Dutch citizens advised to keep cash on hand in case of emergency
The Netherlands' Central Bank (DNB) has advised citizens to keep enough cash on hand to last them three days in case of disaster or emergency, citing rising geopolitical tensions and cyber threats that could jeopardise the country's payment system.
Citizens should keep €70 per adult and €30 per child in cash as a precautionary measure, the bank warned this week.
The money should be enough to cover necessary expenses for 72 hours "such as for water, food, medicine, and transportation", it said.
"Think of a power failure, a technical disruption at your bank or the Wi-Fi going down. Then you might not be able to pay the way you are used to. But paying with cash is almost always possible," the DNB's advisory said.
The recommendation "was prompted by increased geopolitical tensions and cyber threats that could challenge our payment system", it added.
In addition to holding hard cash, the DNB said people should consider having a debit card and using contactless with their phone or smartwatch.
The bank's warning follows a massive power outage that hit Spain and Portugal on 28 April. The causes of the blackout are still being investigated.
Card payment systems went offline and ATMs were out of order, meaning that many people in the two countries had to rely on cash to buy water, food, torches and battery-powered radios to stay up-to-date with the news.
The European Commission released a preparedness plan in March that encouraged the public to maintain sufficient supplies for at least 72 hours in case of emergencies such as natural disasters or conflict.
The plan listed items including cash, medication, a power bank and a radio.
Representatives of Central Asian countries have come together to maximise the region's economic opportunities and make an effort to support Afghanistan, which is now signalling a business-oriented international outreach after years of isolation.
The Termez Dialogue on Connectivity Between Central and South Asia, which included leaders from Central Asian countries along with India, Pakistan and Afghanistan, was held in the southern Uzbek city of Termez.
The meeting was initiated by Uzbekistan, a strong supporter of the economic integration of its neighbour Afghanistan, which is now in the fifth year of the Taliban government.
The Central Asian countries have for years been pushing for what they call "acceptance of reality" in the region and engagement with Afghanistan.
In 2022 Uzbekistan President Shavkat Mirziyoyev, proposed a platform for Central and South Asian countries to collaborate, which was later reflected in a UN General Assembly resolution.
The meeting in Termez is an effort to turn the ideas presented in the resolution into a reality.
"The main goal of this dialogue is to create a permanent, functional platform within which the representatives of Central and South Asian countries can discuss a wide range of cooperation issues, from interconnectivity, trade and economic cooperation to humanitarian exchange," Eldor Aripov, Director of the Institute for Strategic and Regional Studies, said.
Most of the region's countries have already started their first infrastructure projects in Afghanistan.
There are now high-voltage power lines to Afghanistan running from both from Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. Through them Afghanistan receives regular aid in the form of electricity.
Turkmenistan's deputy foreign minister Temirbek Erkinov pointed out a new road and a railway from his country to Afghanistan projects are in the planning for the route to be extended as far as the city of Mazar-i-Sharif.
The participants in the Termez talks repeatedly pointed out the cultural and historic ties between the countries in the region and were all clear about one thing.
Since they became independent from the Soviet Union, the landlocked countries of Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan, were cut off both from the nearest deep sea ports in Pakistan and from the vast markets of Pakistan and India due to ongoing conflict in Afghanistan.
No pipeline, road or railway line was viable through the vast swathes of Afghanistan that were deemed unsafe.
That situation has changed and Afghanistan now has a government which seems to be able to provide security for major projects. An opportunity not to be missed, in the opinion of Central Asian leaders.
"We want active engagement on a number of concrete infrastructure projects, first of all Afghan Trans Railway Corridor. You know that all the countries of the region are land-locked, Uzbekistan is double-land locked as we have to cross two borders to reach the nearest sea," explained Aripov.
"This is why the question of transport communication is the most important topic for all the central and south Asian countries. We are committed to the Trans Afghan corridor above all because it will connect Pakistani ports to the countries of Central Asia."
"Right now, trade between Central and South Asia is worth five billion dollars. That is nothing. It does not remotely reflect the potential that's there. Europe is much further away and our trade exchange with them is ten times higher," he added.
Afghanistan's deputy foreign minister Mohammad Naeem Wardak joined the summit to announce Kabul's intentions to get involved in trade, transit and stronger regional economic cooperation, to act what he called "a regional connector and a transit route."
"The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan is making efforts to make Afghanistan the connectivity point in this region. Afghanistan's position is to the benefit of all the countries around us in the region," he said.
He insisted that Afghanistan is already providing security in the region by tackling drug trafficking, eradicating poppy fields and fighting organised crime and terrorism.
But his government is eager to engage more, economically, he said.
"Afghanistan is centrally located and is the bridge between Central and South Asia. As such, it represents a bridge. Unfortunately, we had 40 years of fighting and the opportunity did not exist. Now, thanks to Allah, with the return of the Islamic Emirate, the opportunities for development are in place," he told Euronews.
The city of Termez, situated on the border between Uzbekistan and Afghanistan on the bank of the Amu Darya river, has been a logistics hub for the caravans travelling between east and west along the ancient Silk Road.
During Soviet times it was reduced to a distant outpost and served as the Red Army's entry point to Afghanistan in 1979.
A project which envisions the city regaining some of its former glory and bringing the prosperity of a trade hub is under way.
On a patch of land on the border, Uzbekistan built a free trade zone in 2024 for Afghan companies and a logistics centre.
Afghan nationals can enter the zone as part of a 15-day visa-free regime.
Almost half a million Afghans have already made use of the opportunity, opening businesses thanks to a simplified registration procedure and enjoying duty free trade.
Around 100 shops are currently active there and a further 500 have been announced. A cargo centre within the zone is used to load more than 70 lorries, and a daily train transports goods to both sides of the border.
A modern hospital, opened last year, with 380 doctors working in 15 different areas has treated around 48,000 Afghan patients, paid for by the Uzbek government.
Around 300 complicated surgeries were performed that patients were unable to have in Afghanistan.
A business school for medium and small enterprises was also opened and teaches some 500 shop owners how to run and develop their business.
"We have seen the surge of trade contracts in the last year. Last year the increase was 160%, and they are now worth $560 million (€494 million)," said the governor of the Surkhandarya region, Ulugbek Kosimov.
He also hopes that the development of trade routes from Russia in the north to India in the south and from Iran in the west and China in the east, with all the countries along the road, will see his province prosper in what he called a "new renaissance."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Euronews
17 hours ago
- Euronews
Can the EU lower the cap on Russian oil without the US?
The European Union is readying a new round of sanctions against Russia to pile extra pressure on the Kremlin and pressure it to agree to a 30-day unconditional ceasefire in Ukraine, a step that Western allies consider indispensable for serious peace negotiations. Ursula von der Leyen has already provided an outline of what that package, the 18th since February 2022, is supposed to target: Russia's financial sector, the "shadow fleet" and the Nord Stream pipelines, which are currently non-operational. On top of that, the president of the European Commission has pitched a downward revision of the price cap on Russian oil to further squeeze profits from worldwide sales, a crucial cash flow to sustain the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. "We need a real ceasefire, we need Russia at the negotiating table, and we need to end this war. Pressure works, as the Kremlin understands nothing else," von der Leyen said earlier this week after meeting with US Senator Lindsey Graham. But there's a catch: unlike other sanctions the bloc has imposed on Russia, such as the multiple export and import bans, the price cap has a political and practical dimension that exceeds the institutional sphere of Brussels and stretches across the ocean. More specifically, to Washington, DC. The price cap on Russian oil was introduced in December 2022 by the Group of Seven (G7) under the initiative of the Joe Biden administration. It was hailed as an ingenious, ground-breaking mechanism to mobilise the collective power of Western allies and cripple Russia's high-intensity war machine. As part of the plan, the G7, together with Australia, passed laws prohibiting their domestic companies from providing services, such as insurance, financing and flagging, to Russian tankers that sold seaborne crude oil above a predetermined price. The secret lay in market power: for decades, Western firms, particularly British ones, have dominated the sector of Protection and Indemnity (P&I), a type of insurance that gives shipowners broad protection and allows them to cover potentially huge costs from any accidental harm caused to the crew, their property or the environment. Due to the inherent risks of moving oil in high waters, P&I is today considered the norm in maritime trade and a must-have to be accepted in a foreign port. By leveraging their leading firms, the G7 intended to create an extraterritorial effect that would cap the price of Russian oil not only within their jurisdictions but all around the world. Following intense behind-the-scenes talks, the cap was set at $60 per barrel, a compromise between hard-line and cautious member states. The strategy only worked up to a point however. Although the price of Russian Urals oil gradually decreased, it consistently remained above the $60 mark, often exceeding the $70 threshold. The blatant circumvention was attributed to the "shadow fleet" that Russia deployed at high sea. These tankers are so old and poorly kept that they fall outside P&I standards and rely on alternative, obscure insurance systems that escape G7 surveillance. By the time the cap entered into force, Moscow "had spent months building a 'shadow fleet' of tankers, finding new buyers like India and China, and creating new payment systems, to the point that its oil does not need to be greatly discounted to sell," Luis Caricano, a professor at the London School of Economics, wrote in a recent analysis. "What should have been a blow became a manageable problem," Caricano said. With few sectors in the Russian economy left to sanction, Brussels has turned its sight to the cap as a means to tighten the screws on the Kremlin and secure a ceasefire in Ukraine. The Commission has reportedly pitched a revision between $50 and $45 per barrel, which the UK and Canada are believed to support. However, the US has so far refrained from endorsing a lower price cap, raising the stakes ahead of crunch talks at the G7 summit in Alberta, scheduled for mid-June. Now, a tough question emerges: Can the EU dare, and afford, to go it alone? In the strictest legalistic sense, the EU could, indeed, establish a lower price cap on its own. After all, the G7, as an organisation, lacks regulatory powers: each ally amends its laws individually to fulfil a collective mission. In this case, the EU introduced new legislation to prohibit EU companies – rather than, say, American or British companies – from servicing Russian tankers that bypassed the $60-per-barrel cap. Similarly, the bloc could now change the text to adjust that prohibition to a tighter price without waiting for other allies to reciprocate. Here appears the first roadblock: any change to sanctions must be approved by a unanimous vote among member states. It is highly unlikely that all 27 countries would choose to move forward with a lower cap without having an explicit guarantee that Washington will follow suit. Hungary, in particular, has fully aligned itself with the Trump administration and could veto any proposal opposed by the White House. Even if the bloc managed to overcome internal differences and agreed to a lower cap on its own, more formidable obstacles could impede its success. The bloc's revised cap would have to co-exist with America's existing cap. This means that one side of the Atlantic Ocean would apply a $50-per-barrel limit while the other side would apply a $60-per-barrel limit, creating a cacophony for all actors involved. "Different price caps across G7 countries could confuse maritime service providers and weaken overall enforcement," Petras Katinas, an energy analyst at the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA), told Euronews. "A solo move by the EU could cause friction within the Price Cap Coalition, damaging trust and coordination, both of which are crucial for keeping pressure on Russian oil revenues," Katinas added, warning the project could be rendered "largely symbolic". The legislative chaos would immediately benefit the Kremlin, which has long sought to exploit loopholes to evade and undermine international sanctions. Moscow, though, would also face hurdles: the continued crackdown on "shadow fleet" vessels has forced the country to increase its reliance on G7 insurance, which, in theory, could make it easier for the EU to apply the revised measure. "If the EU alone decides to tighten the screws on the cap, it's an additional constraint on Russia's oil exports but not as tight as with a whole of G7 approach," said Elisabetta Cornago, a senior researcher at the Centre for European Reform (CER). Besides practical snags and legal matters, there is geopolitics to consider. One of the reasons why the G7 initiative has fallen short of expectations is that, as the name suggests, it has remained a G7-exclusive plan. Countries in Asia, Latin America and Africa have refused to play along and join the coalition. China and India openly buy Russian crude oil, sometimes to refine it and resell it under a different label. Having the EU and the US go separate ways would further destabilise the Western alliance and create the impression of a transatlantic break-up. But for many, that is already a reality: the "Coalition of the Willing", born after Donald Trump unilaterally launched negotiations with Vladimir Putin, bears testament to the political divide. "The price cap was a G7 + EU initiative, and so in its current form, I do not see any pathway in which the EU could adjust the cap without the support of the broader coalition, including the US," said Ben McWilliams, an affiliate fellow with Bruegel. "That said, the EU is free to implement whatever measures it wants on its own domestic ships and insurance companies, which it could likely encourage the UK to join," McWilliams added. "So the EU can still move ahead – it would just need to be under a different institutional format than currently exists." This week we are joined by Mika Aaltola, a Finnish MEP representing the centre-right European People's Party, Dorota Bawolek, a seasoned EU correspondent for Polish broadcaster TVP and Ian Lesser, Vice President of the German Marshall Fund, the transatlantic think tank. US President Donald Trump's renewed trade offensive has left Brussels rather stressed with sweeping tariffs hitting European steel, aluminium, and car exports — and threats of more to come. European Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič is trying to defuse the crisis, warning that retaliatory EU measures could kick in as early as July 14. MEP Mika Aaltola blasted the US approach as 'unfair treatment'. The OECD also warned this week that Trump's tariffs are dragging global growth to its weakest levels since the COVID-19 pandemic. In a very tight presidential race, Poland elected conservative Karol Nawrocki, a nationalist and eurosceptic, narrowly defeating pro-EU candidate and Warsaw mayor Rafał Trzaskowski. The result marks a blow for Prime Minister Donald Tusk who has called for a vote of confidence in his government early next week. Nawrocki's rhetoric — emphasizing national sovereignty, anti-migrant policies, and a rejection of 'Brussels diktats' — has alarmed Europhiles. However, his nationalist platform resonated with a rather divided electorate. "He's not very presidential", Dorota Bawolek told the panel adding that history shows Poles prefer an 'ordinary guy'. Finally, the panel discuss the Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez' diplomatic setback after the EU Council rejected his proposal to make Catalan, Basque, and Galician official EU languages. The move, promised to Catalan separatists in exchange for political support, was rejected by member states over fears of a domino effect involving other regional languages. Watch the full episode in the player above.
Euronews
a day ago
- Euronews
EU hits back against 'Buy China' policy in medical devices market
EU member states' representatives voted this week for retaliatory measures against Chinese restrictions on European medical device manufacturers, diplomatic and EU sources confirmed to Euronews. This followed an investigation by the European Commission found "clear evidence" that China unfairly blocked EU-made medical devices from its procurement market. It represents the first countermeasure implemented using an International Procurement Instrument (IPI), which came into force in August 2022, designed to ensure fair access for EU firms to procurement opportunities outside the bloc. Ambassadors adopted the proposal midweek, but the details are expected to be published in the EU's Official Journal in the coming days. 'We had truly hoped that the International Procurement Instrument process would lead to more meaningful dialogue and progress with China, but unfortunately, that hasn't happened yet,' said Oliver Bisazza, CEO of MedTech Europe, the EU's association of medical device manufacturers. Bisazza wants to see the full details before reacting, but he pointed out that medical device companies remain committed to constructive engagement between the EU and China. 'This sector is vital for saving and improving people's lives and maintaining essential healthcare infrastructure, offering crucial services. This is something both parties should consider,' he added. EU companies have long struggled to gain access to China's public procurement market, despite China being one of Europe's largest trading partners for medical devices - accounting for 11% of export destinations in 2022. The Commission's investigation focused on China's government procurement law, which enforces the so-called "Buy China" policy, requiring public entities to prioritise domestic products and services, with limited exceptions. The probe found that EU manufacturers face a range of obstacles, including opaque approval systems, discriminatory certification procedures, vague national interest clauses used to exclude foreign bidders, and pricing pressures that are often unfeasible for European firms. One stark example: in Guangdong Province, the number of 'approved' imported medical devices dropped from 132 in 2019 to just 46 in 2021, highlighting the tightening of market access for EU firms. The China Chamber of Commerce to the EU responded with concern, tweeting that the IPI measures send 'a troubling signal' for bilateral trade ties. In a follow-up statement, the Chamber argued that the targeted use of the IPI risks becoming a de facto trade barrier and urged the EU to reconsider the necessity and long-term impact of such actions. The measures come at a sensitive moment in EU-China relations, which are currently undergoing a tentative diplomatic reset. After years of friction, the two sides have stepped up engagement to manage long-standing disputes. Much of this renewed dialogue is a response to shifting global dynamics, including the Trump-era trade war and broader US-China tensions, which have prompted Brussels to pursue a more balanced approach. A key milestone in this reset is the upcoming EU-China Summit, now confirmed to take place in Beijing in the second half of July 2025. Despite the escalating procurement dispute, a Commission spokesperson downplayed concerns that the IPI measures would damage broader trade relations. 'We've been making very clear to any global partners with whom we believe there is a problem as regards to the level playing field for procurement: should those problems not be removed, we would be forced to take action,' said the spokesperson. On Wednesday, EU Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič met with Chinese Minister Wang Wentao on the sidelines of the OECD Ministerial Council – their third meeting overall and second in person. According to the Commission, the talks covered a wide range of critical bilateral issues as both sides work to ensure progress ahead of the July summit.
Euronews
2 days ago
- Euronews
Commission strengthens imports monitoring amid fear of trade diversion
The European Commission presented on Thursday a new system for monitoring imports arriving in the EU based on customs data. It should be complemented by member states and EU industries' data to identify import surges coming from foreign countries following US tariffs affecting global trade. 'Recent turbulence in the global trading system has increased the risk of harmful trade diversion - products diverted from high tariff markets could find their way to Europe,' EU trade commissioner Maroš Šefčovič said, adding: "With this new import surveillance tool we are boosting our capacity to protect our own interests and stop surges in imports diverted to our market." On 7 April the Commission announced the creation of a task force to monitor variations in imports of products arriving in the EU since 1 January 2025. The biggest fear concerns diversion of products coming from China. At the peak of trade confrontation between the US and China in April, Washington imposed tariffs of up to 145% on Chinese goods. However, the two economic giants reached a truce in May, lowering these duties on Chinese products to 30%. According to the latest figures from Chinese customs, exports from China to the EU increased by 8.2% in April 2025 compared with April 2024. At the member state level, exports to Germany rose by 20.4% over the same period, while the Netherlands saw an increase of 5.6%, Italy 4.7%, and France 2.6%. In the meantime, Chinese exports to the US have fallen by 20% over the same period. The data also showed a surge in Chinese exports to South-East Asian countries, with Thailand up 28% and Indonesia up 37%. To defend itself from excessive trade diversion, the Commission can resort to safeguards, which enable the EU to limit temporarily imports of a product when they might cause market distortion. It can also impose anti-dumping duties if a foreign country exports a product at a lower price than the price on its domestic market. Trade expert Simon Evenett, from the St Gallen Endowment for Prosperity Through Trade, in Switzerland, compiled data showing accelerating price falls between January and April 2025 for Chinese automotive and petroleum products, and prices starting falling over the same period for medicines and ships exported by China across the globe.
