fintechs Revolut and N26, which have launched similar offerings. Klarna's plans come with unlimited data, calls and texts and will cost $40 a month. The new telco offering aligns with CEO Sebastian Siemiatkowski's vision to make Klarna more of an all-encompassing personalized financial "super app" that can offer services outside the realms of traditional finance. It isn't the company's first attempt. Previously, Klarna tried to make itself more akin to a "super app" — similar to Ant Group's Alipay and Tencent's WeChat Pay — offering additional services through multiple different buttons. This ended up being "confusing for the customer," however, Siemiatkowski told CNBC in an interview. But the Klarna boss stressed the part AI can play as looks to diversify its services and become known for more than its BNPL offering. "I think in this new AI world, there's a better opportunity to serve customers with different services and then adopt the kind of level of articulation and visualization of those services than there was historically," Siemiatkowski said. "With AI, you can abstract and adopt the experience much more to the specific user you're dealing with," he added. Super apps are popular in China and in other parts of Asia. They're meant to serve as a one-stop shop for all your mobile needs — for example, having taxi-hailing and food ordering in the same place as payment and messaging services. However, while super apps have flourished in Asia, adoption in Western markets has nonetheless been slower due to a number of reasons. 'Tremendous opportunity' Siemiatkowski says he's spending a lot of his time focusing on AI. "There's a tremendous opportunity for that — but it's just getting it to work," he said. "Everyone who has used it knows it can spit out some exciting stuff but then you need to make sure that it works every time." Going forward, Klarna's chief sees the platform becoming more of a "digital financial assistant" for users' every-day banking needs. "If we have some information that suggests that you are overpaying for your carrier subscription or your data or whatever," Siemiatkowski says, Klarna will aim to use AI to "offer you both a suggestion of a better price model, but also with a click, implement that and make it a reality." Acknowledging issues with Klarna's previous attempt to become a super app, Siemiatkowski says the technology just wasn't "mature" enough at the time. "Ultimately, the north star for all financial products — especially the fintech companies — is to try and be the financial advisor in your pocket," Simon Taylor, told CNBC. "That private banker like experience but provided by a brand becomes the super-aggregator of your financial life, and that's what 'owning the customer' looks like in the age of AI." Taylor added that, while many firms are still figuring out how to use AI, "you've got companies like Klarna building in public and trying to grab market share for a future that might not yet be built." Klarna reported a $99 million loss for the quarter that ended in March, citing one-off costs relating to depreciation, share-based payments and restructuring. Perception problem Still, Klarna has a perception problem to overcome. In the U.S., the firm has become synonymous with the "buy now, pay later" (BNPL) payment method, which allows consumers to pay off orders over monthly installments — typically interest-free. By contrast, European consumers recognize they can use Klarna to store their deposits and pay for things in one go as well as via a credit plan, according to Siemiatkowski. He also expressed frustration with "the kind of memes that we get in in the U.S. when it's like, 'Oh, Klarna launched with DoorDash... it is a sign of the macroeconomic environment," referring to a tie-up the company announced with food delivery app DoorDash earlier this year that was met with backlash online. Siemiakowski said this kind of reaction wouldn't happen in the German or Nordic markets, where Klarna operates more like online payment system PayPal. He sees a future where Klarna works as a more all-encompassing financial ecosystem with add-on services such as features for investments in stocks and cryptocurrencies — which, he adds, is "not that far off." "Offering people the ability to invest in both stock and crypto is is what's becoming a kind of more standard part of a neobank offering," he said, while stressing he doesn't want to compete with popular U.S. stock trading app Robinhood. When will Klarna IPO? Klarna paused plans to go public in April, after U.S. President Donald Trump announced sweeping tariffs on dozens of countries. Siemiatkowski said that Klarna has already achieved what it set out to do in order to be ready for that milestone — namely, building up a brand in the U.S. "The U.S. is now our largest market by number of users. It's a profitable market for us," he said. "Those things have been accomplished." Whether the company does or doesn't go public, the business strategy for Klarna remains the same. "That is just a healthy way to drive liquidity for our shareholders, as well as give the company more ways to fund itself, if it would like to do so, and ... to show that this is a an established company," Siemiatkowski said.
Forbes
2 hours ago
- Forbes
New Gallup Report: AI Culture Readiness Demands New Mindsets
Digital generated image of young woman jumping through portal door and turning into avatar in ... More imaginary world. Metaverse concept. In our workplaces a quiet revolution is unfolding. It is marked by the persistent hum of cultural transformation. Recent Gallup research reveals a striking reality: while algorithmic tools are increasingly common, especially in white-collar jobs (with 27% of employees now using them often — a 12-point jump since 2024), the readiness to truly work alongside these systems has dropped. The percentage of employees who feel fully prepared to collaborate with algorithmic intelligence continued its decline from 2024 into 2025, suggesting this disconnect persists and may even intensify. This mirrors data from the Stanford AI Index 2025 which shows that although four in five computer science teachers agree that using AI and learning about AI should be included in a foundational CS learning experience, less than half of them feel equipped to teach it. The gap between widespread use and emotional readiness signals something vital about how humans are interacting with their expanding range of digital counterparts. We are witnessing the rise of a cohabitation state where algorithms integrate into our lives faster than our minds and cultures can adapt. In this context the European Union's AI Act, which took effect on August 1, 2024, is more than just a regulatory framework. It's a philosophical statement about how humans and machines should coexist. By emphasizing transparency, the Act ensures that users know when they are interacting with AI systems, including chatbots and deepfakes. This reflects a commitment to conscious engagement, rather than a slide along the scale of agency decay, into the darker waters of unaware dependence. This regulatory blueprint arrives at a sensitive time, just as computing power surges, promising myriad benefits. The EU's approach recognizes that successful AI integration isn't just about technical compliance — it demands a cultural metamorphosis. The phenomenon of cognitive offloading — our natural tendency to outsource mental tasks to external tools — is accelerating quickly. This trend is risky amid AI. While algorithmic tools can boost productivity and quality, with research showing that well managed interactions with generative AI systems increase both the quantity and quality of human labor, they also tend to erode our critical thinking skills by encouraging us to bypass mental effort. How do we harness AI's power to augment our abilities without sacrificing our cognitive independence? Rather than an either-or, natural versus artificial equation the answer might be appropriate reliance — or maybe even better 'adequate acquaintance', a fine-tuned relationship that allows humans and machines to collaborate effectively within clearly defined territories. The real leap occurs when we move beyond seeing AI as just another powerful tool and recognize it as a cognitive partner. Hybrid intelligence comes with two main models for augmented intelligence: human-in-the-loop collaboration and cognitive computing-based augmentation. Consider medical research, where a hybrid approach is already taking root. AI's pattern recognition is excellent in diagnostic imaging, while human oversight remains paramount for life-critical decisions. The outcome isn't replacement, but true complementarity — each partner bringing unique strengths to achieve results neither could achieve alone. Similarly, when accomplished jazz musicians collaborate with generative AI to compose new pieces, the algorithm's vast knowledge of harmonic possibilities, combined with the musician's emotional intuition, creates symphonies beyond what either could achieve independently. The computational system suggests pathways traditional training might miss, while human artistry steers the algorithm towards emotionally resonant territory it could never identify alone. This evolving partnership demands what we call double literacy — fluency in both human and algorithmic domains, individually and collectively. At the individual level, algorithmic literacy means not just knowing how to prompt an AI, but understanding its underlying logic, limitations, biases, and best uses. Human literacy involves continuously developing our unique human capacities: creativity, empathy, ethical reasoning, and the ability to ask truly meaningful questions. Ironically understanding artificial intelligence starts by developing a more nuanced comprehension of natural intelligence. Insights from cognitive psychology can help educators and trainers better utilize AI-powered tools to facilitate learning, rather than letting them replace essential human cognitive processes. At the organizational level, such double literacy translates into institutional cultures that gracefully navigate the tension between efficiency and emotional safety, creativity and compassion, between delegating tasks and curating cognitive engagement. Gallup's research into algorithmic culture readiness looks underscores that successful AI integration demands a mindset transformation across every part of an organization. At the heart of effective human-machine collaboration lies trust calibration — the delicate balance between trust in AI systems and healthy skepticism. The question is to deliberately manage the risk of over-reliance on algorithms while creating intuitive hybrid interfaces that allow for seamless human-human and human-machine interaction. Over-reliance comes from blindly accepting AI recommendations; it leads to avoidable errors. Yet, under-reliance means missing out on the potential of genuine enhancements. The sweet spot demands a conscious cultivation of smart skepticism — neither besotted faith nor rigid rejection, but thoughtful case-by-case evaluation. Gallup's report confirms the bedrock of successful human-machine collaboration. The organizational culture that is needed now must actively foster four qualities : Curiosity fuels the exploration necessary to grasp AI's capabilities and limitations. Organizations must encourage questioning algorithmic outputs, seeing it not as resistance, but as a vital part of innovation. Compassion ensures that human well-being remains central as AI systems evolve. This means prioritizing not just efficiency gains, but the human impact of AI on employees, customers, and communities. Creativity enables the kind of hybrid collaboration that produces truly novel solutions. Instead of merely automating existing processes, creative organizations explore how human-machine partnerships can generate entirely new approaches. Courage provides the willingness to experiment, learn from setbacks, and adapt in an uncertain landscape. This includes the courage to pause or even reverse AI implementations if they don't ultimately serve human flourishing. Humans and algorithms working together can outperform AI systems that outcompete humans when alone. This challenges the common idea that the goal is to create AI that completely replaces human labor. Instead, the path ahead calls for conscious collaboration — intentional partnerships where humans remain fully engaged, even as they delegate specific tasks. This demands new approaches to education with a focus on critical thinking and comfort with questions that don't have easy answers. It requires new management practices and fresh cultural norms around human to human and human-machine interaction. Ultimately the ongoing tech transition requires hybrid humanistic leadership. The coming stages stages of AI culture changes will be best navigated by those who have a holistic understanding of themselves, others and the human implications of AI. As we navigate this transformation, organizations and individuals can apply the CREATE framework for conscious algorithmic collaboration: Curate: Deliberately select AI tools and applications that align with human values and organizational goals, rather than adopting technology for its own sake. Relate: Maintain human relationships and emotional intelligence as central to decision-making processes, using algorithms to enhance rather than replace human connection. Evaluate: Continuously assess both AI outputs and human responses, fostering cultures of intelligent skepticism and iterative improvement. Adapt: Build flexibility into human-machine systems, allowing for adjustment as both technologies and human understanding evolve. Be Transparent: Ensure all stakeholders understand when and how AI systems are being used, following the EU's emphasis on conscious awareness of algorithmic interaction. Remain Ethical: Prioritize human flourishing and societal benefit in all AI implementation decisions, maintaining human agency as the ultimate arbiter of important choices. The future belongs not to humans or machines alone, but to their conscious, carefully orchestrated collaboration. In this dance of minds, both partners must remain fully present, each contributing their unique strengths while learning to move in harmony. The Gallup report hints to the fact that the results of that alliance could come from hybrid space which neither could achieve alone — one that pushes creation into unforeseen territory while preserving human agency amid AI. Let's travel.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Putin Isn't Actually Enjoying This
The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here. Within weeks of Donald Trump's second inauguration, pundits began saying that his return to office opened new doors for Vladimir Putin, offering Moscow opportunities it hadn't seen in years. The deference the new administration afforded the Kremlin appeared to be rivaled only by its hostility toward its own national-security establishment. Trump entered negotiations to end the war in Ukraine by presenting Putin with a bouquet of inexplicable concessions. Washington ruled out NATO membership for Ukraine—then proposed that it might recognize the illegally occupied Crimean peninsula as Russian (in a reversal of long-standing U.S. policy), allow Russia to retain most of the territory it had seized since 2022, and lift sanctions. The U.S. even sided against its European allies when they presented a resolution at the United Nations condemning Moscow—and then it drafted a peace proposal that omitted any criticism of Russia. You'd think Putin would be delighted by all of this. Instead, he's been thrown on his heels. Trump's efforts at rapprochement have left Russia's propaganda apparatus, foreign policy, and economic stability in worse shape than they were before January 20. Whatever the intent, Washington has robbed the Kremlin of its north star: opposition to the United States. After years of routinely threatening to drown the Eastern Seaboard, Moscow can no longer afford the luxury of calling America its enemy No. 1. Thanks to Trump, the Kremlin now has to portray Washington as a rational negotiating partner—even as American-made missiles continue to rain down on Russian troops. The title of Russia's civilizational enemy has been reassigned to the European Union. The Russian propaganda machine has some flexibility, but being locked in an existential struggle with the Netherlands is far less flattering to the imperial mindset than going up against the world's leading superpower. And so Russia's information mills seem to be glitching out. In a May 25 Truth Social post, Trump wrote that Putin was absolutely 'CRAZY' for bombing Ukrainian cities in the middle of negotiations. 'We are really grateful to the Americans and to President Trump personally,' Putin's spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said in response. The last time I scanned Russia's top propaganda sites, I couldn't find a single hostile reference to the United States. On May 20, Konstantin Kosachev, the deputy speaker of the Russian senate, described two emerging camps: a 'Russian American' one 'discussing prospects for achieving peace,' and a 'Ukrainian European' one 'exploring options for continuing the war.' The reversal isn't just a problem for Putin's media proxies. The Russian leader himself has been forced to improvise. For years, Putin claimed that direct talks with Ukraine were impossible because President Volodymyr Zelensky's government was illegitimate and, more important, Ukraine wasn't a real country—merely a proxy for the American imperial project. He framed the war as a conflict that only Russia and the U.S. could resolve, in a Yalta-style deal between great powers—preferably in occupied Yalta itself. Along came Trump, who repeatedly sidelined Ukraine and the EU to speak with Putin one-on-one. Putin looked set to get what he wanted. But then that changed, as all things Trump tend to do: By May, Putin wasn't carving up Europe with Trump—he was competing with Zelensky to convince the White House that the other side was out of control. Trump's point man for Russia is the billionaire real-estate developer Steve Witkoff, whose bewilderingly affectionate approach to Putin continues to flummox the Western media. His meetings with the Russian dictator last for hours. He forgoes American translators (relying instead on Russian intelligence assets), sits alone with top Kremlin negotiators, and emerges voicing Moscow's talking points without even being able to name the Ukrainian regions Russia claims as its own. Even seasoned diplomats have to resist being crushed by Russia's imperial grandeur when they are received like state dignitaries inside the Kremlin complex. Someone who devoted his life to building condos barely stands a chance. Still, the Kremlin surely knows that Witkoff has no authority over what America can offer Russia. Only Trump does. For now, the man trying to rebuild the Russian empire is forced to negotiate with the king of Manhattan real estate. And negotiate he must, because Trump has made forging a settlement between Russia and Ukraine a defining foreign-policy objective. The goal is an elusive one: Washington has so far failed to secure even a 30-day cease-fire. On May 1, the administration threatened to withdraw from the peace talks. Many in the West expected that this would translate into a win for the Kremlin: Trump, they assumed, would abandon Ukraine and strike a separate deal with Moscow. But Russia has reason to be wary that a thwarted Trump administration might not prove so amenable. The U.S. president apparently wants a diplomatic victory, and if he feels that he's been pushed aside, he may have less reason to end arms shipments to Ukraine—especially now that Kyiv is purchasing munitions—and more reason to blame Moscow for sabotaging the peace process. For the Kremlin, standing between Trump and the Nobel Peace Prize is risky, but agreeing to a cease-fire while Russia is making steady, if incremental, gains on the battlefield is a step too far. So it opted for a third path: Putin held a rare late-night press conference inviting Ukraine to bilateral negotiations, dodging the cease-fire while handing Trump a symbolic win that he could sell as a breakthrough. For the Russian dictator, whose foreign and domestic policy is shaped by Brioni-clad men playing by prison-yard rules, the need to appease the U.S. president in this way is a distinctly uncomfortable—and demeaning—shift from the predictable antagonism of the Joe Biden years. Trump frequently holds out the prospect of lifting sanctions or striking lucrative deals as incentives for Moscow to end the war. Russia was even spared from Trump's sweeping tariffs. But what the U.S. can offer Russia is ultimately underwhelming. The sanctions that hurt Russia the most—an oil-export ban, the freezing of two-thirds of its foreign reserves, and its exclusion from the SWIFT bank-to-bank payment network—all came from the EU. Russian exports to the United States were at their peak in 2011—before the annexation of Crimea, the full-scale war in Ukraine, and the U.S. energy boom—and amounted to just $34.6 billion worth of goods. That figure offers little hope for meaningful bilateral trade, especially now. What does matter to Russia is oil sales. And in the months before the renewed conflict between Israel and Iran, oil prices dropped by 20 percent, largely because of the Trump administration's global tariff war. This forced Moscow to revise its federal budget for 2025–26; triple this year's expected budget deficit, from 0.5 to 1.7 percent of GDP; and, as a result, tap its fiscal reserves for $5.51 billion, or about one-tenth of its liquid assets, to balance the budget. It also cost Russia $39 billion in anticipated hydrocarbon revenue—more than the proposed deals with the U.S. could make up for. In other words, without imposing a single new sanction, Trump has significantly intensified fiscal pressure on the Kremlin simply by dint of his erratic economic policies. Washington's public stance on Russia has certainly changed. One popularly circulated YouTube clip shows Secretary of State Marco Rubio refusing to call Putin a war criminal during a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing on May 21. But as someone who once worked with the Kremlin (I produced a talk show for Russian state media in the late 2000s), I can assure you: Putin would much rather be labeled a war criminal with oil at $70 a barrel than a rational leader looking to end the war with oil at $56. During the first three years of Russia's all-out war in Ukraine, the United States and the EU presented a united front against Russia that proved, perhaps paradoxically, manageable for the Kremlin, in terms of both propaganda and strategic positioning. Trump has shattered that coherence, and now the Kremlin finds itself in an uncomfortable position, despite its triumphalist rhetoric and maximalist demands: It's scrambling to keep pace with an American president who has no idea where he's going.
