A bombed-out building in Gaza sheltering around 100 people collapsed, and there are hundreds more like it that could, too

It is rarely a good sign when European politicians open their speeches by quoting Charles Dickens. So alarms should have sounded the moment European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen declared this to be the best and the worst of times at the start of her State of the European Union address on September 16.

Things went downhill from there: the EU leader painted a picture of the region that stands in complete contrast to the general experience of its people, amounting to a summary of the bloc’s worst achievements.

“Von der Leyen has achieved the feat of not mentioning a single measure to help Europeans cope with the soaring cost of living across Europe, at a time when an ever-growing number of people are now forced to choose between housing, food and transport,” said Manon Aubry, Co-President of The Left in the European Parliament.

“Fiscal sustainability” and concern for businesses

In the lengthy address, von der Leyen laid out what she considered the EU’s successes, including raising military spending by almost 80% over the past five years and “reducing dependence” on Russian fossil fuels. However, this interpretation does not correspond to what people are experiencing, as outlined by The Left in a dedicated dossier. Growing military spending benefits only the arms industry. And attempts to replace cheaper Russian gas have essentially boiled down to committing to more expensive and environmentally devastating US LNG imports.

While recognizing growing energy prices, von der Leyen offered no tangible response to this problem plaguing EU households. On the other hand, she demonstrated notable concern for businesses, signaling the continuation of eroding labor and environmental protections along the lines implemented by right and far-right parties at the EU level.

Read more: Peter Mertens: “Don’t be afraid, seize the opportunities of 2026 with both hands”

The likelihood of maintaining the status quo was also noticeable when von der Leyen turned to the deadly wildfires that hit Europe this summer, devastating communities from Belgium and France to Spain and Greece. Trade unions and progressive analysts have warned for years that fire preparedness is severely impaired by a lack of planning and, specifically, shortages of firefighters. Yet there was no commitment in the address to invest more in essential public service workers. Instead, the EC President referred to the ongoing need for overall “fiscal sustainability” – meaning Europeans should expect no relief from austerity programs.

“The best of times is clearly reserved for billionaires, multinational energy companies, and war profiteers,” remarked Member of the European Parliament Marc Botenga from the Workers’ Party of Belgium (PTB-PVDA). “The other side of the coin for workers: austerity and rising prices.”

The EU’s failed foreign affairs policy

Based on the vision tabled by von der Leyen, there is also little to look forward to in Europe’s international and trade policy. “It’s hard to think of an area where the EU has been more inactive and less effective than in foreign affairs,” The Left wrote, referring to the union’s ongoing disregard of international law in relation to the genocide in Gaza and its approach to the Trump administration. 

“The President has praised Saudi Arabia’s war on Yemen, she has stood with Trump as he bombed Tehran and the European Commission has sided with the USA as they brought the global economy to a standstill in the Strait of Hormuz,” the progressive bloc warned.

The EU’s relationship with the US has continued to be one of submission, with elected regional leaders going to great lengths (unsuccessfully) to appease Donald Trump. Even when the region announced it would stand firm against US threats – in Greenland or on tariffs – this did not translate into practice.

In the context of von der Leyen’s speech, this boiled down to announcing Canada would become the “first associate member of the EU” and listing trade agreements signed with India, Mercosur, and Indonesia – met by the people of these countries with understandable concern.

Read more: Indian left opposes free trade agreement with EU, calls it “wholesale surrender” of country’s economic interests

Von der Leyen’s speech showed no sign of breaking with disdain towards nations outside the West. In addition to continuing animosity toward China, it offered a glimpse into plans involving countries rich in critical materials. The EC President announced the launch of a European Corporation on Critical Raw Materials – designed to secure and stockpile supplies for Europe’s industry and defense – with obvious implications for mineral-rich territories like Ukraine, Greenland, and several African countries. For the more skeptical listeners, this also carried weird echoes of the East India Company.

The State of the EU’s vision, it goes without saying, comes with further promises of an even stricter migration framework – on the pretext of situations like the one experienced in Ceuta earlier this year – that allow the erosion of basic human rights like asylum. Von der Leyen’s speech pledged even more finances for Frontex and suggested that outsourcing migration enforcement to third countries will continue, as endorsed by recent EU legislation.

“This policy of externalizing migration control has contributed to grave human rights violations, arbitrary detentions and systematic violence against people on the move,” The Left warned, calling for a union rooted in solidarity rather than violence and militarization.

The left’s capacity to build knowledge, organization, and struggle was a central theme at this year’s ManiFiesta, introduced during a discussion of Peter Mertens’ new book, “The Last Days of the Old Normal“. In the context of Europe’s ongoing armament, these questions are crucial not only for progressive movements in core countries but also for those building alternatives in Central and Eastern Europe.

The festival featured several sessions examining developments in Central and Eastern Europe, including an intervention by Ukrainian sociologist Volodymyr Ishchenko on the class character of the Ukraine war. Another session – “East of the former wall: the AfD, the industrial crisis, and the war economy” – brought together Markéta Juřicová of the Czech party Levice, Orsolya Haboczki from the Hungarian progressive movement Szikra, German Bundestag representative Cem Ince from Die Linke, and Member of the European Parliament Marc Botenga from the Workers’ Party of Belgium (PTB-PVDA). 

They discussed how the growth of the far right in core EU countries is interacting with events eastwards – and what lessons Western left movements can learn from their Eastern counterparts.

Read more: ‘Ukraine is no longer a sovereign country,’ says sociologist Volodymyr Ishchenko

As Juřicová and Haboczki pointed out, while movements in the West are worried about the popularity of parties like the Alternative for Germany (AfD), many nations in Central and Eastern Europe already have experience with far-right participation – even leadership – in government. More than 15 years of Viktor Orbán’s rule in Hungary, Haboczki noted, offers an important lesson on far-right governments’ economic agendas and tactics. As the Orbán administration used identity issues to capture opposition parties’ attention, it channeled resources into the hands of the local bourgeoisie and served transnational capital by securing huge state subsidies, she said. 

Right-wing parties in Eastern Europe also look to their international peers for inspiration. In the Czech Republic, Juřicová said, the far right “loves” the AfD, picking and choosing many of the same topics the German group campaigns on. The discussion signaled this is particularly important to recognize as the growth of extreme right parties is fueled largely by popular dissatisfaction with mainstream parties’ programs. 

Read more: Far-right victory in German state elections shocks the center

Ince emphasized this was the case in Germany, where a large share of AfD votes came from those believing the party would bring upheaval compared to the status quo, marked by massive job losses and cuts to welfare. But while European progressives recognize this, they still struggle to incorporate it into their programs, recent experiences show. Instead, many of them ponder attempts to prevent the far right from seizing institutional power by providing support to establishment parties, failing to shape a concrete alternative to both the mainstream and the extreme right.

In Central and Eastern Europe, the work of progressive parties is further complicated by the need to rebuild credibility after decades of vilification of socialism and austerity measures implemented by liberal options, Haboczki added. 

Read more: “We cannot eat grenades once the grains no longer grow:” European peace movements organize against militarization

While recognizing workers’ material concerns in Central and East Europe is imperative for building local alternatives, the panel showed, it will also be necessary to build region-wide partnership to challenge topics dominating the narrative in Germany, Belgium, and other core countries.

Militarization stands out among these topics, Botenga and Ince outlined in their interventions, though its implementation might differ by sub-region. Botenga added that German industry stands to gain the most from European armament, yet these gains will not trickle down to the working class – meaning the left in the region can find in anti-militarism a common cause to rally around. 

Ince echoed these observations by emphasizing that, even as their profit lines stand to gain from billions of euros directed towards rearmament, German companies continue to shift significant parts of their operations to countries including Poland, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic – making most of eroded workplace protections and labor rights. This shows that the left across Europe must work together to protect workers’ interests everywhere, building a joint struggle for peace and civilian industry, he indicated.

Kazakhstan is developing Alatau City near Almaty as a new regional centre for manufacturing, logistics, technology and finance. Its investment pipeline has expanded to 67 projects worth nearly $6.9 billion, with the potential to create around 55,000 jobs. Projects involving PepsiCo, Sunny Paper, Mars Petcare KZ and several logistics companies are already at different stages of implementation. The project is supported by a special legal regime, but experts say its long-term success will depend on sustained investment, effective governance and the development of a competitive economic ecosystem.

https://astanatimes.com/2026/09/alatau-city-can-kazakhstan-build-regional-economic-hub-from-scratch

Leaders of pro-independence parties in Ireland, Scotland, and Wales met in Cardiff on Monday to sign a memorandum of understanding laying out a plan for strengthened cooperation. The document commits Sinn Féin, the Scottish National Party (SNP), and Plaid Cymru to deepen exchanges on renewable energy, economic policy, and, notably, “supporting the right of each nation to determine its own future.”

“For the first time ever, people across these islands have First Ministers in Scotland, in Wales, and in the North of Ireland who are all committed to independence from the United Kingdom,” the memorandum states. “For people watching across these islands – for people watching around the world – there could be no clearer sign that Westminster’s time is coming to an end.”

Read more: Welsh by-election shows far right isn’t the only alternative to establishment parties

The agreement includes commitments to break with the economic policy shaped in London and to build a different approach that would “create good jobs, tackle inequality and ensure that wealth and opportunity are spread more fairly.” It also outlines an energy strategy promising to leverage the three regions’ renewable resources to bring more affordable energy to communities.

However, the provision that has attracted most attention is the commitment to realize the three nations’ right to self-determination. “We call for the British Government to prepare for, plan and facilitate constitutional change in each jurisdiction,” the party leaders wrote. “No Westminster government has the right to block democracy or undermine the principle that our people will decide their own future,” they added.

The meeting followed comments by British Prime Minister Andy Burnham on the possibility of independence referendums in Scotland and Ireland. Burnham ruled out – in different terms – such public votes, drawing criticism from independence-oriented parties. 

In Ireland, his remarks were called out for contradicting Good Friday Agreement provisions that foresee a path to the island’s unity. “It is not an option that the British government can choose whether or not to exercise based on what is politically convenient, but a legal obligation that plays a critical role in underpinning the relative peace achieved since 1998,” the Workers’ Party of Ireland wrote.

Read more: On anniversary of Easter Rising, calls for Irish unity are strengthened

The SNP insisted their ongoing efforts for achieving independence must be contextualized as a response to the aftermath of the 2014 referendum, where unionist parties argued that staying in the UK provided more stability and predictability. Following that vote – where a majority of Scots opted for remaining in the UK – British authorities failed to live up to such arguments, the party said, including when it comes to the protection of public services. “Westminster blocked legislation designed to protect the NHS from being opened up to US healthcare corporations in post-Brexit trade deals, treating our public health service like a garage sale item,” the SNP wrote.

Pro-union critics suggested the memorandum’s commitments risk diverting public attention from everyday issues toward lengthy constitutional discussions. However, Sinn Féin, the SNP and Plaid Cymru contrasted this with a different approach, insisting that independence would allow more space for challenging harmful policies imposed by the British government and for realizing a different vision of society.

Quer receber os textos desta coluna em primeira mão no seu e-mail? Assine a newsletter Xeque na Democracia, enviada toda segunda-feira, 12h. Para receber as próximas edições, inscreva-se aqui.

A denúncia vem de fonte suspeita: Renan Santos. O candidato do Missão está bradando aos quatro ventos que a campanha de Flávio Bolsonaro recebeu dinheiro do Rockbridge Network, uma rede de financiadores da extrema direita ligados ao Vale do Silício e que foi fundada pelo vice-presidente dos EUA, J. D. Vance. O principal interesse do grupo é organizar uma infraestrutura mundial para a evolução da IA, incluindo terras raras e data centers.  

Segundo Renan, dois empresários, chamados Tallis Gomes e Pedro Sang, são representantes da Rockbridge no Brasil e intermediariam os fundos. “Esses caras vieram para o Brasil e saíram oferecendo apoio a várias candidaturas: Flávio, antes tentaram o Tarcísio, e fecharam com o Flávio. Esses caras trabalham com muitas coisas, entre elas terras raras. Eles entraram na campanha do Flávio, naturalmente e ilegalmente”, afirmou Renan Santos.

Se fato, Renan está desesperado por atenção desde que viu a ascensão de Augusto Cury (Avante).

Mas graças ao site Amado Mundo, do jornalista Guilherme Amado, sabemos que pelo menos parte das acusações é verdade. E elas são graves, porque financiamento externo de campanha é proibido pela lei eleitoral. 

Segundo o site, o carioca Pedro Sang atua de fato dentro do comitê da campanha de Flávio Bolsonaro em São Paulo, em um casarão perto do parque Ibirapuera, na zona sul, onde despacha de uma sala no segundo andar. Pedro teria providenciado imóveis e infraestrutura ao local. A quem pergunta, ele se apresenta, segundo o Amado Mundo, como “Pedro da Rockbridge”. Pedro Sang reconheceu que é ligado ao Rockbridge, mas negou ser intermediador de fundos. 

Flávio mudou seu QG de campanha de Brasília para São Paulo no começo de julho. O objetivo propalado era facilitar viagens para Minas, Rio e Paraná e estar mais perto da Faria Lima.  

O especialista em direito eleitoral, advogado Fernando Neisser, afirma que “a entrada de recursos internacionais em campanha eleitoral no Brasil é absolutamente proibida, seja oriundos de pessoas físicas, cidadãos não brasileiros, seja por meio de empresas, de pessoas jurídicas”.

“É uma grave irregularidade, constitui abuso de poder econômico, que, se for comprovado, levaria à instauração de uma ação de investigação judicial eleitoral perante o TSE e, caso haja, como disse, prova suficiente, a condenação levaria à cassação do registro, do diploma ou do mandato, caso seja vencedor e isso aconteça depois das eleições, e a necessidade de convocação de novas eleições, além de acarretar a inelegibilidade de oito anos das pessoas consideradas responsáveis por esse ato de abuso de poder econômico”.

Para ele, “não faz diferença se esse pagamento é em dinheiro, se esse pagamento é em bens, como aluguéis, enfim, fornecimento de material, de insumos, ou no pagamento de serviços”. 

Ele alerta ainda para outra hipótese. Caso o trabalho de algum colaborador ou serviço seja pago por fora da campanha, isso poderia constituir Caixa 2.

Fundado em 2019 por J. D. Vance, vice-presidente dos Estados Unidos, e o empresário Chris Buskirk, o Rockbridge Network é tido como responsável pelo impulsionamento do vice para o círculo de Trump. O objetivo declarado de Buskirk é “transformar” o Partido Republicano. Editor do site American Greatness, ele diz ser a “voz da nova geração de conservadorismo americano” e que os conservadores dos EUA “perderam seu caminho”. Além dele, manteve durante anos um Podcast com as tais “novas vozes” do conservadorismo, entre elas Darren Beattie, que hoje é o principal aliado de Eduardo Bolsonaro no Departamento de Estado.  

Chris é um velho conhecido de Eduardo Bolsonaro. Em 17 de março de 2019, ambos estiveram presentes no jantar oferecido a Olavo de Carvalho e Jair Bolsonaro em Washington, às vésperas da primeira reunião do ex-presidente com Donald Trump. No jantar oferecido pelo embaixador Sérgio Amaral na residência oficial, Olavo de Carvalho, ainda vivo, foi o centro das atenções, recepcionado junto a estrelas hoje caídas do bolsonarismo, como general Heleno, o general Rego Barros e Filipe Martins. Mas, segundo relevou O Globo, Eduardo Bolsonaro deu atenção a Chris Buskirk e Steve Bannon, ao lado do ex-ministro das Relações Exteriores, Ernesto Araújo. 

O Amado Mundo descobriu outras ligações diretas entre a turma do Rockbridge e a campanha de Flávio Bolsonaro. 

Um memorando chamado “Prosperity Partnership” elaborado por André Marinho, candidato do Partido Novo a governador do Rio de Janeiro e filho do suplente de Flávio Bolsonaro ao Senado, inclui diretrizes em inglês de como seria uma parceria do potencial governo de Flávio Bolsonaro com os Estados Unidos para exploração de minerais críticos e terras raras. Em suma, ele propõe o afastamento da China e um completo alinhamento com os EUA, notando que o tema destes minerais é considerado um tema de “segurança nacional” para os EUA. 

Os termos da apresentação são idênticos ao discurso feito por Flávio Bolsonaro no CPAC deste ano, que já tinham um tom de “pitch” de vendas para investidores, como apontei nesta coluna. O discurso aconteceu nove dias depois da elaboração do documento.     

André Marinho admitiu ser autor do documento mas nega que ele tenha sido apresentado a qualquer estrangeiro. Mas o Amado Mundo descobriu que, três semanas depois de elaborar o documento, Marinho esteve nos EUA com J. D. Vance. 

Marinho é irmão de Giulia Be, que é casada com Conor Kennedy, filho do secretário de Saúde do governo Donald Trump, Robert Kennedy Jr. O encontro com J. D. Vance teria sido articulado pelo cunhado. 

Procurado, Flávio não respondeu aos questionamentos do site Amado Mundo. 

Em meio a tantas revelações nas últimas semanas, todas elas tingidas de interferência nas eleições, é importante mantermos o foco no que de fato importa. Como já argumentei aqui nesta coluna algumas vezes, os EUA já interferiram de pelo menos 5 maneiras nas eleições brasileiras. Mas até agora nunca apareceu uma transferência de verbas ou bens diretamente para a campanha de Flávio Bolsonaro por grupos ou potências estrangeiras. 

Embora ainda não haja provas de que isso tenha de fato acontecido, a aliança com Rockbridge Network pode levar ao elo que falta para entendermos se o candidato do PL cometeu crime eleitoral na sanha de vencer a corrida para a presidência do país – e o que ele estava disposto a dar em troca.