The euro zone is ready for a new member: Bulgaria
Bulgaria on Wednesday secured the green light to join the euro zone, meaning the bloc could soon grow from 20 to 21 members.
A European Central Bank report assessed that the country met the requirements to adopt the single currency starting next year.
"This positive assessment of convergence paves the way for Bulgaria to introduce the euro as of 1 January 2026 and become the 21st EU Member State to join the euro area," Philip Lane, member of the ECB Executive Board, said in a press release.
This marks a shift from last year's report, which concluded that Sofia did not meet the so-called convergence criteria to adopt the currency on the grounds that the country's inflation rate was too high.
One of the obstacles to cross was inflation. Bulgaria's harmonized consumer price index — which is comparable across European countries — came in at 2.8% in April according to statistics agency Eurostat.
Price stability is just one of the requirements a country needs to fulfil in order to join the euro zone, and thereby the European Central Bank. Others include limitations on the size of a nation's government deficit and debt ratio, its average nominal long-term interest rate and its exchange rate stability.
There is also a legal requirement that covers central bank independence.
Bulgaria joined the European Union in 2007 and committed at the time to also join the euro zone and relinquish the Bulgarian lev as its official currency.
One euro is equivalent to 1.96 lev, a rate set when Bulgaria became part of the board which anchors the currencies.
There are mixed attitudes about joining the euro within Bulgaria. A survey published last year by the EU suggested 49% of the public was in favor of the becoming part of the euro bloc. Political opinion is also split, with several nationalist parties and the country's president advocating against it, while Prime Minister Rosen Zhelyazkov is supportive.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Ukraine war latest: Ukraine strikes targets in Russia, including gunpowder plant
Key developments on June 11: Ukrainian drones strike targets in Russia, including gunpowder plant, General Staff says Zelensky urges 'stronger' EU sanctions on Russia, lower oil price cap Ukraine repatriates bodies of 1,212 fallen soldiers Ukraine's SBU releases fresh video of Operation Spiderweb, teases 'new surprises' NATO summit statement omits Ukraine's entry bid, $40 billion pledge, Bloomberg reports Ukrainian drones struck multiple military targets in Russia, including the Tambov Gunpowder Plant, overnight on June 11, the General Staff of Ukraine's Armed Forces reported. The plant, one of Russia's main manufacturers of gunpowder and explosives for small arms, artillery, and rocket systems, caught fire following the drone strike, according to the General Staff. Local residents reported hearing explosions and shared videos showing a large blaze near the facility, according to the Russian independent media outlet Astra. The General Staff described the attack as part of a broader operation to degrade Russia's ability to produce explosive materials and ammunition used in the full-scale war against Ukraine. The Tambov facility has been targeted several times since November 2023, and U.S. sanctions were imposed on it that same year. Tambov Oblast, located southeast of Moscow, lies hundreds of kilometers from Ukraine and shares no direct border with it. Russian state news agency TASS confirmed a drone attack but did not mention the strike on the powder plant. Tambov Oblast Governor Maxim Egorov said that emergency services had extinguished the fire and that there were no casualties, though he did not specify the location of the fire. In addition to the strike on Tambov, Ukrainian drones hit the ammunition depot of Russia's 106th Airborne Division in Kursk Oblast and the depot at Buturlinovka airfield in Voronezh Oblast, the General Staff said. The extent of the damage is still being assessed, the General Staff said. "The Defense Forces continue to take all measures to undermine the military and economic potential of the Russian occupiers and force Russia to stop its armed aggression against Ukraine," the statement reads. Ukraine has ramped up long-range drone strikes in recent weeks, targeting Russian air bases and arms production facilities in an effort to disrupt Moscow's war machine ahead of an anticipated Russian summer offensive. Read also: As Russia inches closer to Dnipropetrovsk Oblast, new Ukrainian region might soon be at war President Volodymyr Zelensky on June 11 called on the European Union to impose tougher sanctions against Russia, arguing that stronger financial pressure is necessary to curb Moscow's war effort. Speaking at the Ukraine-Southeast Europe Summit in Odesa, Zelensky said the upcoming 18th EU sanctions package "could be stronger," especially in targeting Russian oil tankers and the financial sector. He urged the EU to further reduce the price cap on Russian oil exports. "A ceiling of $45 per barrel of oil is better than $60, that's clear, that's true. But real peace will come with a ceiling of $30," he said. "That's the level that will really change the mindset in Moscow." After the 17th package of sanctions against Russia took effect on May 20, Ukraine's allies announced the following day that another round of restrictions was already in the works. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced on June 10 that the EU is considering lowering the oil price cap from $60 to $45 per barrel — a measure that will be discussed at the upcoming G7 summit in Canada on June 15–17. The Kremlin's budget is increasingly strained by soaring military expenditures, with Russia's Finance Ministry relying heavily on energy revenues to fund the war against Ukraine. Join our community Support independent journalism in Ukraine. Join us in this fight. Support Us The push for tighter sanctions comes as Russia continues to reject ceasefire proposals and presses forward with military operations. Zelensky warned that Odesa remains one of Russia's "main targets," with plans to push beyond it toward the borders with Romania and Moldova. "Russia wants to destroy it, as it has done with countless cities and villages in the occupied territories," he said. "Russian military plans point to this region — Odesa — and then to the border with Moldova and Romania." Odesa is a major port city in southern Ukraine, located on the northwestern coast of the Black Sea. The president warned of possible destabilization efforts in the broader region, comparing the Kremlin's strategy to its previous interference in the Balkans. "We saw this before in the Balkans, where Russia intensified interethnic friction, carried out sabotage, and even attempted coups," Zelensky said. The Odesa summit was attended by several southeastern European leaders, including Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic and Romania's newly elected President Nicusor Dan. Vucic's trip marked his first official visit to Ukraine since the start of Russia's full-scale invasion. Read also: Ukraine bracing for 'painful' reduction in US military aid after Hegseth announces cuts Ukraine has brought back the bodies of 1,212 fallen service members, the Ukrainian Coordination Headquarters for the Treatment of Prisoners of War (POW) said on June 11. The announcement follows Russian-Ukrainian Istanbul talks on June 2, which focused on exchanges of POWs and fallen soldiers. The repatriation was carried out through a coordinated effort involving the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU), the Armed Forces, the Interior Ministry, the Ombudsman's Office, the State Emergency Service, and other national security and defense institutions. The International Committee of the Red Cross also supported the operation. The remains of soldiers were returned from multiple front-line regions, including Kharkiv, Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, Kherson, and Sumy oblasts. Officials emphasized that investigative and forensic teams from the Interior Ministry and the Health Ministry are working to identify the bodies in the shortest possible time. Vladimir Medinsky, aide to Russian President Vladimir Putin, claimed Russia transferred the bodies of 1,212 Ukrainian soldiers in accordance with the agreements in Istanbul, while Ukraine released the remains of 27 Russian service members. The Ukrainian side did not disclose how many Russian bodies were handed over in return. At the Istanbul meeting on June 2, Russian and Ukrainian delegations agreed on a new exchange of POWs but failed to reach a ceasefire agreement. The Turkey-hosted talks were the second round since mid-May and resulted in an agreement to exchange severely wounded and young prisoners, with President Volodymyr Zelensky saying up to 1,200 individuals could be returned on each side. Russia also pledged to transfer up to 6,000 bodies of Ukrainian soldiers. Following the Istanbul talks, Ukraine and Russia have already conducted two prisoner exchanges on June 9 and 10. While exact figures were not immediately disclosed, Ukraine confirmed the return of severely wounded and chronically ill prisoners, including those captured during the 2022 siege of Mariupol and held for more than three years. In Istanbul, Ukraine also submitted a peace proposal that called for a full ceasefire, an "all-for-all" POW exchange, the return of abducted children, and the use of frozen Russian assets to rebuild Ukraine. Russia has yet to formally respond. Read also: 'Ukrainians have been stripped of illusion of control' — Filmmaker Kateryna Gornostai on Russia's war, cinema and reclaiming the narrative The Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) released on June 11 a new video detailing the sequence of its mass drone strike against Russia's strategic aviation earlier this month. The Operation Spiderweb, carried out on June 1, involved 117 drones that were hidden in trucks across Russia and deployed against four air bases, some thousands of kilometers from the Ukrainian border. The strike deep in the rear damaged 41 aircraft, including Tu-95, Tu-22M3, and Tu-160 bombers, rare A-50 spy planes, and An-12 and Il-78 transport aircraft, causing damage of over $7 billion, the SBU said. Trucks, seen in the footage driving in an undisclosed location, first transported first-person-view (FPV) drones and wooden cabins to Russia, the SBU said. Already on Russian territory, the vehicles were loaded with cabins, which, in turn, carried the drones. 0:00 / 1× The preparations were taking place in the Russian city of Chelyabinsk, not far from a Federal Security Service (FSB) office, according to the SBU. The loaded trucks then drove to multiple locations in the cities of Ivanovo, Ryazan, and in the Murmansk, Irkutsk, and Amur oblasts. The cabins opened remotely at the time of the attack, allowing the drones to strike Russian planes at the Belaya, Olenya, Dyagilevo, and Ivanovo air bases. The operation was also meant to strike at the Russian air base in Ukrainka in Amur Oblast, but this part of the attack failed. In the strike, Ukraine deployed drones specially designed by SBU specialists for attacks deep in the rear. Their unique features allowed them to be remotely controlled in real time thousands of kilometers behind the border, an SBU source told the Kyiv Independent. The drones' design also helped them "bypass Russian defenses and effectively strike the strategic aviation," the source said. SBU chief Vasyl Maliuk, who personally oversaw the operation, stressed that Ukrainian drones targeted "absolutely legitimate targets – military airfields and aircraft that attack our peaceful cities." "The SBU is hitting and will hit (Russia) where it considers itself unreachable!" Maliuk said in a statement. "We are working on new surprises, no less painful than the Operation Spiderweb." The attack was lauded by Ukrainian leaders and Western partners, with NATO Admiral Pierre Vandier calling it a reinvention of "the Trojan Horse" method with "technical and industrial creativity." Various satellite imagery released after the attack showed around a dozen destroyed planes. NATO estimates that between 10 and 13 Russian planes were completely destroyed, and more were damaged. In turn, President Volodymyr Zelensky claimed that roughly half of the 41 targeted planes have been damaged beyond repair. Russia acknowledged damage to its aircraft but claimed all of them will be "restored." Read also: America's weak strongman A one-page draft of a joint declaration for the upcoming NATO summit omits Ukraine's membership aspirations and last year's pledge of over $40 billion in support, Bloomberg reported on June 11 after reviewing the draft. This news signals that, for the first time since 2022, Russia's war against Ukraine will not be the chief focus of the annual NATO meeting, which is taking place on June 24-25 in The Hague. The unusually brief document recognizes Russia as a threat to NATO but not as an aggressor in Ukraine. It also does not mention China, Bloomberg reported. The communique of the 2024 summit in Washington named Beijing as a "decisive enabler" of Russia's war against Ukraine. Last year's gathering also included a declaration that Ukraine's path to NATO is "irreversible" and promised more than $40 billion in additional military aid. This year, the document will solely focus on defense spending, as U.S. President Donald Trump pushes NATO partners to hike the military expenditure benchmark from 2% to 5% of GDP. The final version of the statement can still change, Bloomberg reported. The brevity of the communique and the summit itself, as well as the decreased focus on Ukraine, stems from the effort to avoid conflict between Trump and European allies. In a sharp break from former U.S. President Joe Biden, the Trump administration has not approved any new military aid packages to Ukraine and signaled its intent to reduce assistance for Kyiv in the next year's budget. The U.S. president initially vowed to broker a peace deal between Kyiv and Moscow but became increasingly less engaged in the process as the negotiations stalled and Russia only intensified its attacks against Ukraine. According to Bloomberg, NATO allies will pledge to allocate at least 3.5% of GDP to defense needs and 1.5% to protecting infrastructure and civil preparedness by 2032. Member states will also consider counting their contributions to Ukraine as part of the new defense spending targets, the news outlet reported. The summit was preceded by rumors that President Volodymyr Zelensky would not be invited to participate for the first time due to U.S. opposition. Later, the speculations were dispelled after the Dutch media reported that NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte had invited the Ukrainian leader to attend. Ukraine War Latest is put together by the Kyiv Independent news desk team, who keep you informed 24 hours a day, seven days a week. If you value our work and want to ensure we have the resources to continue, join the Kyiv Independent community. We've been working hard to bring you independent, locally-sourced news from Ukraine. Consider supporting the Kyiv Independent.
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Lammy is picking a needless fight with America
The alarming revelation that 2024 recorded the highest number of global conflicts since the Second World War should be taken as an incentive to deepen ties with key allies, not fracture them. That would certainly be the response of any government committed to the defence of the realm faced with the depressing statistic that last year saw 61 conflicts taking place in 36 countries. Of these, 11 were defined as full-blown conflicts – those that claimed at least 1,000 battlefield deaths – and included the ongoing wars in Ukraine and Gaza, as well as other less-publicised violent eruptions in Sudan, Syria, Nigeria and Ethiopia. At a time when Sir Keir Starmer is attempting to promote his national security credentials, the rising tide of conflict detailed in a report by Sweden's Uppsala University should prompt his Government to strengthen ties with key allies such as the US and Israel. Instead, by opting to target two members of the Israeli government with sanctions, Starmer has shown that he is more interested in virtue-signalling than common sense. National security minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and finance minister Bezalel Smotrich may come from the ulta-nationalist fringe of Israeli politics, but they remain important members of Israel's democratically elected government, which is one of the UK's closest allies in the Middle East. Moreover, Israel, just like Ukraine, finds itself in the vanguard of the West's deepening confrontation with two of the most potent threats it faces, in the form of Vladimir Putin's Russia and Iranian-sponsored Islamist terrorism. The UK's support for Ukraine, together with its European allies, is predicated on the understanding that Western security would be fatally compromised if Russia's unprovoked invasion of Ukraine were to succeed. Similarly, the UK's declaration of support for Israel in the wake of the October 7 attacks in 2023 was based on the tacit acknowledgement that it was in the West's interests that Iran's backing for Hamas terrorists must not be allowed to go unchallenged, especially given the ayatollahs' fixation with developing nuclear weapons. The Labour Government's decision, therefore, to single out two prominent members of the Israeli government for public censure not only threatens to undermine relations with a key regional ally. It runs the risk of jeopardising our own national security, especially if the Israelis conclude it is no longer in their interests to share vital intelligence with the UK. Israeli foreign minister Gideon Saar has already announced the Israeli cabinet will meet next week to respond to what he called an 'unacceptable decision'. The British Government's decision to pick on the two politicians is hardly surprising given its previous lamentable track record of targeting Israel, with Foreign Secretary David Lammy declaring his support for the International Criminal Court and its highly politicised move to prosecute Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu for war crimes. Yet, by siding with other self-righteous, but wholly naive, administrations in Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Norway, to provoke an entirely avoidable diplomatic row with Israel, Starmer and Co have placed themselves firmly on the wrong side of history. Apart from alienating Israel, the move also risks causing a rift with the US, another key ally. America's secretary of state Marco Rubio was particularly critical of the measures imposed against Ben-Gvir and Smotrich for 'inciting violence against the Palestinian people'. The sanctions 'do not advance US-led efforts to achieve a ceasefire, bring all hostages home and end the war,' he said, urging the UK 'not to forget who the real enemy is'. Hitting two controversial Israeli politicians with sanctions might play to Labour's vociferously anti-Israel supporters, but it could prove to be a self-defeating move in terms of safeguarding our own long-term interests. In terms of the likely impact it will have on Israeli policy, the sanctions will be about as effective as Greta Thunberg's equally puerile attempt this week to break Israel's Gaza blockade with her Freedom Flotilla. At the same time they run the risk of sending a signal to Iran and other hostile regimes that the UK is more interested in embarrassing its allies than confronting its enemies. It is certainly hard to grasp the logic of why, when Western powers like the UK are preparing to confront Iran over its nuclear programme, they should choose this moment to pick a fight with Israel, Tehran's sworn enemy. The need to impose fresh sanctions against Iran was very much in evidence at this week's meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna, when Rafael Grossi, the body's director general, confirmed three new previously undeclared nuclear sites had been identified in Iran that could be used for developing nuclear weapons. The UK is among a number of European powers that have responded by pressing for the reimposition of sanctions against Tehran. But the ayatollahs are unlikely to change course on their nuclear ambitions if they believe they share a common interest with Britain and its allies in targeting the Israelis. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Rachel Reeves may have just killed Nato
There will be a moment, some time in the next few years when the US will genuinely consider leaving Nato. And if it does, we should not be surprised. It wasn't as if they didn't warn the rest of us. About the only thing Donald Trump and Barack Obama ever agreed on was that Europe must make a much bigger financial contribution to Nato. In 2014 at the Cardiff Summit, the Treasury furiously resisted the demands. All sorts of tricks were pulled and definitions were stretched to get the UK to 2 per cent of GDP. The Americans, in their polite way, asked nicely. They've been asking ever since. Because as they command all Allied forces in Nato they knew the truth about the state of everyone's forces. While public scrutiny was kept at bay using secrecy and 'operational reasons', SACEUR – Supreme Allied Commander Europe, the military boss of Nato and always an American – grew increasingly concerned as Russia got more and more aggressive. And still European capitals, including London, carried on cutting. Not until 2019 and Boris Johnson did the Ministry of Defence turn the corner with real money and real reform. Previous Conservative and Labour governments had used the Red Arrows and Trooping the Colour to pretend that all was well. But Ukraine found us out. Nato and the international community needed to act: and as we examined our inventory ministers could see just how weak we had become. I remember when we debated gifting the AS90 155mm long range artillery to Ukraine I was informed that while we had 73 guns on the books only 19 worked! Or when I tried to increase the number of tanks to be upgraded to Challenger 3s I was told it was impossible because so many of our tanks had already been stripped of parts to keep others running. You might say that I should have known all that detail on day one. But you'd be surprised how well the services can hide bad news when they want to. Last week we witnessed Labour's first defence review for more than 20 years. It was heralded by re‑announcing many Conservative procurements. As a review it was weak: clearly budget-led not threat led. The big decisions had been made beforehand, and without 3 per cent by 2030 the review would clearly be hollow at birth, as it was. It was also an insult to the men and women of the Armed Forces and the equivalent of sticking two fingers up to the White House. Today's spending review confirmed what we all feared. Rather than making tough decisions on public spending priorities, Rachel Reeves chose to use Treasury tricks to deceive us all. The Government has folded in intelligence spending, Ukraine spending and even Foreign Office money to the notional 'defence' figure. The result is that core defence spending will not even be 2.5 per cent as promised: not even close. There was no path to 3 per cent either. It was just a con all along. If John Healey spent as much time battling the Treasury as he did repeating my government's plans or deceiving the public with spin then he might have had some success. But it is clear he is Labour first and UK defence second. How dare this Government avoid the solemn duty to defend our shores and properly equip the men and women of the armed forces. Labour was the government that sent our troops to war in Snatch Land Rovers and they are destined to repeat that betrayal. Next week Donald Trump will arrive in Holland for the Nato summit. He will bring with him a message that we must all spend 3.5 per cent of GDP on actual defence, not counting spies or diplomats. The Donald will not be bought off with Treasury tricks. I was in Washington last week and some very senior people in the White House and the Pentagon genuinely believe Trump may leave Nato in two years. They are serious. So we need to either demonstrate we are pulling our weight or we need to compensate for the 70 per cent loss to Nato capability if the US leaves. Based on Rachel Reeves's efforts we will do neither. History may point to this as the moment when the UK surrendered its place in Nato and triggered its demise. And all the while, Putin and Xi will be licking their lips. Waiting for their moment. For that little bit of Estonia or Finland. The best Donald Trump can do next week is say that Nato is a club with a subscription. No money should mean no entry. Ben Wallace served as Secretary of State for Defence from 2019 to 2023. He is a former British Army officer Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
