Bavaria wants German health system prepared for war
'We therefore need a comprehensive 'civil operational plan Germany'' geared toward addressing a wide range of emergencies, including military aggression, Gerlach stressed.
According to the Bavarian health minister, in such a scenario Germany's healthcare system would have to be prepared to provide services to more than 80 million civilian residents, as well as wounded military personnel.
'The state must set clear standards. This goes for the EU level, the federal and the regional [levels],' the official told the newspaper. She also emphasized the need to ensure Germany's and the EU's ability to produce all the medicines and drugs they may need.
Given likely personnel shortages in hospitals in case of a large-scale military conflict, Gerlach suggested that the German government should consider imposing mandatory civilian service, along with the military draft.
Moscow has consistently denied allegations that it intends to attack any NATO or EU member countries, labeling such claims as 'nonsense' designed to scare people and justify increased defense budgets.
Additionally, Russian officials have strongly criticized the EU's recent moves toward militarization and the portrayal of Moscow as an adversary, arguing that such actions only escalate tensions and undermine peace efforts in the Ukraine conflict.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
21 minutes ago
- Russia Today
The EU hits Russia with limp sanctions pack
The European Union has unveiled its 18th package of sanctions against Russia, a move described by EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas as 'one of the strongest packages ever imposed.' That sounds impressive. But while the new measures will undoubtedly cause inconvenience, their real power – especially in 2025 – is more symbolic than strategic. Had these same measures been rolled out in early 2022, the impact might have been severe. At that time, economic interdependence between Russia and the EU remained significant, and the Russian economy was still adjusting to the new reality. But now, three years on, Moscow has adapted. In many sectors, it has learned to operate independently. Increased pressure from Brussels no longer yields proportional damage. Let's begin with the energy sector. One headline measure involves changes to the price cap on Russian oil under EU Council Regulation 833/2014. The ceiling has been lowered from $60 per barrel to $47.60. Western European entities are now banned from trading or transporting Russian oil if the price exceeds that threshold. In 2022, this could have shaken the market. But in 2025, the reality is different: Russian oil is transported via independent channels, with little reliance on EU carriers or brokers. The result is more psychological than practical. Russia's independence in oil logistics has triggered a new round of attacks on its so-called 'shadow fleet.' The 18th package expands the list of banned vessels under EU jurisdiction to 447 tankers. These ships are restricted from accessing EU ports or services. Again, this may cause some logistical friction, but it's far from a game-changer. Russia can and does move oil without Western European help. The occasional tanker seizure in contested waters like the Baltic Sea is unlikely to escalate. After all, that region is patrolled by Russia's Baltic Fleet, which, while modest in size, is more than capable of deterring threats to energy security. Another measure targets refined petroleum products. The EU now bans imports of oil-based products made from Russian crude in third countries. This is clearly aimed at stopping countries like India or Turkey from processing Russian oil and selling the finished products to Western Europe. But the real loser here may not be Russia, but the refiners. These third countries earn significant margins from processing. Cutting off that trade deprives them of profit and incentivizes creative workarounds, such as swapping sources in their reserves or manipulating origin data. As always, enforcement will be tricky. Meanwhile, Brussels has moved to formalize its hostility toward the Nord Stream pipelines. The 18th package bans all transactions related to Nord Stream 1 and 2. Given that both pipelines were sabotaged in 2022 and remain inactive, this is more a symbolic gesture than a substantive move. The idea of future US-Russia cooperation on restoring the lines is also dead in the water, thanks to these new restrictions. The financial sector hasn't been left out either. More Russian banks have been removed from the SWIFT messaging system under Article 5h of Regulation 833/2014, bringing the total to 55. Transactions with these institutions inside EU jurisdiction are now prohibited. Again, this would have mattered in 2022. But by 2025, most affected banks are already under EU or US blocking sanctions. In practice, Western firms avoid them regardless. So this package is more about reinforcing old moves than breaking new ground. Interestingly, the EU has begun applying secondary financial sanctions, similar to Washington's model. Two small Chinese regional banks are now banned from doing business with the EU over ties to Russia's dual-use supply chains. The inclusion of India's Nayara Energy Limited – part-owned by Rosneft – is more notable. This sends a message to companies in Russia-friendly countries: continued involvement with Moscow's energy sector may come at a price. Whether that message lands remains to be seen. The US has wielded similar threats for years with mixed results. Many foreign firms still see Russia as a valuable market, and their calculations depend on risk versus reward. Export controls also feature heavily in the new package. Twenty-six new entities have been added to Annex IV of Regulation 833/2014, which bans them from supplying dual-use goods. Most are small intermediaries, easily replaced. The real damage from export bans was done in 2022 and 2023. There's little left to block that hasn't already been sanctioned. The 18th package includes vague language about tightening controls on re-exports via third countries, but how that will work in practice is unclear. Measure 18 addresses legal disputes, reaffirming the EU's refusal to recognize arbitration court decisions in sanctions-related cases involving Russia. But this is nothing new – it was already part of the 14th package. On the symbolic front, the EU continues to add companies and individuals to its asset freeze list under Regulation 269/2014. As expected, these include defense firms and manufacturers, as well as businesses from China and India accused of supplying Russia with industrial goods. Despite the bold rhetoric from Brussels, there is little in this package that fundamentally alters the landscape. The sanctions may chip away at certain areas, cause headaches for some businesses, and reinforce a hardline stance. But they will not achieve what the previous 17 packages have failed to do: break the backbone of the Russian economy. Russia is not what it was in early 2022. It has adjusted its logistics, diversified its markets, strengthened domestic production, and recalibrated its financial flows. The EU's 18th sanctions package is not insignificant, but to call it one of the 'toughest ever' is an overstatement rooted more in political theater than economic article was first published in Kommersant, and was translated and edited by the RT team.
Russia Today
an hour ago
- Russia Today
Immigration is ‘killing' Europe
US President Donald Trump has ramped up his rhetoric on immigration, claiming it is 'killing' Europe and warning that European leaders must act immediately or risk losing control. The warning comes as the continent continues to grapple with a protracted migration crisis that has spanned more than a decade. Large numbers of migrants have been entering the EU since 2015, largely caused by upheavals in the Middle East and Africa, and later the Ukraine conflict. According to the EU Commission, there were 385,445 irregular border crossings in 2023, an 18% increase from 2022. 'You're allowing it to happen to your countries, and you've got to stop this horrible invasion that's happening to Europe,' Trump said during a five-day visit to Scotland focused on his business interests, including golf resorts. 'Immigration is killing Europe,' the president added, urging leaders to take immediate action. 'You better get your act together, or you're not going to have Europe anymore.' Trump also used the occasion to highlight his administration's hardline stance on immigration within the US, boasting about stepped-up enforcement along the southern border. 'As you know, last month we had nobody entering our country. We removed a lot of bad people who got in,' he said. Since returning to the Oval Office in January, Trump has reinstated strict immigration control, including mass deportations and expanded detention efforts. He has pledged to carry out the largest migrant removal operation in US history despite widespread criticism and protests across the country. The migration crisis in Europe has been met with varied responses across the continent. While some countries initially welcomed asylum seekers, many have since reintroduced border controls and tightened immigration laws amid concerns over security and rising crime. In April, US Vice President J.D. Vance echoed the president's concerns, describing its migration policy as one of the Europe's greatest threats. He warned that uncontrolled migration risks 'destroying the fundamental cultural bedrock of Europe.'
Russia Today
6 hours ago
- Russia Today
Turns out the Kremlin hates von der Leyen about as much as EU lawmakers do
Apparently, trying to hold Ursula von der Leyen accountable is now a Russian op, reports Der Spiegel, citing a new NATO-linked think tank report. The study treats elected oversight and European lawmakers whose job, ideally, involves more than clapping like trained seals every time an unelected Eurocrat lights public money on fire, like elements of some kind of Russian infiltration plot. 'Massive support for this effort was also found by pro-Kremlin media outlets, bloggers, and online influencers, as the Lithuania-based organization specializes in analyzing disinformation and Russian propaganda, which is seen as part of Russia's hybrid warfare against the EU,' Spiegel wrote, describing Russian-linked media 'fueling' a recent von der Leyen non-confidence vote in the EU Parliament. 'Among the larger portals were those of the Russian propaganda channel RT…' According to the advance copy of this report seen by Spiegel, the study reviewed 284 articles from Russian-linked media. Exactly how many of those articles expressed something like only von der Leyen's ouster could save Europe? 90%? 75%? Maybe half? Nope, just 35%. Roughly the same percentage of voting EU lawmakers who favored ejecting her (32.7%). So by this logic, the Kremlin is about as supportive of Ursula as Brussels is. Awkward. Spiegel said that was the most common so-called Kremlin-backed narrative that the study found. Others included the suggestion that von der Leyen is part of a corrupt elite that robbed citizens to fill Big Pharma's pockets. Because apparently, saying that hey, maybe EU contracts shouldn't be inked via disappearing text messages with the CEO of a company, means that you're doing Putin's bidding. Real democracy means that you shut your mouth when you see your overlords doing shady stuff. Another alleged Kremlin line? That Ursula, despite her presidential title, was never elected. As someone who personally refers to her as 'Queen Ursula,' I'm actually surprised that one didn't rank higher. It's not like she won a popular vote or anything. She was handpicked in shady backrooms and then subjected to a simple confirmation by EU lawmakers. Her sole opponent in this so-called 'election' was literally just 'not Ursula.' Only the EU, in all its dystopian delusion, would call that an 'election'. Then there was the claim that she's obsessed with confronting Russia. Which is just, uh, objectively true? I mean, come on. If there are extraterrestrials somewhere out there, they may not know much about Earth, except for the fact that von der Leyen is obsessed with Russia – a phenomenon easily visible from space. Even right before the vote, she accused the lawmakers subjecting her to democratic accountability of being Kremlin stooges just because they wanted her to explain herself. 'There is ample proof that many are supported by our enemies and by their puppet masters in Russia or elsewhere. What we hear from you are movements fueled by conspiracies, from anti-vaxxers, to put in apologists and you only have to look at some of the signatories of this motion to understand what I mean,' she pleaded. Let's back up here. Why exactly did she face this no-confidence vote? Because no one who's elected and accountable at the EU has actually been able to provide concrete details of contract terms for the tens of billions of euros in Covid jabs that she strong-armed European governments into paying for. Jabs that are now so useless they're being dumped in landfills all over Europe, where one-eyed stuffed animals, soggy pizza boxes, and a moldy futon just got their third booster, courtesy of the EU taxpayer. One of those contracts followed a flurry of text exchanges between Ursula and Pfizer CEO, Robert Bourla, which she bragged about to the New York Times right before they pulled a Houdini. The courts have so far politely asked her to explain herself. And that's where we're stuck right now. So frustrated lawmakers figured that they could at least make her publicly squirm with a non-confidence vote in an attempt to get her to cough up at least some of the answers for taxpayers. The result? Ursula's interpretive song and tap-dance routine in Parliament: 'Putin Did It: Paranoia in Three Acts.' She ultimately survived the vote thanks to some budget crumbs thrown at the lefties who were otherwise saying that they would have voted against her. But even they told Politico that it was her 'absolute last chance.' So here comes an obscure outlet that sounds like it's trying a little too hard with the name. It's funded by, let's see… NATO members like the German government, UK Foreign Office, Lithuanian Ministry of Defense, and also the German Marshall Fund, which is practically a NATO mascot. In other words, roughly as independent as a teenager who calls down to his mom for 'room service.' And wouldn't you know it, they galloped in like Queen Ursula's white knight with a whole 'study' backing her mantra that the whole non-confidence vote was little more than a Kremlin plot. They could've just called themselves But sure, let's just call skepticism and the demand for basic accountability a 'Russian disinformation campaign,' and totally ignore the fact that Russian-linked media were mostly just echoing general discontent that has been bubbling up in European coverage and parliament for a while now. As reported by multiple outlets including Politico and Euronews, establishment EU Socialists have been turned off by what they perceive as von der Leyen's overtures to the right-wing. Centrist Renew Europe voices frustration over her increasingly aloof style. Even her own center right European People's Party (EPP) allies have been criticizing her centralized leadership approach. 'EU capitals fume at 'Queen' von der Leyen. Diplomats accuse European Commission president of overreach amid a furor over her trip to Israel,' Politico wrote in 2023. 'From queen to empress: Inside Ursula von der Leyen's power grab,' it wrote last year. 'Her penchant for centralisation, her aloof character and her avoidance of controversial subjects have garnered her the nickname of 'Queen Ursula' in Brussels,' Euronews says. Know what would've been genuinely illuminating? A side-by-side comparison of 'Russian' and 'non-Russian' media coverage, because although I've personally been calling her 'Queen Ursula' for years now, apparently it's been catching on in the mainstream. accuses the Russian-linked press of suggesting that 'von der Leyen was an undemocratically legitimized autocrat.' That's a long-winded way to say 'Queen,' as even the mainstream outlets have been doing lately, and also, apparently her own colleagues, as Euronews suggests. But maybe a broader analysis would've complicated the nice, clean Kremlin-driven narrative angle. And who needs that when Queen Ursula has a throne to protect? Funny how 'Russian disinfo' always seems to show up right when accountability does. If challenging Ursula's behavior makes you a Russian asset, then much of the EU Parliament should probably just register as foreign agents. Because either the Kremlin is now running half of Europe, or needs to make an effort to step out of NATO's basement and touch grass.
