Poland extends border controls with Germany and Lithuania
Increased security measures have made the route via Belarus and Russia largely impassable, which is why the migration movement is increasingly shifting to other EU states - especially Lithuania and Latvia.
'The 98% tightness of our barrier means that Belarusian and Russian services and illegal migration are moving to other sections,' says Kierwiński.
'Today, the main task not only for us but also for our partners in the European Union is to close the route to Lithuania and Latvia, if I may use that word,' he added.
In response to illegal migration, Germany introduced controls at its borders with Poland and the Czech Republic. Last year, these controls were extended to all borders.
'In September, we will decide on the next steps in this regard based on data from the border guards, the military and the police,' Kierwiński said.
In Lithuania, controls are being carried out at 13 locations, including three border crossings. The remaining 10 border crossing sites will be 'ad hoc control sites', which can be used by local residents.
In Germany, border controls are carried out at 52 locations.
The decision to maintain controls at internal Schengen borders continues to undermine the EU principle of free movement of people.
However, Schengen countries are allowed to introduce border controls in what they consider to be 'emergency' situations, which occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic, or as a 'last resort' for security threats.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Euronews
44 minutes ago
- Euronews
The two faces of Ursula: Reinvention or deception at the EU's helm?
In December 2019 Ursula von der Leyen returned to Brussels, the city where she spent her childhood, with the poise of a self-assured centrist and the promise of a visionary. The Green Deal stood at the centre of her first presidency, offering climate hope and a surprisingly collaborative touch, flanked by the liberal Danish Executive Vice-President Margrethe Vestager and Frans Timmermans, the socialist Dutchman - co-stars in her ensemble cast. That was Season 1. But as Season 2 gets underway, followers of her first term might be wondering if they're still watching the same show. Or at least asking if the lead character has been switched and a doppelganger has taken the helm. So what's happened - is Ursula von der Leyen suffering an identity crisis, or simply channelling her inner political shapeshifter? Different style, different priorities The new Ursula appears to be a pragmatic political realist, even Machiavellian. A significant part of this shift toward centralisation can be attributed to her powerful chief of staff, Bjoern Seibert, an adept puppet master skilfully pulling the strings of power within the Berlaymont building. During Season 1, maverick Commissioners such as France's Thierry Breton and Luxembourg's Nicolas Schmit developed as characters critical of von der Leyen's decisions. This has now disappeared from the script, and Ursula's gone from ensemble lead to solo act. Most importantly, they've been replaced with lower-profile allies who are kept in the dark on key decisions - most notably during the unveiling of the EU's long-term budget, when Commissioners reportedly saw the figures only moments before the official curtain raise on the proposal. Core priorities have seemingly vanished. There's an air of political amnesia, or perhaps strategic dissociation, where past commitments are forgotten or discarded. But what are Ursula von der Leyen's true colours? Is she still the 'Green Queen' of 2019, or has she transformed into the grey, power-consolidating 'VDL'? The curious case of the vanishing Green Deal Let's rewind to 2019, when von der Leyen made the Green Deal the crown jewel of her presidency. Back then, 'green' wasn't just a policy, it was a vibe. The Green Deal was supposed to transform Europe's economy, its agriculture and transport. Fast forward to today: the vibe's off. Her environmental mission seems increasingly distant, if not altogether abandoned. Today, the Green Deal is conspicuously absent, not just from rhetoric, but also from official documents. In the new long-term EU budget proposal, for instance, the term isn't mentioned once. Many of its pillars are being dismantled piece by piece. The most glaring example is the systematic rollback of Green Deal initiatives - such as the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism - through so-called "Omnibus" simplification proposals, with the latest retreat involving the proposed Green Claims Directive—meant to combat greenwashing. More symbolic is the disappearance of the "Farm to Fork" strategy, once the farming side of the Green Deal, which has all but vanished from speeches, policy documents, and public messaging. Its omission from the Commission's long-awaited 'Vision for Agriculture and Food' was effectively a quiet burial, making the document less of a vision and more a eulogy. Officially, the Commission remains in denial, but the signs of abandonment are impossible to ignore. Europe's Beating Cancer Plan - missing a beat? Green isn't the only colour fading from von der Leyen's palette, telling a story of a shifting focus. Over in the health file, there's a quiet code blue, with a key dossier on life support. In her first term, von der Leyen championed the European Health Union, with the Beating Cancer Plan as a cornerstone. With €4 billion on the table, the Commission pledged a full-frontal assault on tobacco, alcohol, asbestos, and other risk factors for cancer. But momentum has slowed dramatically. Measures targeting tobacco and alcohol reduction have stalled, and once-prioritised regulations (such as those governing sunbed usage) have been quietly dropped. The new EU4Health budget reflects this decline. In 2024, €115 million was allocated specifically for cancer. In 2025, this has been slashed to €60 million, now also covering not just cancer but also cardiovascular disease and other non-communicable illnesses. With attention diverted to pandemic preparedness and other priorities, it's unclear how much of the original vision will survive. And with more open files than open funding lines, Brussels insiders are asking: is health promotion and the fight against cancer being reassigned to sleepy interns and relegated to just a historical footnote? Back to her roots: Defence and military power And yet, amid the abandonment of green and health priorities, von der Leyen appears more energised than ever, but on a different front: defence. A year into her second term, the former German defence minister has returned to familiar territory. With the Green Deal receding, she has seized the geopolitical moment to promote a stronger European defence industry. With her former life as Germany's defence minister back in vogue (and with Frans Timmermans no longer breathing green fire down her neck), von der Leyen has pivoted hard to European defence. An example: the EU's upcoming budget cycle (starting in 2028) proposes a fivefold increase in defence and space funding. National budgets on defence are also rising, spurred by Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Her Commission has also recently proposed structural changes: redirecting cohesion funds to defence, relaxing fiscal rules to allow greater military spending, launching the European Competitiveness Fund (ECF), and offering low-interest loans under the SAFE scheme. There's also an emphasis on simplifying defence procurement rules and boosting joint R&D initiatives. Still to come: a military mobility package aimed at streamlining troop and equipment movement, and the unveiling of plans for a true "European Defence Union". With the US increasingly focused on the Indo-Pacific, the EU faces a test: can it become a credible security actor within NATO? And will von der Leyen's defence push bear fruit in time to deter potential threats—particularly from Russia—by 2030? The verdict: the jury's still out... From Green Deal visionary to defence strategist, von der Leyen's transformation has raised eyebrows across Brussels and beyond, leaving many confused. The contrast between the two mandates could not be starker. So, who is the real Ursula von der Leyen? Is she the eco-champion who once promised to make Europe the first climate-neutral continent? Or the iron-fisted strategist consolidating power and refocusing on geopolitical muscle? Perhaps both. Perhaps only one of them ever truly existed. Or maybe neither. What's clear is that the second mandate is not just more of the same: It's a whole new season and a new cast. With the same protagonist wearing the same blazer but with different habits and a different mind. As Brussels braces for the next plot twist, especially with US tariffs and budget wrangling, one thing's for sure: Ursula von der Leyen is playing a different game. And the rest of Europe? Still trying to figure out if this is a character arc... or a complete reboot.
Euronews
2 hours ago
- Euronews
Amsterdam funds first US weapons package to Kyiv under new initiative
The Netherlands said on Monday that it will contribute €500 million to purchase US military equipment to be sent to Ukraine, becoming the first NATO country to forge a new protocol to provide Kyiv with American weaponry after US President Donald Trump tightened crucial military aid following his re-election. Last month, Trump announced that the US will continue to supply weapons to Ukraine, which would be paid for by Kyiv's European allies, but did not provide information on how this new system was designed to operate. Dutch Defence Minister Ruben Brekelmans announced in a post on X, formerly Twitter, that 'The Netherlands is the first NATO country to provide a package of €500 million in American weapon systems (including Patriot components and missiles).' The Dutch defence chief noted that these weapons are of significant importance to Ukrainian soldiers fending off Russian attacks on the frontline and are needed 'so that Ukraine can counter Russian aggression, also for the rest of Europe.' NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte welcomed the announcement on X, saying 'Great to see the Netherlands taking the lead and funding the first package of US military equipment for Ukraine under NATO's Prioritised Ukraine Requirements List initiative.' The NATO boss, former prime minister of the Netherlands, thanked allies for ensuring Ukraine remains equipped to continue to defend against the Kremlin's attacks and protect its skies and people. He also added that he hopes other NATO allies will make similar 'significant announcements' soon. The Dutch move comes a few weeks after several European countries including Germany and Norway purchased Patriot air defence systems from the US for Ukraine in a deal facilitated by NATO. On Friday, Berlin announced that it was providing a further two Patriot systems to Kyiv to further enhance its defence capabilities. US Ambassador to NATO Matt Whitaker also welcomed the Dutch announcement, asserting that it fulfils Trump's initiative of 'allies buying American weapons to help Ukraine defend itself, pressure Russia and boost US jobs'. Whitaker noted that he expects more NATO allies to follow suit and supply Ukraine through this new mechanism. NATO said previously that it will coordinate this new initiative, funded by European allies and Canada, and broken up in packages worth roughly €500 million. Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy took to X to express his gratitude for Amsterdam leading the way in this new effort. 'Ukraine, and thus the whole of Europe, will be better protected from Russian terror. I am sincerely grateful to the Netherlands for their substantial contribution to strengthening Ukraine's air shield,' wrote Zelenskyy. 'he package is worth 500 million euros and includes American weapons, including missiles for the Patriots. The first such step among NATO countries and at a time when Russia is trying to scale up its strikes. This will definitely help protect the lives of our people!' Zelenskyy said this initiative is a result of the most recent NATO summit in The Hague in June. Dutch Prime Minister Dick Schoof said the weapons package will help Ukraine not only continue to fight for its freedom, but all of Europe's.
LeMonde
2 hours ago
- LeMonde
US Attorney General moves forward on Justice Department investigation into the origins of the Trump-Russia probe
US Attorney General Pam Bondi has directed that the Justice Department move forward with a probe into the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation following the recent release of documents aimed at undermining the legitimacy of the inquiry that established that Moscow interfered on the Republican's behalf in the 2016 US presidential election. Bondi has directed a prosecutor to present evidence to a grand jury after referrals from the Trump administration's top intelligence official, a person familiar with the matter said on Monday, August 4. It was not clear which former officials might be the target of any grand jury activity, where the grand jury that might ultimately hear evidence will be located or which prosecutors − whether career employees or political appointees − might be involved in pursuing the investigation. It was also not clear what precise claims of misconduct Trump administration officials believe could form the basis of criminal charges, which a grand jury would have to sign off on for an indictment to be issued. The development is likely to heighten concerns that the Justice Department is being used to achieve political ends given longstanding grievances over the Russia investigation voiced by President Donald Trump, who has called for the jailing of perceived political adversaries, and because any criminal investigation would revisit one of the most dissected chapters of modern American political history. It is also surfacing at a time when the Trump administration is being buffeted by criticism over its handling of documents from the Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking investigation. The initial, years-old investigation into Russian election interference resulted in the appointment of a special counsel, Robert Mueller, who secured multiple convictions against Trump aides and allies but did not establish proof of a criminal conspiracy between Moscow and the Trump campaign. Multiple special counsels, congressional committees and the Justice Department's own inspector general have studied and documented a multi-pronged effort by Russia to interfere in the 2016 presidential election on Trump's behalf, including through a hack-and-leak dump of Democratic emails and a covert social media operation aimed at sowing discord and swaying public opinion. But that conclusion has been aggressively challenged in recent weeks as Trump's director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, and other allies have released previously classified records that they hope will cast doubt on the extent of Russian interference and establish an Obama administration effort to falsely link Trump to Russia. In one batch of documents released last month, Gabbard disclosed emails showing that senior Obama administration officials were aware in 2016 that Russians had not hacked state election systems to manipulate the votes in Trump's favor. But President Barack Obama's administration never alleged that votes were tampered with and had instead detailed other forms of election interference and foreign influence.
