Latest news with #Adenauer
Local Germany
01-08-2025
- Business
- Local Germany
OPINION: Why Germany's pensions problems will soon be your problem
Finance Minister Lars Klingbeil presented his budget for 2026 this week. And now that the debt brake has been taken very firmly off, he's splashing the cash. So much so that it's easy to lose track of where the money is coming from – and where it's going: billions for the Bundeswehr here, billions for Deutsche Bahn there; even the consolation prizes for out-of-fashion green initiatives have nine-figure price-tags… But the real story here is not the €126 billion in off-plan spending on defence, infrastructure, and net zero. It's the near-identical sum which will be spent on pensions: €127,8 billion. That's almost a quarter of the regular budget, which stands at €520 billion. And given the lower-than-projected tax take in year six of economic stagnation, this level of spending will require a record €170 billion of government debt. So yes, we are, in essence, topping up the pension fund on credit. How the German pensions system works If you are employed in Germany, you make monthly contributions of 9.3 percent of your salary to an arms-length body, Rentenversicherung , which is matched one-to-one by your employer. Similarly to systems such National Insurance in the UK, the idea is for those in the workforce to finance pensions while they themselves acquire entitlements for their own retirement. So in theory, the government shouldn't need to allocate any budget to the system at all. Yet in practice – in another similarity to the UK's National Insurance – the system stopped working a long time ago and now requires annual injections of cash from the state exchequer to stay afloat. Unfavourable demographics The principal cause is that Germany now has far more retirees living much longer set against a rapidly-declining working population. Advertisement When the current pensions architecture was put in place in the 1950s, there were around six people in work for every one person claiming a pension. Average life expectancy was still below 70, and as Chancellor Adenauer famously remarked: ' Kinder kriegen die Leute immer ' (People always have kids). It didn't turn out that way. Instead, as life expectancy heads past 80, there are now only three workers for every pensioner; soon, this ratio will be closer to two to one. READ ALSO: 'Multiple crises' - Why fewer babies are being born in Germany While Germany is not alone here, our 1950-1970 boomers proved both particularly numerous and particularly shy of having children, so we have worse statistics than neighbouring countries – and more trouble paying pensions. Poor design Moreover, Germany's pensions system is, by design, more expensive than most other variants: instead of setting a minimum number of years' contributions as a threshold for a basic entitlement (as in UK, Denmark, or Sweden, for example), our system awards earnings-based points throughout working lives and then sets an individual pension level accordingly. Advertisement Check your annual statement to find out your projected monthly sum, and you'll see that this is good for high-earners and bad for the low-paid. What is more, it makes life difficult for actuaries at the pensions body, who have no idea how contributions from those still in work will develop. Germany has plenty to offer retirees. Image by Rudy and Peter Skitterians from Pixabay If the current labour force earns less, workers pay in less, too. Yet life expectancy rises inexorably (especially for high earners, who tend to be healthier in old age), and so the government has to step in to satisfy pensioners' legal entitlements. Bad politics Worse, government has continually tweaked the system in ways which make it ever costlier. In the late 2010s, for example, Merkel's coalitions expanded early retirement programmes, enticing anyone with 45 years' employment history to leave the workforce at 63 rather than 68, cutting five years of potential contributions out of the system – and adding five years of pay-outs. They also introduced the basic minimum state pension ( Grundrente ) and an additional mothers' allowance ( Mütterrente ) – over and above the points-based calculation. READ ALSO: Tax cuts and pensions - How Germany's budget changes could impact you The justification for this was that people who don't earn well or leave work to look after their families accrue fewer points, and so are left with low pensions. Advertisement Some say it's only fair that everyone has a decent income in old age, regardless of what they contributed. Others say: hard cheese, that's how it works. Wherever you stand on the politics, though, one thing is clear: the system was not designed to simultaneously reward high earners and be generous to all. Why the German pension systems won't stop working – for pensioners Yet that is precisely what, out of political expediency, it is being bent to do. The result is an already huge demographic deficit being made worse, swallowing up ever larger amounts of government spending. And it's about to get worse: a new, expanded Mütterrente is being planned as part of a bill guaranteeing that pay-outs will average 48 percent of wages for the remainder of this parliament. All workers in Germany contribute to the country's pension system. Photo: picture alliance/dpa | Axel Heimken Yet there will be no reduction in entitlements for higher earners, so the money will have to come from… That's right, future budgets! By 2027/2028, we can expect subsidies to the system to be approaching one third of regular spending. This means that, once the €500-billion off-plan bonanza ends in 2029/2030, there'll be direct competition for resources between the Army and the army of pensioners. Whoever the Finance Minister is by then, they'll be weighing up whether to spend on upgrading railways or uprating pensions. OPINION: If Germany is to thrive it must help foreigners feel they belong here What is already obvious: they'll opt for the latter. As everybody knows, turkeys don't vote for Christmas – and any politician looking to please turkeys doesn't put them on the menu. As pensioners make up an ever-growing proportion of the electorate, no major party will campaign to make them even marginally worse-off. Recent policy initiatives from well-meaning economists – e.g. a ' Boomer-Soli ' whereby wealthier pensioners pay a tax surcharge to finance the system, or doing it like the Danes and coupling pension age to life-expectancy – are total non-starters. As is the idea of getting civil servants and state functionaries to pay contributions. (Yes: Beamte get off scot-free…) How will the pension challenge affect today's workers? Instead, the ever-growing pensions bill will have to be financed by penny-pinching elsewhere – and by increasing insurance contributions for those currently in the workforce. So expect taxes to stay high, public infrastructure to get worse, and that 9.3 percent on your pay-packet to turn double-digit before the decade's out. READ ALSO: '€10 a month' - Germany to set up pension accounts for all children from age 6 Of course, no-one is going to say that out loud, which is why this thorny issue has been delegated to a commission which will report on the matter in the coming… *Yawn*. As anyone who has worked in a German company knows: Wenn man nicht weiter weiß, bildet man einen Arbeitskreis! (If you don't know the answer, set up a committee!) So if you're in work in Germany, there are two ways of looking at: Pessimistically, you're being sucked dry by a Ponzi scheme which will have collapsed by the time you're of pension age. Or, optimistically, politicians' consistent refusals to change anything mean that, when you hit retirement age, you'll be having the cash splashed on you – and may see the whole issue quite differently. Advertisement One thing's for sure: if Germany retains its system in anything like the present form, it will remain generous by comparison to many other countries – who will also be facing demographic pressures to varying degrees and seeking to keep spending under control. And a country without any pension provision at all is almost inconceivable. Indeed, as one of German politics' most enduring soundbites has it: " Die Rente ist sicherI " (Your pension is safe).
Euronews
05-06-2025
- Business
- Euronews
Beasts and besties: German chancellors and US presidents through time
As Germany's new Chancellor Friedrich Merz meets US President Donald Trump for the first time at the White House on Thursday, he'll be aware of how his predecessors have tackled the transatlantic relationship. The stars don't augur well, however. During his first stint in office, Trump regularly made disparaging remarks about Germany and developed a non-relationship with Chancellor Angela Merkel characterised by mutual personal dislike. Trump's erratic trade policy, which has the EU and Germany specifically in its sights, as well as Trump's retreat from traditionally solid transatlantic positions on common defence and Russia, have challenged Merz before he even moved into the Chancellery. How the mutual relationship between Merz and Trump develops in the future is likely to depend crucially on how the Chancellor completes his first visit to the Oval Office - Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy sends his regards! Merz's basic problem is that Trump has taken an axe to German-US relations and is not particularly interested in good terms with Berlin. This situation is a novelty for a German chancellor. Merz's predecessors since 1949 have experienced ups and downs in their relations with the respective US presidents, but the close friendship between the two countries has never been called into question. So how did they get along? Konrad Adenauer was 73 when he was elected the first Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany in 1949. Four years after the end of World War II, however, the country was not yet a sovereign state. Adenauer was only too aware of this. He sought a close and trusting relationship with the US and adheres very closely to instructions from Washington. In 1953, Adenauer travelled to the US for the first time - it was the first ever visit by a German head of government to Washington! His talks with US President Dwight Eisenhower (1953-61) were friendly. For Adenauer, the protection, aid and military presence of the United States were indispensable for the democratic development of Germany, as well as for peace and prosperity in Europe. Adenauer developed close personal relations with Eisenhower and especially his Secretary of State John Foster Dulles, which benefitted German-US relations as a whole. In contrast, Adenauer's relationship with John F Kennedy (1961-63) was not without problems. The two are far apart in terms of both age and politics. In 1963, his last year in office, Adenauer was already 87, and Kennedy, 41 years his junior, saw him as a man of the past. Kennedy felt that the chancellor's stance on the German question was too rigid and lacked flexibility in the face of changing conditions in Europe. Conversely, Adenauer harbours mistrust of US-Soviet negotiations. He believes that a rapprochement between the two superpowers could only take place at the expense of Germany and its political goal of reunification. After the discord between Adenauer and JFK, relations between Chancellor Ludwig Erhard and Kennedy's successor Lyndon B. Johnson (1963-69) became very friendly again. German foreign policy was by now characterised by the conflict between 'Atlanticists' and 'Gaullists', with the latter wanting a close alliance with France, which Erhard rejects in favour of nuclear protection by the US. Erhard and Johnson met sympathetically from the outset and came together five times during Erhard's short time in office. The first time was just one month after Johnson's inauguration, when the Texan invited the German to his ranch in Texas, a particular honour, especially for a foreigner. Willy Brandt was the first Social Democrat to become Federal Chancellor in 1974. Brandt sees himself as a self-confident partner of the USA. However, his 'Ostpolitik', which sought an understanding with East Germany (GDR), Poland and the Soviet Union, was viewed with great suspicion in Washington. US President Richard Nixon (1969-1974) distrusted Brandt, whom he considered to be a 'German nationalist'. Brandt, on the other hand, tried to maintain a good relationship with Nixon and avoided open criticism of the war in Vietnam. Personally, the two had practically nothing to say to each other. Alluding to Brandt's illegitimate origins, Nixon occasionally calls him 'the bastard' behind closed doors. In the mid-1970s, German-US relations were better than ever before. US President Gerald Ford (1974-1977) and German Chancellor Helmut Schmidt knew and appreciated each other and were close friends in their private lives. There was a great deal of agreement on key issues, as well as a trusting openness in discussing differences. However, Ford lost the 1976 election to his challenger Jimmy Carter (1977-1981). Carter was inexperienced in foreign policy and relied on a team of advisors disconnected from the think tanks of the East Coast, where Schmidt had been well-connected for decades and enjoyed a high reputation. Schmidt, who had a tendency to lecture people, saw Carter as a novice who had only a limited understanding of the world's complex problems. This does not go unnoticed by Carter - relations quickly hit rock bottom. When it came to the deployment of the neutron bomb, there were serious disagreements. Schmidt, amid great domestic political difficulties, advocated the weapons system desired by Washington. When Carter stopped its production at the last minute for domestic political reasons, Schmidt felt exposed and abandoned. Unlike Schmidt, Helmut Kohl had no personal connection to the United States and did not speak English. Nevertheless, he showed transatlantic solidarity from the outset and endeavours to establish a personal relationship with every US president he deals with. His relationship with Ronald Reagan (1981-1989) even had friendly traits that outlasted even the embarrassing Bitburg controversy. In 1985, Kohl invited Reagan to visit the Bitburg military cemetery in the Eifel region during his stay in Germany - as a sign of reconciliation between former enemies. When it was discovered that not only Wehrmacht soldiers but also members of the Waffen SS were buried at the cemetery, a storm of indignation broke out in Washington. The White House wanted to cancel the visit, but Reagan remained stubborn and thus supported the German chancellor. Kohl also developed a friendly and close relationship with Reagan's successor George HW Bush (1989-93), which facilitated communication between the two governments during the collapse of the GDR and the German reunification process. In the 1990s, German-US relations were determined not least by the question of how much responsibility Germany should assume in the world. US President Bill Clinton (1993-2001), with whom Kohl had an even better relationship than with Reagan, reacted positively to the German decision to send Bundeswehr soldiers to the Balkans as part of an international peacekeeping force. In his memoirs, Clinton spoke almost affectionately and with great respect about his appreciation for Kohl. He was 'not only physically' the most impressive political leader in Europe for decades, according to Clinton. The relationship between German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder and US President George W. Bush developed quite differently. The atmosphere between Bonn (later Berlin) and Washington was probably never as icy as in those years. The reason: the red-green government's no to the war in Iraq. Mistrust, personal animus, blatant dislike - the rift between the two leaders was total. This became apparent again years later, when both were no longer in office and both accused each other of lying on the occasion of the publication of Bush's memoirs in 2010. Under Chancellor Angela Merkel, German-American relations relaxed again. Unlike with Schröder, Bush got on well with Merkel and called her 'a friend'. In contrast, the chancellor's relationship with Barack Obama was slow to warm. In 2008, she refused to allow the then-presidential candidate to give a speech in front of the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin - Obama had to make do with the Victory Column. But after Obama's election, the relationship was increasingly characterised by mutual trust. Both cultivated a sober and pragmatic political style and a liberal view of the world, which facilitated cooperation. In a way, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz was lucky: US President Joe Biden was probably the last great old-school US Atlanticist. This made cooperation easier. Both liked each other, worked together in a spirit of trust and described each other as friends. In fact, Scholz consulted with Biden more frequently and more closely than with his European colleagues. When it comes to aid for Ukraine, Scholz did nothing without obtaining Biden's approval. At their last meeting, both warned against ending military support to Ukraine. This is now a matter for their successors.
Euronews
05-06-2025
- Business
- Euronews
Digital weight loss: How online Ozempic buyers bypass prescriptions
As Germany's new Chancellor Friedrich Merz meets US President Donald Trump for the first time at the White House on Thursday, he'll be aware of how his predecessors have tackled the transatlantic relationship. The stars don't augur well, however. During his first stint in office, Trump regularly made disparaging remarks about Germany and developed a non-relationship with Chancellor Angela Merkel characterised by mutual personal dislike. Trump's erratic trade policy, which has the EU and Germany specifically in its sights, as well as Trump's retreat from traditionally solid transatlantic positions on common defence and Russia, have challenged Merz before he even moved into the Chancellery. How the mutual relationship between Merz and Trump develops in the future is likely to depend crucially on how the Chancellor completes his first visit to the Oval Office - Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy sends his regards! Merz's basic problem is that Trump has taken an axe to German-US relations and is not particularly interested in good terms with Berlin. This situation is a novelty for a German chancellor. Merz's predecessors since 1949 have experienced ups and downs in their relations with the respective US presidents, but the close friendship between the two countries has never been called into question. So how did they get along? Konrad Adenauer was 73 when he was elected the first Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany in 1949. Four years after the end of World War II, however, the country was not yet a sovereign state. Adenauer was only too aware of this. He sought a close and trusting relationship with the US and adheres very closely to instructions from Washington. In 1953, Adenauer travelled to the US for the first time - it was the first ever visit by a German head of government to Washington! His talks with US President Dwight Eisenhower (1953-61) were friendly. For Adenauer, the protection, aid and military presence of the United States were indispensable for the democratic development of Germany, as well as for peace and prosperity in Europe. Adenauer developed close personal relations with Eisenhower and especially his Secretary of State John Foster Dulles, which benefitted German-US relations as a whole. In contrast, Adenauer's relationship with John F Kennedy (1961-63) was not without problems. The two are far apart in terms of both age and politics. In 1963, his last year in office, Adenauer was already 87, and Kennedy, 41 years his junior, saw him as a man of the past. Kennedy felt that the chancellor's stance on the German question was too rigid and lacked flexibility in the face of changing conditions in Europe. Conversely, Adenauer harbours mistrust of US-Soviet negotiations. He believes that a rapprochement between the two superpowers could only take place at the expense of Germany and its political goal of reunification. After the discord between Adenauer and JFK, relations between Chancellor Ludwig Erhard and Kennedy's successor Lyndon B. Johnson (1963-69) became very friendly again. German foreign policy was by now characterised by the conflict between 'Atlanticists' and 'Gaullists', with the latter wanting a close alliance with France, which Erhard rejects in favour of nuclear protection by the US. Erhard and Johnson met sympathetically from the outset and came together five times during Erhard's short time in office. The first time was just one month after Johnson's inauguration, when the Texan invited the German to his ranch in Texas, a particular honour, especially for a foreigner. Willy Brandt was the first Social Democrat to become Federal Chancellor in 1974. Brandt sees himself as a self-confident partner of the USA. However, his 'Ostpolitik', which sought an understanding with East Germany (GDR), Poland and the Soviet Union, was viewed with great suspicion in Washington. US President Richard Nixon (1969-1974) distrusted Brandt, whom he considered to be a 'German nationalist'. Brandt, on the other hand, tried to maintain a good relationship with Nixon and avoided open criticism of the war in Vietnam. Personally, the two had practically nothing to say to each other. Alluding to Brandt's illegitimate origins, Nixon occasionally calls him 'the bastard' behind closed doors. In the mid-1970s, German-US relations were better than ever before. US President Gerald Ford (1974-1977) and German Chancellor Helmut Schmidt knew and appreciated each other and were close friends in their private lives. There was a great deal of agreement on key issues, as well as a trusting openness in discussing differences. However, Ford lost the 1976 election to his challenger Jimmy Carter (1977-1981). Carter was inexperienced in foreign policy and relied on a team of advisors disconnected from the think tanks of the East Coast, where Schmidt had been well-connected for decades and enjoyed a high reputation. Schmidt, who had a tendency to lecture people, saw Carter as a novice who had only a limited understanding of the world's complex problems. This does not go unnoticed by Carter - relations quickly hit rock bottom. When it came to the deployment of the neutron bomb, there were serious disagreements. Schmidt, amid great domestic political difficulties, advocated the weapons system desired by Washington. When Carter stopped its production at the last minute for domestic political reasons, Schmidt felt exposed and abandoned. Unlike Schmidt, Helmut Kohl had no personal connection to the United States and did not speak English. Nevertheless, he showed transatlantic solidarity from the outset and endeavours to establish a personal relationship with every US president he deals with. His relationship with Ronald Reagan (1981-1989) even had friendly traits that outlasted even the embarrassing Bitburg controversy. In 1985, Kohl invited Reagan to visit the Bitburg military cemetery in the Eifel region during his stay in Germany - as a sign of reconciliation between former enemies. When it was discovered that not only Wehrmacht soldiers but also members of the Waffen SS were buried at the cemetery, a storm of indignation broke out in Washington. The White House wanted to cancel the visit, but Reagan remained stubborn and thus supported the German chancellor. Kohl also developed a friendly and close relationship with Reagan's successor George HW Bush (1989-93), which facilitated communication between the two governments during the collapse of the GDR and the German reunification process. In the 1990s, German-US relations were determined not least by the question of how much responsibility Germany should assume in the world. US President Bill Clinton (1993-2001), with whom Kohl had an even better relationship than with Reagan, reacted positively to the German decision to send Bundeswehr soldiers to the Balkans as part of an international peacekeeping force. In his memoirs, Clinton spoke almost affectionately and with great respect about his appreciation for Kohl. He was 'not only physically' the most impressive political leader in Europe for decades, according to Clinton. The relationship between German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder and US President George W. Bush developed quite differently. The atmosphere between Bonn (later Berlin) and Washington was probably never as icy as in those years. The reason: the red-green government's no to the war in Iraq. Mistrust, personal animus, blatant dislike - the rift between the two leaders was total. This became apparent again years later, when both were no longer in office and both accused each other of lying on the occasion of the publication of Bush's memoirs in 2010. Under Chancellor Angela Merkel, German-American relations relaxed again. Unlike with Schröder, Bush got on well with Merkel and called her 'a friend'. In contrast, the chancellor's relationship with Barack Obama was slow to warm. In 2008, she refused to allow the then-presidential candidate to give a speech in front of the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin - Obama had to make do with the Victory Column. But after Obama's election, the relationship was increasingly characterised by mutual trust. Both cultivated a sober and pragmatic political style and a liberal view of the world, which facilitated cooperation. In a way, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz was lucky: US President Joe Biden was probably the last great old-school US Atlanticist. This made cooperation easier. Both liked each other, worked together in a spirit of trust and described each other as friends. In fact, Scholz consulted with Biden more frequently and more closely than with his European colleagues. When it comes to aid for Ukraine, Scholz did nothing without obtaining Biden's approval. At their last meeting, both warned against ending military support to Ukraine. This is now a matter for their successors. In a world chasing speed—fast food, fast fashion, fast tech—it's no surprise that quick slimming is the latest obsession. But the demand for rapid weight loss has opened a controversial new chapter in global health: the widespread use of prescription-only diabetes medications like Ozempic and Mounjaro for aesthetic purposes. These drugs, part of the GLP-1 class, were developed to help manage type 2 diabetes. Yet their dramatic side effect—substantial weight loss—has made them wildly popular among people with no underlying medical need. It's a trend health experts now warn could spiral into a global crisis. More than 1 billion people worldwide live with obesity, and over 830 million are managing diabetes. In Europe, over half the adult population is overweight, and 17% are clinically obese. The World Obesity Federation projects that by 2050, 60% of adults globally will fall into this category. GLP-1 drugs like Ozempic, Wegovy, Mounjaro and Saxenda were designed to address these numbers through medical treatment. They regulate insulin levels, slow digestion and reduce appetite, helping some users shed up to 15% of their body weight. For people with obesity and related health conditions, these drugs are a breakthrough. But for others—especially the young and image-conscious—they've become a shortcut. A way to stay lean without diet or exercise. And in today's fast-paced, hyper-filtered world, many are willing to skip the medical justification entirely. Although legally restricted in most countries, Ozempic and similar drugs can often be obtained with alarming ease. A quick online search reveals dozens of websites offering 'digital consultations' where users simply fill out a questionnaire, upload an ID, and—often without ever speaking to a doctor—receive a prescription. In some countries, the process is even more relaxed. Online platforms may not require access to a user's official medical records, allowing anyone with basic Photoshop skills and a scale to potentially game the system. In others, local pharmacies bend the rules. In places like Poland, Turkey, Greece, and Kosovo, access through unofficial channels has been reported despite existing regulations. A thriving grey market fills the gaps. Private group chats on messaging apps function like digital black markets. In just minutes, users can browse listings, order, and pay for unregulated GLP-1 drugs—no questions asked, no prescription required. Users even post photos celebrating their arrivals, turning health risks into social memes. This growing off-label trend comes with serious consequences. GLP-1 medications aren't without risks—especially when misused or taken without medical supervision. Common side effects include nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea, constipation, loss of appetite and dehydration. More serious complications may include swelling of the pancreas, gallbladder disease which sometimes requires surgical removal, loss of muscle tissue, kidney injuries and hypoglycaemia, especially when combined with other medications. Thyroid tumours have been noted in some animal studies of the drugs. Then there's the risk of fakes. In 2023, authorities in Austria and the UK reported hospitalisations due to counterfeit Ozempic pens, some of which were found to contain insulin instead of semaglutide. The World Health Organization (WHO) has since issued a global alert over falsified versions of semaglutide found in the UK, US and Brazil. 'These counterfeits can be life-threatening,' warned WHO's Dr Yukiko Nakatani. 'We urge people to stop using suspicious products and report them immediately.' Despite growing awareness, enforcement lags behind. Messaging platforms where these drug sales take place continue to operate with minimal oversight. Closed groups named after "fitness" or "health" are often digital storefronts for illicit sales. Algorithms don't differentiate between helpful tips and harmful products—until someone gets hurt. This loophole highlights a growing regulatory blind spot. Health authorities may police pharmacies and clinics, but the world's most popular communication platforms remain largely unregulated terrain when it comes to drug trafficking. A European Commission spokesperson noted that under the EU's Digital Services Act online platforms have an obligation to protect consumers. The act requires users to be able to quickly report illegal content and products, obliges platforms to remove illicit goods and online marketplaces have to trace their traders. "The DSA obliges platforms to address risks of illegal content and goods being disseminated on their sites," and the Commission is monitoring compliance and won't hesitate to open further proceedings, according to the spokesperson. The rise of weight-loss drugs has ushered in a new dilemma for both medicine and society. These are powerful tools with potential to transform lives—but only when used safely, and for the right reasons. As regulators struggle to keep up with demand, tech companies and messaging platforms must also step up. Health isn't just a personal issue—it's a systemic one. And without stronger protections in place, the rush for fast fixes could leave a trail of long-term damage. US President Donald Trump said that his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin told him "very strongly" in a phone call on Wednesday that he will respond to Ukraine's weekend drone attack on Russian airfields. "We discussed the attack on Russia's docked airplanes, by Ukraine, and also various other attacks that have been taking place by both sides," Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social. "It was a good conversation, but not a conversation that will lead to immediate Peace." The call reportedly lasted for an hour and 15 minutes and was Trump's first known contact with Putin since 19 May. In a briefing with government ministers earlier on Wednesday, Putin made no mention of Ukraine's audacious operation deep inside Russia on Sunday, instead referring only to an operation carried out by Ukraine's Security Service (SBU) on Tuesday which saw the Kerch Bridge damaged. The bridge is a key piece of Russian infrastructure illegally built by Moscow after its unilateral annexation of the Ukrainian peninsula in 2014. Putin referred to that attack as "certainly a terrorist act." However, Ukraine's SBU said the first explosion was timed to take place just before 5am when there were no civilians on or near the bridge. The Russian leader also questioned the value of faltering peace talks with Ukraine, accusing Kyiv of not being interested in peace. "What is there to talk about? How can we negotiate with those who rely on terror?" he said. The second round of face-to-face talks between Ukraine and Russia took place in Istanbul on Monday, with no major breakthrough made towards a lasting ceasefire. The two sides however agreed to another prisoner of war exchange, with Ukraine's Defence Minister Rustem Umerov saying seriously ill and young soldiers would be swapped. During the talks in Istanbul, Ukraine also gave Moscow officials a list of hundreds of Ukrainian children forcefully deported by Russia. "We are talking about hundreds of children whom Russia has illegally deported, forcibly transferred or is holding in the temporarily occupied territories. We are waiting for a response. The ball is in Russia's court," the head of Ukraine's presidential office Andriy Yermak said on Telegram. Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said it took Kyiv "one year, six months, and nine days from the start of planning to effective execution" of the operation. Kyiv managed to smuggle FPV drones deep inside Russia and hide them inside trucks in mobile log cabins. The cabins' roofs were then opened remotely and the drones proceeded to launch their attack on Russian military bombers. Social media footage widely shared by Russian media appears to show the drones rising from inside containers, while the panels lie discarded on the road. On Wednesday, Zelenskyy said Kyiv would not have launched its drone strike on Russian strategic bombers if Moscow had accepted Kyiv's calls for a ceasefire. Zelenskyy said Ukraine has repeatedly urged Russia to accept the US-backed 30-day ceasefire proposal, which could be the first step to putting an end to Russia's all-out war against Ukraine. However during the second round of talks on Monday, Moscow rejected the proposal once again. "If there had been a ceasefire, would the operation have taken place? No," Zelenskyy explained, adding that roughly half of the planes will be impossible to repair, while others will require significant time to be put back into service. On Wednesday, Ukraine's security service (SBU) released new drone footage of Operation "Spiderweb," showing how exactly Kyiv struck 41 Russian heavy military bombers on Sunday. The footage shows Ukraine's first-person-view drones striking four Russian airfields: Dyagilevo in the Riazan region, Ivanovo in the Ivanovo region, Belaya air base in the Irkutsk region, located in south-eastern Siberia over 4,000km east of the frontline, and Olenya air base in Russia's Murmansk region, some 2,000km away from Ukraine's border. Kyiv said these were the airfields where Russian strategic aviation "had been based". The damaged aircraft include A-50, Tu-95, Tu-22, Tu-160, as well as An-12 and Il-78. Moscow uses these heavy bombers for daily attacks on Ukrainian cities. The SBU also revealed that it used a modern UAV control technology during this operation. It combined autonomous artificial intelligence algorithms and manual operator interventions. Ukraine's security service says some of the UAVs lost signal and would switch to an artificial intelligence-assisted mission following a pre-planned route. The warhead then automatically detonated as it approached and made contact with a specific target. Earlier, Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said that 117 drones had been used in Operation Spiderweb, each with its own pilot. The General Staff of Ukraine's Armed Forces confirmed on Tuesday that Russia lost 41 military aircraft.
Euronews
05-06-2025
- Business
- Euronews
Beasts and besties - German chancellors and US presidents through time
As Germany's new Chancellor Friedrich Merz meets US President Donald Trump for the first time at the White House on Thursday he'll be aware of how predecessors have tackled the transatlantic relationship. The stars don't augur well, however. During his first stint in office, Trump regularly made disparaging remarks about Germany and developed a non-relationship with Chancellor Angela Merkel characterised by mutual personal dislike. Trump's erratic trade policy, which has the EU and Germany specifically in its sights, as well as Trump's retreat from traditionally solid transatlantic positions on common defence and Russia have, challenged Merz before he even moved into the Chancellery. How the mutual relationship between Merz and Trump develops in the future is likely to depend crucially on how the Chancellor completes his first visit to the Oval Office - Volodymyr Zelenskyy sends his regards! Merz's basic problem is that Trump has taken an axe to German-American relations and is not particularly interested in good terms with Berlin. This situation is a novelty for a German chancellor. Merz's predecessors since 1949 have experienced ups and downs in their relations with the respective American presidents, but the close friendship between the two countries has never been called into question. So how did they get along? Konrad Adenauer (1949-63) vs. Dwight D. Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy Konrad Adenauer is 73 when he is elected the first Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany in 1949. Four years after the end of the Second World War, however, the country is not yet a sovereign state. Adenauer is only too aware of this. He seeks a close and trusting relationship with the US and adheres very closely to instructions from Washington. In 1953, Adenauer travels to the USA for the first time - it is the first ever visit by a German head of government to Washington! His talks with US President Dwight D. Eisenhower (1953-61) are friendly. For Adenauer, the protection, aid and military presence of the United States are indispensable for the democratic development of Germany as well as peace and prosperity in Europe. Adenauer develops close personal relations with Eisenhower and especially his Secretary of State John Foster Dulles, which benefits German-American relations as a whole. In contrast, Adenauer's relationship with John F. Kennedy (1961-63) is not without problems. The two are far apart in terms of both age and politics. In 1963, his last year in office, Adenauer is already 87 - and Kennedy, 41 years his junior, sees him as a man of the past. Kennedy feels that the Chancellor's stance on the German question is too rigid and lacks flexibility in the face of changing conditions in Europe. Conversely, Adenauer harbours mistrust of American-Soviet negotiations. He believes that a rapprochement between the two superpowers could only take place at the expense of Germany and its political goal of reunification. Ludwig Erhard (1963-66) vs. Lyndon B. Johnson After the discord between Adenauer and JFK, relations between Chancellor Ludwig Erhard and Kennedy's successor Lyndon B. Johnson (1963-69) become very friendly again. German foreign policy is by now characterised by the conflict between 'Atlanticists' and 'Gaullists', with the latter wanting a close alliance with France, which Erhard rejects in favour of nuclear protection of the US. Erhard and Johnson meet sympathetically from the outset and come together five times during Erhard's short time in office. The first time was just one month after Johnson's inauguration, when the Texan invited the German to his ranch in Texas, a particular honour, especially for a foreigner. Willy Brandt (1969-1974) vs. Richard Nixon Willy Brandt is the first Social Democrat to become Federal Chancellor in 1974. Brandt sees himself as a self-confident partner of the USA. However, his 'Ostpolitik', which seeks an understanding with the GDR, Poland and the Soviet Union, is viewed with great suspicion in Washington. US President Richard Nixon (1969-74) distrusts Brandt, whom he considers to be a 'German nationalist'. Brandt, on the other hand, tries to maintain a good relationship with Nixon and avoids open criticism of the war in Vietnam. Personally, the two have practically nothing to say to each other. Alluding to Brandt's illegitimate origins, Nixon occasionally calls him 'the bastard' behind closed doors. Helmut Schmidt (1974-82) vs. Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter In the mid-1970s, German-American relations are better than ever before. US President Gerald Ford (1974-77) and German Chancellor Helmut Schmidt know and appreciate each other and are close friends in their private lives. There is a great deal of agreement on key issues, as well as a trusting openness in discussing differences. However, Ford loses the 1976 election to his challenger Jimmy Carter (1977-81). Carter is inexperienced on foreign policy and relies on a team of advisors disconnected from the think tanks of the East Coast - where Schmidt has been well connected for decades and enjoys a high reputation. Schmidt, who has a tendency to lecture people, sees Carter as a novice who has only a limited understanding of the world's complex problems. This does not go unnoticed by Carter - relations quickly hit rock bottom. When it comes to the deployment of the neutron bomb, there are serious disagreements. Schmidt, amid great domestic political difficulties, advocates the weapons system desired by Washington. When Carter stops its production at the last minute for domestic political reasons, Schmidt feels exposed and abandoned. Helmut Kohl (1982-1998) vs. Ronald Reagan, George Bush, Bill Clinton Unlike Schmidt, Helmut Kohl has no personal connection to the United States and does not speak English. Nevertheless, he shows transatlantic solidarity from the outset and endeavours to establish a personal relationship with every US president he deals with. His relationship with Ronald Reagan (1981-89) even has friendly traits that outlasts even the embarrassing Bitburg controversy. In 1985, Kohl invites Reagan to visit the Bitburg military cemetery in the Eifel region during his stay in Germany - as a sign of reconciliation between former enemies. When it is discovered that not only Wehrmacht soldiers but also members of the Waffen SS are buried at the cemetery, a storm of indignation breaks out in Washington. The White House wants to cancel the visit, but Reagan remains stubborn and thus supports the German Chancellor. Kohl also develops a friendly and close relationship with Reagan's successor George Bush (1989-93), which facilitates communication between the two governments during the collapse of the GDR and the German reunification process. In the 1990s, German-American relations are determined not least by the question of how much responsibility Germany should assume in the world. US President Bill Clinton (1993-2001), with whom Kohl has an even better relationship than with Reagan, reacts positively to the German decision to send Bundeswehr soldiers to the Balkans as part of an international peacekeeping force. In his memoirs, Clinton speaks almost affectionately and with great respect about his appreciation for Kohl. He was 'not only physically' the most impressive political leader in Europe for decades, according to Clinton. Gerhard Schröder (1998-2005) vs. George W. Bush The relationship between German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder and US President George W. Bush develops quite differently. The atmosphere between Bonn (later Berlin) and Washington is probably never as icy as in those years. The reason: the red-green government's no to the war in Iraq. Mistrust, personal animus, blatant dislike - the rift between the two leaders is total. This becomes apparent again years later, when both are no longer in office and both accused each other of lying on the occasion of the publication of Bush's memoirs in 2010. Angela Merkel (2005-21) vs. Barack Obama Under Chancellor Angela Merkel, German-American relations relax again. Unlike with Schröder, Bush gets on well with Merkel and calls her 'a friend'. In contrast, the Chancellor's relationship with Barack Obama is slow to warm. In 2008, she refuses to allow the then presidential candidate to give a speech in front of the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin - Obama has to make do with the Victory Column. But after Obama's election, the relationship is increasingly characterised by mutual trust. Both cultivate a sober and pragmatic political style and a liberal view of the world, which facilitates cooperation. Olaf Scholz (2021-25) vs Joe Biden In a way, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz is lucky: US President Joe Biden is probably the last great old-school US Atlanticist. This makes cooperation easier. Both like each other, work together in a spirit of trust and describe each other as friends. In fact, Scholz consults with Biden more frequently and more closely than with his European colleagues. When it comes to aid for Ukraine, Scholz does nothing without obtaining Biden's approval. At their last meeting, both warned against ending aid to Ukraine. This is now a matter for their successors. Hacking the way to the prescription: digital black markets and remote consultations give an easy access to weight loss drugs In a world chasing speed—fast food, fast fashion, fast tech—it's no surprise that quick slimming is the latest obsession. But the demand for rapid weight loss has opened a controversial new chapter in global health: the widespread use of prescription-only diabetes medications like Ozempic and Mounjaro for aesthetic purposes. These drugs, part of the GLP-1 class, were developed to help manage type 2 diabetes. Yet their dramatic side effect—substantial weight loss—has made them wildly popular among people with no underlying medical need. It's a trend health experts now warn could spiral into a global crisis. More than a billion people worldwide live with obesity, and over 830 million are managing diabetes. In Europe, over half the adult population is overweight, and 17% are clinically obese. The World Obesity Federation projects that by 2050, 60% of adults globally will fall into this category. GLP-1 drugs like Ozempic, Wegovy, Mounjaro, and Saxenda were designed to address these numbers through medical treatment. They regulate insulin levels, slow digestion, and reduce appetite, helping some users shed up to 15% of their body weight. For people with obesity and related health conditions, these drugs are a breakthrough. But for others—especially the young and image-conscious—they've become a shortcut. A way to stay lean without diet or exercise. And in today's fast-paced, hyper-filtered world, many are willing to skip the medical justification entirely. Although legally restricted in most countries, Ozempic and similar drugs can often be obtained with alarming ease. A quick online search reveals dozens of websites offering 'digital consultations' where users simply fill out a questionnaire, upload an ID, and—often without ever speaking to a doctor—receive a prescription. In some countries, the process is even more relaxed. Online platforms may not require access to a user's official medical records, allowing anyone with basic Photoshop skills and a scale to potentially game the system. In others, local pharmacies bend the rules. In places like Poland, Turkey, Greece, and Kosovo, access through unofficial channels has been reported despite existing regulations. A thriving grey market fills the gaps. Private group chats on messaging apps function like digital black markets. In just minutes, users can browse listings, order, and pay for unregulated GLP-1 drugs—no questions asked, no prescription required. Users even post photos celebrating their arrivals, turning health risks into social memes. This growing off-label trend comes with serious consequences. GLP-1 medications aren't without risks—especially when misused or taken without medical supervision. Common side effects include nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea, constipation, loss of appetite and dehydration. More serious complications may include swelling of the pancreas, gallbladder disease which sometimes requires surgical removal, loss of muscle tissue, kidney injuries and hypoglycaemia, especially when combined with other medications. Thyroid tumours have been noted in some animal studies of the drugs. Then there's the risk of fakes. In 2023, authorities in Austria and the UK reported hospitalisations due to counterfeit Ozempic pens, some of which were found to contain insulin instead of semaglutide. The World Health Organization (WHO) has since issued a global alert over falsified versions of semaglutide found in the UK, US, and Brazil. 'These counterfeits can be life-threatening,' warned WHO's Dr. Yukiko Nakatani. 'We urge people to stop using suspicious products and report them immediately.' Despite growing awareness, enforcement lags behind. Messaging platforms where these drug sales take place continue to operate with minimal oversight. Closed groups named after "fitness" or "health" are often digital storefronts for illicit sales. Algorithms don't differentiate between helpful tips and harmful products—until someone gets hurt. This loophole highlights a growing regulatory blind spot. Health authorities may police pharmacies and clinics, but the world's most popular communication platforms remain largely unregulated terrain when it comes to drug trafficking. A European Commission spokesperson noted that under the EU's Digital Services Act online platforms have an obligation to protect consumers. The Act requires users to be able to quickly report illegal content and products, obliges platforms to remove illegal goods and online marketplaces have to trace their traders. "The DSA obliges platforms to address risks of illegal content and goods being disseminated on their sites," and the Commission is monitoring compliance and won't hesitate to open further proceedings, according to the spokesperson. The rise of weight-loss drugs has ushered in a new dilemma for both medicine and society. These are powerful tools with potential to transform lives—but only when used safely, and for the right reasons. As regulators struggle to keep up with demand, tech companies and messaging platforms must also step up. Health isn't just a personal issue—it's a systemic one. And without stronger protections in place, the rush for fast fixes could leave a trail of long-term damage.
The Independent
07-05-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
AP PHOTOS: How bitter wartime enemies France and Germany built a friendship that underpins the EU
They were bitter enemies, seemingly destined to be perpetually at odds after fighting two devastating world wars less than 30 years apart. But in the decades since French forces were among the victors of World War II, which ended in Europe with Nazi Germany 's surrender 80 years ago, neighbors France and Germany have built a powerful partnership that underpins the European Union. With the EU's largest economies, they're frequently described as the motors of the 27-nation bloc and its stated goal of 'an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe' after generations of conflict. Statesmen and women and ordinary people alike have worked since WWII to weave deep personal, political, economic, cultural and military bonds upon which French-German friendship has flowered where guns once roared. French wartime hero President Gen. Charles de Gaulle was a pivotal early peacemaker, after fighting in both WWI and WWII. His partner in reconciliation was Konrad Adenauer, who as West Germany's first chancellor led its recovery from the Nazi disaster. Adenauer had himself been one of Nazism's victims, spending several months in the hands of its murderous Gestapo. The cooperation treaty they signed on Jan. 22, 1963, marked a fresh start. De Gaulle said it "turns the page after such a long and bloody history of struggle and fighting.' They sealed the deal with a tight embrace. Other leaders bound France and Germany ever closer with more deals and poignant moments of symbolism. Remembrance of war's horrors became an integral part of the partnership, so lessons from their shared history of tragic conflict aren't forgotten. Seventy years after WWI's eruption, French President François Mitterrand and German Chancellor Helmut Kohl held hands on the former battlefields of Verdun, facing a memorial housing the remains of 130,000 unidentified soldiers. As friends do, France and Germany have supported each other through recent calamities, too. Chancellor Angela Merkel sped to Paris to stand with President François Hollande in January 2015 when France was mourning the victims of a deadly assault by extremist gunmen on satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo. On a bridge that crosses the French-German border that once bristled with guns, words painted in the colors of the French and German flags capture how far the two neighbors have come. 'BIENVENUE" and 'WILLKOMMEN,' they read. Their meaning: Welcome.
