Connect with us

World

The truth behind the €64.6-billion budget deal agreed by EU leaders

Published

on

The truth behind the €64.6-billion budget deal agreed by EU leaders

The European Union might soon add an additional €64.5 billion to its common budget. But it comes with fine print.

ADVERTISEMENT

The top-up was for months the object of fierce bargaining among member states, each of whom, mindful of the upcoming elections to the European Parliament, pushed hard to see their wish list come true.

The negotiations kicked off in June, soon after the European Commission unveiled its proposal, and culminated in an extraordinary summit on 1 February, where Viktor Orbán, under tremendous pressure from his fellow leaders, lifted his monthlong veto.

“We had certainly some difficult choices to make, but we had a very good result,” European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said after the meeting.

Once the gridlock broke, a new figure emerged: the bloc’s budget for 2021-2027, worth €2,018 billion in current prices (including €806.9 billion for the COVID-19 recovery fund), will be given an additional €64.6 billion until the remainder of the period.

The political deal is a considerable downgrade from the €98.8 billion top-up originally envisioned by the Commission. The executive argued the public coffers had been exhausted by the economic shockwaves of the pandemic, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the energy crisis, record-breaking inflation and devastating natural disasters, leaving the budget deprived of financial flexibility to react to unforeseen events.

Advertisement

But from the very onset, the €98.8-billion draft was met with strong resistance from member states, who would have been compelled to provide more than €65 billion in brand-new contributions. Rising interest rates, sluggish growth and diminishing revenues made the idea of writing such a cheque to Brussels all the more intolerable. 

Diplomats haggled hard over how to cut down the fresh money to the bare minimum, playing a game of mix-and-match to plug the gaps.

So what’s new and what’s old in the budget top-up? Let’s break down the numbers.

Ukraine Facility: €50 billion

Boosting aid for Ukraine is the raison d’être of the revised budget. In fact, it was the only envelope that leaders left intact.

Under the agreement, the EU will establish the Ukraine Facility to provide the war-torn nation with €50 billion between 2024 and 2027 to keep its economy afloat and sustain essential services, such as healthcare, education and social protection.

Advertisement

The pot will combine €17 billion in non-repayable grants and €33 billion in low-interest loans, meaning member states will only subsidise the former. The money for the loans will be borrowed by the Commission on the markets and later repaid by Ukraine.

Brussels will roll out the Facility in gradual payments to guarantee reliable and predictable financing. In return, Kyiv will be asked to carry out structural reforms and investments to improve public administration, good governance, the rule of law and the fight against corruption and fraud – all of which can help the country advance its EU membership bid.

In a small concession to Viktor Orbán, the only leader who opposed the Ukraine aid, leaders will hold a debate every year to assess the Facility’s implementation, but this high-level discussion will not be subject to a vote (or possible veto). “If needed,” the deal says, leaders might invite the Commission to review the package in two years.

If the co-legislators agree swiftly on the regulation that underpins the Facility, Brussels will send Kyiv the first tranche in early March.

Migration management: €9.6 billion

This envelope survived the negotiations almost unscathed and it’s easy to see why: migration management is a key priority shared by all countries, particularly those in Southern Europe who bear the brunt of irregular arrivals.

Advertisement

The Commission originally asked for €12.5 billion to cover expenses on border control, relations with the Western Balkans, and the hosting of millions of Syrian refugees in Turkey, Syria, Jordan and Lebanon. The executive said the extra money was needed to realise the ambitions of the New Pact on Migration and Asylum, the holistic reform of the bloc’s migration policy that is nearing the finish line.

Leaders mostly agreed and granted €9.6 billion. “Migration is a European challenge that requires a European response,” they said in the deal.

New technologies: €1.5 billion

The EU is intent on being a leading player in the cutthroat race for cutting-edge technologies. For that, it needs money – a lot of money.

ADVERTISEMENT

The Commission – fulfilling a grand promise made by President Ursula von der Leyen – designed the Strategic Technologies for Europe Platform (STEP) to finance avant-garde projects and promote EU-made high-tech. STEP was designed to help all member states, from the richest to the poorest, access much-needed liquidity in equal conditions.

Von der Leyen initially asked €10 billion for STEP to reinforce ongoing programmes like InvestEU and the Innovation Fund. But leaders shot down the idea and allocated only a meagre fraction: €1.5 billion to prop up the European Defence Fund (EDF).

Unforeseen crises: €3.5 billion

Since the early days of 2020, the bloc has been engulfed in back-to-back crises. From a lethal airborne disease to floods and fires that wrought untold havoc, Brussels has had a hard time adapting its tight budget to a ballooning list of expenses.

Advertisement

In its original proposal, the Commission requested €2.5 billion to bolster the Solidarity and Emergency Aid Reserve, which is triggered to deal with major natural disasters, and €3 billion for the Flexibility Instrument, which, as its name suggests, can be used to respond to any sort of critical situation.

Despite the worsening effects of climate change and a strong diplomatic push from Greece, a country badly hit by wildfires, leaders did not go all the way: their deal earmarks €1.5 billion for emergency aid and €2 billion for the Flexibility Instrument.

ADVERTISEMENT

Interest payments: zero

As a result of the aforementioned crises, the EU had to press the pedal to the metal on its joint borrowing, most notably to build the COVID-19 recovery fund.

The €800-billion plan, which will be rolled out until 2026, comes with a considerable bill of interest payments, which drastically swelled as inflation hit double digits and the European Central Bank retaliated with consecutive rate hikes.

Facing a lofty invoice, the Commission pleaded with member states to add €18.9 billion to the budget review, an amount that immediately raised eyebrows. (The figure to cover overrun costs is variable and is now estimated at €15 billion.)

In the end, leaders opted for a three-step “cascade mechanism.” First, money will come from the existing provisions within the recovery fund. If this is not enough, Brussels will draw funds from programmes that are underperforming and the Flexibility Instrument. If this is still not enough, the third step will kick in and create an instrument financed by “de-commitments,” financial envelopes that were unspent or cancelled.

Advertisement

Only when all of this has failed will the cascade hit leaders as the Commission will be entitled to ask member states to provide direct contributions.

ADVERTISEMENT

Redeployments: €10.6 billion

All the numbers listed above make a total of €64.6 billion but there’s a catch: countries will only cough up €21 billion. How is it possible?

Besides the €33 billion in loans from Ukraine, which involves the Commission and Kyiv, member states decided to shift €10.6 billion from ongoing EU initiatives: €4.6 billion from Global Europe, €2.1 billion from Horizon Europe, €1.3 billion from assistance to displaced workers, €1.1 billion from agriculture and cohesion funds, €1 billion from EU4Health and €0.6 from a special reserve to cushion Brexit disruption.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, a senior Commission official said the overnight cuts to Horizon Europe, the bloc’s flagship research programme, and EU4Health were unfortunate and “difficult to swallow.”

“At this point in time, it’s impossible for us to really tell you what this will mean in practice,” the official said about the potential effects of the €10.6-billion redeployment push. 

In the case of EU4Health, the chop represents about 27% of the money left in the envelope, established less than four years ago in response to the pandemic. The demanded changes to both Horizon and EU4Health are likely to enrage the European Parliament, which needs to co-approve the budget review.

Advertisement
ADVERTISEMENT

“This is something that is not easy,” the senior official added. But “we will religiously follow what the legislators decide.”

World

Takeaways from AP’s report on the ICE detention center holding children and parents

Published

on

Takeaways from AP’s report on the ICE detention center holding children and parents

Many Americans were alarmed recently when immigration officers in Minneapolis took custody of a 5-year-old boy and sent him and his father to a Texas detention center. But he was no outlier.

The government has been holding hundreds of children and their parents at the Dilley Immigration Processing Center, about 75 miles south of San Antonio. Some have been detained for months.

The Department of Homeland Security has strongly defended the quality of care and conditions there.

Here are key findings from an Associated Press report on how the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration enforcement is shaping life inside the facility.

Detention of children has been rising

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement booked more than 3,800 children into detention during the first nine months of the new Trump administration, according to an AP analysis of data from the University of California, Berkeley’s Deportation Data Project.

Advertisement

On an average day, more than 220 children were being held, with most of those detained longer than 24 hours sent to Dilley. More than half of Dilley detainees during the early part of the Trump administration were children, the AP analysis found.

Since being reopened last spring, the number of people detained at Dilley has risen sharply and reached more than 1,300 in late January, according to researchers. Nearly two-thirds of children detained by ICE in the early months of the Trump administration were eventually deported.

ICE holds many children longer than 20-day limit

The government is holding many children at Dilley well beyond the 20-day limit set by a longstanding court order.

“We’ve started to use 100 days as a benchmark because so many children are exceeding 20 days,” said Leecia Welch, the chief legal director at Children’s Rights, who visits Dilley regularly to ensure compliance. In a visit this month, Welch said she counted more than 30 children who had been held for over 100 days.

Many settled families among those currently detained

When the Obama administration opened Dilley in 2014, nearly all the families detained there had recently crossed the border from Mexico.

Advertisement

But many of those now sent to the facility have lived in the U.S. several years, according to lawyers and other observers, meaning children are being uprooted from the familiarity of schools, neighborhoods and many of the people who care for them.

Parents Allege Deficient Care

Parents and children recounted stressful conditions inside Dilley, including experiences that raise questions about the quality of care being provided.

A 13-year-old girl cut herself with a plastic knife after staff withheld prescribed antidepressants and denied her request to join her mother down the hall, the mother told the AP.

Another mother said when her 1-year-old daughter developed a high fever and vomited, medical staff repeatedly offered only acetaminophen and ibuprofen before she was eventually admitted to hospitals with bronchitis, pneumonia and stomach viruses. ICE disputed her account, saying the baby “immediately received proper care.”

Other families described more routine problems, like the difficulty of getting children to sleep in quarters where lights are kept on all night and of stomach aches caused by foul drinking water.

Advertisement

Both adults and children described the often overwhelming stress of being detained that has caused many to despair.

ICE, DHS defend Dilley

DHS did not respond to detailed questions about Dilley submitted by the AP. But both DHS and ICE sharply refuted allegations of poor care and conditions in statements issued this week.

“The Dilley facility is a family residential center designed specifically to house family units in a safe, structured and appropriate environment,” ICE Director Todd M. Lyons said in a statement.

Dilley provides medical screenings and infant care packages as well as classrooms and recreational spaces, ICE said.

Once in full operation, Dilley is expected to generate about $180 million in annual revenue for CoreCivic, the for-profit prison company that operates it under contract with ICE, according to the company’s recent filing with securities regulators.

Advertisement

In response to questions from the AP, a CoreCivic spokesman said no child at Dilley “has been denied medical treatment or experienced a delayed medical assessment.” The company said detainees receive comprehensive care from medical and mental health professionals.

Questions about oversight

The increased detention of families comes as the Trump administration has gutted an office responsible for oversight of conditions inside Dilley and other facilities.

In years past, investigators found problems at Dilley, including consistently inadequate staffing and disregard for the trauma caused by the detention.

A special committee recommended that family detention be discontinued except in rare cases, and the Biden administration began phasing it out in 2021. Dilley was closed in 2024. But in reopening it, the Trump administration has completely reversed course.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

World

World leaders split over military action as US-Israel strike Iran in coordinated operation

Published

on

World leaders split over military action as US-Israel strike Iran in coordinated operation

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

World leaders reacted swiftly Saturday after the United States and Israel launched strikes on Iran, exposing a deep divide between governments backing the attack on Iran and those warning the attacks risk a wider regional war.

In a joint statement, Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney and Foreign Minister Anita Anand voiced firm support saying, “Canada supports the United States acting to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and to prevent its regime from further threatening international peace and security.” The statement described Iran as “the principal source of instability and terror throughout the Middle East” and stressed it “must never be allowed to obtain or develop nuclear weapons.”

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese also endorsed the action, writing on X, “Australia stands with the brave people of Iran in their struggle against oppression.” He confirmed Australia supports “the United States acting to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon,” while activating emergency consular measures and urging Australians to leave Iran if safe.

The United Kingdom said Iran “must never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon.” U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s office said he was speaking with the leaders of France and Germany “as part of a series of calls with allies.”

Advertisement

A person holds an image of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei as Iranian demonstrators protest against the U.S.-Israeli strikes, in Tehran, Iran, Feb. 28, 2026.  (Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) )

French President Emmanuel Macron warned, “The outbreak of war between the United States, Israel and Iran carries grave consequences for international peace and security.” He added, “The ongoing escalation is dangerous for all. It must stop,” and called for an urgent meeting of the United Nations Security Council.

In a joint statement, the leaders of France, Germany and the United Kingdom also  said they had “consistently urged the Iranian regime to end Iran’s nuclear program, curb its ballistic missile program, refrain from its destabilizing activity in the region and our homelands, and to cease the appalling violence and repression against its own people.” 

The three governments said they “did not participate in these strikes,” but remain “in close contact with our international partners, including the United States, Israel, and partners in the region.” 

They reiterated their “commitment to regional stability and to the protection of civilian life,” condemned “Iranian attacks on countries in the region in the strongest terms,” and called for a “resumption of negotiations,” urging Iran’s leadership to seek a negotiated solution. “Ultimately, the Iranian people must be allowed to determine their future,” the statement said.

Advertisement

European Union foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas described developments as “perilous,” saying Iran’s “ballistic missile and nuclear programmes… pose a serious threat to global security,” while emphasizing that “Protection of civilians and international humanitarian law is a priority.”

Spain openly rejected the strikes. Socialist Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez said, “We reject the unilateral military action by the United States and Israel, which represents an escalation and contributes to a more uncertain and hostile international order.”

Meanwhile, Gulf states responded to reported Iranian missile activity.

Saudi Arabia’s Foreign Ministry said, “The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia condemns and denounces in strongest terms the blatant Iranian aggression and the flagrant violation of the sovereignty of the UAE, Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, and Jordan.” It affirmed “its full solidarity with and unwavering support for the brotherly countries” and warned of “grave consequences resulting from the continued violation of states’ sovereignty and the principles of international law.”

The United Arab Emirates’ Ministry of Defense said the country “was subjected to a blatant attack involving Iranian ballistic missiles,” adding that air defense systems “successfully intercepted a number of missiles.” Authorities said falling debris in a residential area caused “one civilian death of an asian nationality” and material damage.

Advertisement

The ministry called the attack “a dangerous escalation and a cowardly act that threatens the safety of civilians and undermines stability,” and stated the UAE “reserves its full right to respond.”

UN’S ATOMIC AGENCY’S IRAN POLICY GETS MIXED REVIEWS FROM EXPERTS AFTER US-ISRAEL ‘OBLITERATE’ NUCLEAR SITES

Smoke rises after reported Iranian missile attacks, following strikes by the United States and Israel against Iran, in Manama, Bahrain, Feb. 28, 2026. (Reuters)

Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry said Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Mohammad Ishaq Dar “strongly condemned the unwarranted attacks against Iran” and called for “urgent resumption of diplomacy.”

China also weighed in. A spokesperson for the Chinese Embassy in Washington, wrote on X that Beijing is “highly concerned over the military strikes against Iran launched by the U.S. and Israel.” He added that “Iran’s sovereignty, security and territorial integrity should be respected” and called for “an immediate stop of the military actions” and “no further escalation.”

Advertisement

Turkey’s Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan held calls with counterparts across the region, a Turkish Foreign Ministry source told Reuters. The discussions focused on “possible steps to be taken to help bring an end to the attacks.”

Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy directly linked the developments to Russia’s war against his country.

“Although Ukrainians never threatened Iran, the Iranian regime chose to become Putin’s accomplice and supplied him with ‘shahed’ drones,” Zelenskyy wrote, adding that Russia has used “more than 57,000 shahed-type attack drones against the Ukrainian people.”

“It is important that the United States is acting decisively,” he said. “Whenever there is American resolve, global criminals weaken.”

Russia sharply criticized the operation. Dmitry Medvedev, deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, said, “All negotiations with Iran are a cover operation.”

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

An interception is visible in the sky over Haifa during the latest barrage. (Anthony Hershko/TPS-IL)

Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam warned, “We will not accept anyone dragging the country into adventures that threaten its security and unity.”

Norwegian Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide said the strike “is not in line with international law.”

Reuters contributed to this report.

Advertisement

Related Article

Iran ramps up regional threats as Trump considers talks, and eyewitness accounts of regime violence emerge
Continue Reading

World

Israel strikes two schools in Iran, killing more than 50 people

Published

on

Israel strikes two schools in Iran, killing more than 50 people

State media says Israeli attack on girls’ school in the city of Minab in the south of the country kills dozens.

An Israeli strike has hit an elementary girls’ school in Minab, a city in the Hormozgan province of southern Iran, killing at least 53 people, according to state media, as the immediate civilian cost from Israel and the United States’ huge bombardment of Iran comes into sharper focus.

Workers are continuing to clear wreckage from the site, where 63 others have been injured on Saturday, said Iran’s state-run IRNA news agency. The strike is part of a wave of joint US-Israeli military attacks across Iran that has triggered an outbreak of regional violence.

Advertisement

Recommended Stories

list of 4 itemsend of list

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi shared a photo of the attack, which he said destroyed the girls’ school and killed “innocent children”.

“These crimes against the Iranian People will not go unanswered,” Araghchi wrote in a post on X.

Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baqaei also slammed the “blatant crime” and urged action from the United Nations Security Council.

Separately, Iran’s Mehr news agency reported that at least two students were killed by another Israeli attack that hit a school east of the capital, Tehran.

Reporting from Tehran, Al Jazeera’s Mohammed Vall said the attacks call into question US and Israeli claims that “they are targeting only military targets and they are trying to punish the regime, not the people of Iran.”

Advertisement

“President Trump has promised the Iranian people that aid or help is coming their way, but now we are seeing civilian casualties; that’s something that the Iranian government will stress as a case of violation of international law and an aggression against the Iranian people, ” said Vall.

There was no immediate reaction from the US or Israel on Iran’s claims about the school strikes.

The last time the US and Iran waged attacks on Iran in June 2025, sparking the 12-day war, the civilian toll in Iran was also heavy.

According to Iran’s Ministry of Health and Medical Education, thousands of civilians were killed or injured, and public infrastructure was damaged, during that conflict.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending