Several suspects held over NATO arms contract graft
BRUSSELS: NATO said Wednesday that several suspects had been detained over alleged corruption in procurement contracts, as authorities in Belgium and in Luxembourg announced an inquiry.
'Law enforcement authorities in a number of countries have arrested a number of individuals accused of corrupt activities related to NATO contracts,' NATO spokeswoman Allison Hart said. 'NATO — including the NSPA (NATO Support and Procurement Agency) — is working closely with law enforcement to ensure that perpetrators are brought to justice.'
Prosecutors in Belgium said one person had been formally arrested in the country after anti-corruption officers carried out searches. "The investigation concerns possible irregularities in awarding contracts to defence contractors for the purchase of military equipment for NATO such as ammunition and drones," the Belgian prosecutors said.
"It would be more specifically about the possible passing on of confidential information by employees of NATO Support & Procurement Agency based in the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, to defence contractors eligible to win these contracts."
The Belgian authorities said several former employees of NATO's procurement agency "are said to be involved". Prosecutors in Luxembourg meanwhile said police in the country had carried out "various searches" and seized documents related to the case.
"Belgian, Dutch, Italian, Spanish and American authorities conducted simultaneous operations, leading to the arrest of suspects," the Luxembourg authorities said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
18 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Trump defends LA Marines deployment amid more protests
Federal agents detain an individual after their hearing in an immigration court in New York City. Photo: AFP Hundreds of US Marines were expected in Los Angeles on Tuesday after President Donald Trump ordered their deployment in response to protests against immigration arrests and despite objections by state officials. The 700 elite troops will join around 4,000 National Guard soldiers, amping up the militarization of the tense situation in the sprawling city, which is home to millions of foreign-born and Latino residents. The small-scale and largely peaceful demonstrations — marred by sporadic but violent clashes between police and protesters — were entering their fifth day. In downtown LA's Little Tokyo neighborhood at night Monday, scores of protesters faced off with security officials in riot gear, some shooting fireworks at officers who fired back volleys of tear gas. Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom wrote on X that US Marines "shouldn't be deployed on American soil facing their own countrymen to fulfill the deranged fantasy of a dictatorial President. This is un-American." But Trump has branded the LA protesters "professional agitators and insurrectionists." "If I didn't 'SEND IN THE TROOPS' to Los Angeles the last three nights, that once beautiful and great City would be burning to the ground right now," he wrote on Truth Social on Tuesday. Earlier, demonstrators marching with banners and handmade signs yelled "ICE out of LA" and "National Guard go away" — a reference to immigration agents and Guard soldiers. One small business owner in the city, whose property was graffitied during the protests, was supportive of Trump's strong-arm tactics. "I think it's needed to stop the vandalism," she told AFP, declining to give her name. Others were horrified. "They're meant to be protecting us, but instead, they're like, being sent to attack us," Kelly Diemer, 47, told AFP. "This is not a democracy anymore." LA police have detained dozens of protesters in recent days, while authorities in San Francisco and other US cities have also made arrests.
Express Tribune
2 days ago
- Express Tribune
America's immigration dilemma: Law, accountability, and the crisis within
For decades, America has prided itself as a land of opportunity—a magnet for dreamers, workers, and refugees. But today, under the aggressive implementation of ICE-led deportations, spearheaded by President Donald Trump's renewed enforcement drive, the country finds itself fractured. The issue is no longer just about legality—it has become a battleground of narratives, identity, and accountability. President Trump insists that 'millions and millions' of illegal immigrants—whom he categorizes as violent criminals, traffickers, sex offenders, and pedophiles—have 'invaded' the U.S. According to him, his administration's duty is to remove these threats through mass deportations, often carried out with military-style precision. ICE raids in cities like Los Angeles, where five individuals with criminal pasts were arrested on June 7, are presented as success stories. But a deeper question lurks behind these headlines: if such individuals are indeed dangerous and illegal, how did they get into the country in the first place? As a legal immigrant myself, my family and I embarked on a long and arduous journey. We applied in 2007 for family-sponsored immigration and were not approved until 2024. Seventeen years of background checks, verification of employment, travel history, character assessment, and criminal records—all under the scrutiny of U.S. immigration services. It is a stringent, sometimes grueling, system that leaves little room for error. If followed diligently, it is almost impossible for someone with a dubious past to pass through. This raises troubling questions. How do individuals with criminal records—those labeled as drug dealers, violent offenders, or sex criminals—make it into the U.S. undocumented? What loopholes exist? And more importantly, who allowed it? Beyond bureaucratic lapse, another profound and often overlooked truth must be acknowledged: every wave of immigration has often been triggered by destruction caused by the United States and its allies. The Syrian crisis, spurred by U.S.-led regime change attempts, created millions of refugees—many welcomed into the United States. The U.S. invasion of Iraq unleashed chaos, civil war, and displacement, compelling thousands of Iraqis to seek shelter abroad. Libya, after being bombed into anarchy, witnessed similar refugee outflows. Palestinians displaced by decades of unending Israeli occupation, often with U.S. political and military backing, have also found refuge in America. The collapse of Afghanistan after two decades of NATO occupation led to a mass exodus—especially of Afghans who worked with Western forces. Most arrived with no paperwork or formal identity verification, given the country's primitive recordkeeping systems. Yet, many were fast-tracked into the U.S., bypassing the very scrutiny imposed on legal immigrants from stable nations. This uncomfortable truth demands moral clarity: if undocumented immigrants are subject to the full weight of the law, then those policymakers and officials who created the conditions for their displacement, or allowed their entry without due diligence, must also be held accountable. It is a shared responsibility—one that begins not at the border, but in the war rooms and foreign policy chambers where these crises were ignited. There appears to be no structured inquiry or investigation into the root causes. No commissions, no accountability frameworks to identify the officials, agencies, or politicians who enabled mass illegal entry. Immigration enforcement in the U.S. has historically vacillated depending on who is in power. One administration turns a blind eye, quietly encouraging mass entry. The next tries to reverse it through high-profile crackdowns. But in the absence of institutional accountability, this cyclical dysfunction persists—feeding public anger and polarizing communities. ICE is now being weaponized not just to remove the undocumented, but to reassert political dominance. The use of unmarked vehicles, masked officers, and sudden, forceful detentions—often in front of children and elders—conveys a message of fear. It is not surprising that over 10,000 protesters recently marched through downtown Los Angeles against these raids. Many carried Mexican flags—none carried the American flag. This wasn't just a protest; it was a symptom of deeper social unrest. Critics argue that these ICE actions, while legal under the Supreme Court's allowance of 24-hour deportation notice, are being carried out in a manner that undermines constitutional due process. Rights of asylum seekers, refugees, and even undocumented residents with long-standing ties to communities are brushed aside in the name of executive orders. A nation built by immigrants is now turning its state machinery against them. Supporters of Trump's policy, on the other hand, insist that deporting illegals—especially criminals—is not just constitutional, but necessary. They point to the Clinton-era deportations of over 12 million people, Obama's deportation of 5 million, and Bush's expedited removal protocols. 'This is not new,' they argue. 'It's enforcement overdue.' But many dissenters challenge this logic. They argue that Trump is not fixing immigration—he's weaponizing it. He's framing all undocumented migrants as threats, fueling fear for political gain. His critics claim that this dehumanization is less about justice and more about re-election. Trump's rhetoric plays to a base who feel left behind—using immigrants as scapegoats for economic and social frustrations. This divide is not only ideological—it's generational, racial, and geographic. Many immigrants, including legal ones like myself, find ourselves in a complicated space. On one hand, we support the rule of law. On the other, we reject the vilification of all migrants and the blanket criminalization of entire communities. Let us remember: America is a nation of immigrants. Even Donald Trump is the grandson of Friedrich Trump, a German immigrant who arrived in the U.S. in 1885. The German Chancellor once presented Trump with his grandfather's immigration file during a White House visit—a reminder that no one, not even the president, is far removed from the immigrant experience. The real issue is not race, religion, or ethnicity. The only legitimate distinction should be between legal and illegal entry. But even that must be addressed humanely, within the framework of rights and due process. It cannot become a pretext for racial profiling, family separation, or fear campaigns. The lack of systemic accountability is the root of this chaos. Who failed to enforce border laws? Who allowed the lapse? Was it intentional? Was there bribery? Was it negligence or political strategy? These are the questions no one in Washington wants to answer. The consequences of this negligence go beyond borders. As seen in the Los Angeles protest, foreign governments—like Mexico—may begin to leverage their diaspora as political tools. If unchecked, this tactic could be replicated by other countries, introducing a dangerous element of foreign interference in domestic American affairs. In my observation of reactions on X (formerly Twitter), two dominant narratives have emerged: one, defending ICE's actions and Trump's policies as lawful and overdue; the other, denouncing the excessive force and racial undertones as unconstitutional and inhumane. Some comments suggest this is less about criminals and more about silencing immigrants—legal and illegal alike—through fear and exclusion. What, then, is the way forward? First, no society or country elsewhere in the world may be destroyed, and no country, especially one as powerful as the United States, should ever tolerate illegal immigration. The law must be upheld. But enforcement must be precise, proportional, and humane. Second, there must be rigorous accountability. Politicians, departments, and border enforcement agencies that failed in their duty must face consequences. Only then can the system regain public trust. Third, investment must be made into technology, manpower, and processes that make it virtually impossible for undocumented migrants—especially those with criminal records—to enter undetected. The U.S. has done this before during the post-9/11 anti-terrorism era. It can do it again. This is not just about protecting borders. It's about preserving the spirit of America—a land where laws are enforced, but justice is never blind to humanity. If illegal immigration is the dragon, it must be slain at its roots. Not with brutality, but with policy, accountability, and moral clarity. Let us hope that sanity prevails. Let us hope that the United States rises above political theatrics and embraces a model of immigration that is lawful, just, and worthy of the ideals it claims to defend.
Express Tribune
3 days ago
- Express Tribune
Tens of thousands rally in Spain for PM Sanchez to resign over corruption
People take part in a demonstration organised by the main opposition conservative People's Party against the Socialist government of Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez under the motto 'Democracy or Mafia' in Madrid, Spain on June 8, 2025. PHOTO: DW Listen to article Tens of thousands of demonstrators gathered in central Madrid on Sunday in a rally organised by Spain's conservative opposition, accusing Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez and his Socialist-led government of corruption and demanding early elections. Protesters waving Spanish flags and chanting 'Pedro Sánchez, resign!' filled Plaza de España, responding to a call from the Popular Party (PP). The rally follows leaked audio recordings that allegedly implicate a former Socialist Party member, Leire Díez, in efforts to discredit police investigations into corruption claims involving Sánchez's wife, brother, and former minister José Luis Ábalos. Díez has denied the allegations, insisting she was conducting research for a book and was not acting on behalf of the government. She has since resigned from the Socialist Workers' Party. Speaking at the rally, PP leader Alberto Núñez Feijóo accused Sánchez's administration of 'mafia practices' and declared: 'This government has stained everything – politics, state institutions, the separation of powers.' The PP claimed over 100,000 people attended the demonstration under the slogan 'Mafia or Democracy', though officials from the central government put the turnout between 45,000 and 50,000. The Sánchez government has been rocked by several corruption-related controversies in recent months, most notably the so-called 'Koldo Case' – an alleged scheme involving inflated COVID-era public contracts for medical supplies. The case centres on Koldo García Izaguirre, a former adviser to Sánchez's then-transport minister Ábalos. García is accused of using political connections to steer contracts towards favoured companies in exchange for large commissions. In April 2024, Sánchez briefly considered resigning after a Madrid court opened an investigation into his wife, Begoña Gómez, on suspicion of influence peddling and business corruption. The accusations stemmed from a complaint by right-wing group Manos Limpias (Clean Hands), which claims Gómez used her position to benefit certain companies. Sánchez has strongly denied any wrongdoing by himself or his inner circle, describing the investigations and leaks as part of a coordinated right-wing smear campaign aimed at destabilising his administration. But with public anger growing and political pressure mounting, the PP is hoping to capitalise on the unrest. Despite the controversies, Spain's next general election is not due until 2027, though recent polls suggest the PP has a slight edge over Sánchez's Socialist Party. 'The expiry date on this government passed a long time ago,' protester Blanca Requejo, 46, told AFP. 'It's getting tiring.' Sánchez came to power in 2018 after ousting former PP Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy in a no-confidence vote triggered by a separate corruption scandal.
