Special counsel: Trump would have been convicted of election interference if not elected


Special counsel Jack Smith said in his final report on the case, which was submitted to Congress on Tuesday, that Donald Trump would have been convicted of election interference if he was not elected president in November. 

Pool File Photo by Charly Triballeau/UPI | License Photo

UPI
Jan. 14, 2025 

Jan. 14 (UPI) -- Donald Trump would have been convicted of attempting to overturn the 2020 election if not for his victory in the presidential election in November, Jack Smith, the special counsel who twice indicted the former and future president, said in his final report on the case, which was submitted to Congress early Tuesday.

Trump was charged by Smith with four felony counts in August 2023. However, amid litigation, the special counsel was forced to move to dismiss the case after Trump defeated Vice President Kamala Harris in November's presidential election.

In ending the election interference case, Smith cited the long-held Justice Department policy that forbids the prosecution of a sitting president.

Following litigation over the release of the final report, the 170-page document, obtained by The New York Times and NBC News, was submitted to Congress early Tuesday, meticulously detailing the case built against Trump.
Advertisement

"The Department's view that the Constitution prohibits the continued indictment and prosecution of a President is categorical and does not turn on the gravity of the crimes charged, the strength of the Government's proof or the merits of the prosecution, which the Office stands fully behind," Smith wrote in the report.

"Indeed, but for Trump's election and imminent return to the Presidency, the Office assessed that the admissible evidence was sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction at trial."

Smith was appointed special counsel in November of 2022, and brought two indictments against the former president the following summer: one concerning election interference and the other regarding Trump's retention of classified documents.

Only one of the two volumes that make up Smith's final report was released Tuesday. The second volume, which concerns the classified documents case that was controversially dismissed this past summer, is being withheld from the public.

The report was submitted to Congress following litigation over its release, with Trump and his lawyers fighting to keep it private. On Monday, U.S District Judge Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee who oversaw the documents case, permitted the release of Smith's report concerning the election interference case while barring the second volume for review.

Trump railed against the report on his social media platform, Truth Social, after its release early Tuesday.

"Jack is a lamebrain prosecutor who was unable to get his case before the election," he said in a statement, while incorrectly describing his election victory as a landslide. "THE VOTERS HAVE SPOKEN!!!"

In the report, Smith defends his decision to charge Trump, whom he accuses of pursuing a criminal conspiracy to maintain his hold of the White House after losing the presidential election to Biden in 2020.

Alleged illegal actions include attempting to induce state officials to ignore legitimate vote counts, manufacturing fraudulent electors in seven states he lost, pressuring Justice Department officials and Vice President Michael Pence to violate their oaths of office to support Trump's false claims and directing an angry mob to attack the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

"The throughline of all of Mr. Trump's criminal efforts was deceit -- knowingly false claims of election fraud -- and the evidence shows that Mr. Trump used these lies as a weapon to defeat a federal government function foundational to the United States' democratic process," Smith said.

False claims propagated by Trump included large numbers of dead and ineligible voters had cast ballots and that voting machines had changed votes for him to Biden.

Smith said Trump's election claims -- widely referred to as The Big Lie -- "were demonstrably and, in many cases, obviously false," and that Trump knew there was no fraud in the 2020 election.

"Until Mr. Trump obstructed it, this democratic process had operated in a peaceful and orderly manner for more than 130 years," he said.

Throughout the report, Smith recounts how Trump pursued various efforts to overturn the election, despite knowing he had legitimately lost and that there was no evidence of fraud.

Smith also holds Trump responsible for the Jan. 6 insurrection, when thousands of the former president's supporters attacked Congress to prevent Biden's certification as the 46th president, resulting in five deaths and 140 police officers injured.

"Mr. Trump's words inspired his supporters to commit acts of physical violence," Smith wrote, referring to Trump's Jan. 6 speech at the Ellipse in which he directed his supporters to march on the Capitol and "fight like hell."

"The people who took Mr. Trump at his word formed a massive crowd that broke onto restricted Capitol grounds and into the building, violently attacking law enforcement officers protecting the Capitol and those inside."

Although much detailed in the report was already publicly known through the indictments, Smith, who resigned as special counsel over the weekend, stated Trump's candidacy represented "an unprecedented challenge" for both the Justice Department the courts.

He added that his office "had no interest" in affecting the election.

In a letter addressed to Attorney General Merrick Garland, included in the report, Smith emphasized that while he relied upon his team, the decision to bring changes against Trump was his alone.

"It is a decision I stand behind fully," he said. "To have done otherwise on the facts developed during our work would have been to shirk my duties as a prosecutor and a public servant.

"After nearly 30 years of public service, that is a choice I could not abide," he said.

Read More

Judge allows partial release of Trump election interference report

Federal prosecutor Jack Smith resigns ahead of Trump's inauguration

U.S. blacklists online White supremacist group as terrorist organization



Jan. 13 (UPI) -- The United States named an online extreme right-wing group of White supremacists a designated terrorist organization on Monday, accusing it and its leaders of promoting race and ethnic-based violence.

Members of the transnational Terrorgram Collective connect via Telegram, hence its name, where they promote White supremacy and encourage racially or ethnically motivated violence.

Its users have been blamed for a number of violent attacks, including the October shooting outside a Slovakia LGBTQ+ bar that killed three people, including the gunman; a July planned attack on a New Jersey energy facility; and an August kift attack at a Turkey mosque that injured five.

"The Terrorgram Collective is being designated for having committed or attempted to commit, posing a significant risk of committing or having participated in training to commit acts of terrorism that threaten the security of United States nationals or the national security, foreign policy of economy of the United States," the State Department said in a statement.

Three leaders of the collective -- Ciro Daniel Amorim Ferreira of Brazil, Noah Licul of Croatia and Hedrik-Wahl Muller of South Africa -- were individually listed as Specially Designated Global terrorists.

With the designations, all property and interests in property of the collective as well as those named in the United States is blocked and Americans are barred from doing business with them. According to State Department officials, the terrorist designations expose and isolate those named from using the U.S. financial system.

In September, two U.S.-based leaders of the collective -- Dallas Humber of California and Matthew Allison of Idaho -- were charged in a 15-count indictment for conspiracy to provide material support to terrorists and soliciting hate crimes and the murder of federal officials.

According to the indictment, the pair spread online video and publications that provided what federal prosecutors described as "specific advice" for carrying out crimes and a hit list for assassinations.

They are accused of inciting users, including those behind the Slovakia, New Jersey and Turkey attacks.

The collective was designated as a terrorist organization in Britain following approval from its Parliament in April. The order criminalizes being a member of the collective with a potential sentence of up to 14 years in prison.

The 51st US state? How Canada might take on Donald Trump

Nik Martin

DW

January 12, 2025

US President-elect Donald Trump threatened Canada with 25% tariffs and even quipped about a merger of the nations. The North American neighbors have strong economic links, so a trade dispute would have a heavy impact.

Canada's economy could be plunged into recession if Trump imposes 25% tariffs

Image: Valerie Macon/AFP/Getty Images


"Blame Canada!" goes the satirical song from the 1999 animated comedy film "South Park: Bigger, Longer & Uncut," in which a mother rallies her small Colorado town to confront youth degeneracy.

The song humorously shifts blame to the US's northern neighbor rather than the policies of the government of the United Statespolicies, parenting failures or media influence, declaring that "we need to form a full assault — it's Canada’s fault."

Decades later, US President-elect Donald Trump appears to be channeling a similar energy, blaming Canada for illegal migration and drug trafficking across the northern border.

Weeks after winning a second term in the White House, Trump threatened to impose 25% tariffs on all Canadian imports — including cars and automotive parts — starting on his first day in office.

He has since stepped up his rhetoric, joking that Canada could even be annexed as the 51st US state. He even mocked the Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau — who resigned last week amid plummeting approval ratings — by calling him the "Governor" of the "Great State of Canada."

Trump bombast or threat to be tackled?

While some analysts believe the rhetoric is typical Trump bluster, his remarks have been widely condemned by Canadian politicians and economists as Canada wasn't a major target for the Republican candidate during the US election campaign — unlike China, Mexico, BRICS and NATO.

"It came like a bolt from the blue," Douglas Porter, chief economist of the Bank of Montreal (BMO), told DW, referring to Trump's attack. "There was no groundswell among his supporters that saw Canada as a big villain ... so I find this one a bit more unnerving."

Porter said Trump's reasoning appears to be changing as he prepares to take office on January 20.

"Initially, there were concerns about the border, which I think Canada would be happy to address. Then there was talk about the US-Canada trade imbalance. And in his press conference the other day, Trump talked about imposing economic hardship on Canada," he said.

Canada produced more than 1.5 million motor vehicles in 2023, many for the US marketImage: Chris Young/The Canadian Press/ZUMA Press/picture alliance

Despite championing and signing the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), which took effect in 2020, Trump now says Washington's neighbors have failed to meet key terms in the accord, from border control to trade. The deal is up for review next year.

Trump "is known to rip up his own deals to secure even better deals," Tony Stillo, Director of Canada Economics at the economic advisory firm Oxford Economics, told DW. "Even though he helped negotiate the USMCA that replaced NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement), he's now calling it the worst deal ever."

The US does, however, have far worse trade imbalances with China, Mexico, Vietnam, Germany, and Japan than with Canada, which was nearly $55 billion (€53.6 billion) from January to November last year, according to the US Census Bureau.

By comparison, the US-China trade imbalance was almost five times higher during that same period, at $270.4 billion. The US-Canada trade imbalance has fallen by about a quarter over the past two years. However, it was much lower before the pandemic and the USMCA took effect.

Canada getting US subsidy, says Trump

Trump wrote on his Truth Social messaging platform this week that the imbalance is effectively a US subsidy to Canada, saying the world's largest economy "can no longer suffer the massive Trade Deficits that Canada needs to stay afloat."

US-Canada trade is one of the most extensive and integrated partnerships in the world. In the first 11 months of 2024, $699.4 billion in trade was conducted between the countries. Canada is the largest market for US exports, ahead of Mexico, Europe and China. US exports include trucks, vans, cars and auto parts, as well as fossil fuels.

The United States is also Canada's top export destination, with more than three-quarters of outbound goods and services heading across the southern border. For comparison, 53% of Germany's exports go to other European Union nations.

Crude oil makes up a quarter of Canada's exports southward, which in July 2024 reached a record 4.3 million barrels per day, according to the US Energy Information Administration (EIA).

Thanks to surplus US processing capacity, the US refines the crude oil into gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel for domestic use and re-export — some of it back to Canada.

Despite the US being a major oil producer, the country imports millions of barrels of crude oil from CanadaImage: Jeff McIntosh/The Canadian Press/AP Photo/picture alliance

Trouble for oil and auto sectors

Danielle Smith, the premier of the oil-rich Canadian province of Alberta, warned the US would be shooting itself in the foot if Trump makes good on his threats, writing this week on X that: "Any proposed tariffs would immediately hurt American refiners and also make consumers pay more at the pumps."




Trump's ire has also targeted Canada's automotive industry, which the president-elect says has shifted manufacturing across the northern border in recent years, resulting in layoffs for American workers.

However, North America's auto sector is deeply integrated and parts and vehicles often cross the US-Canada border multiple times during production.

Canadian auto executives have warned that tariffs could disrupt complex supply chains, leading to increased costs and inefficiencies — spiking prices for new vehicles in both countries.

"If you tariff at 25% every time it [an auto part] goes across a border, the costs become ridiculous," William Huggins, assistant professor at McMaster University's DeGroote School of Business, told DW.

Canada's BNN Bloomberg this week cited economists as saying the US tariffs could shrink Canada's gross domestic product (GDP) by 2-4% and may tip the economy into recession.

Ottawa readies tit-for-tat measures

Canada's ruling Liberal Party won't elect Trudeau's successor until March 9. While his departure leaves his country politically rudderless, Canadian policymakers have devised a list of US imports that might face retaliation if Trump proceeds with his tariff plan.

The analysts DW spoke with said Canada is likely to pursue tariffs on politically and economically sensitive US products as it did under a similar trade row with Trump in 2018 and which was resolved a year later.

The Global & Mail newspaper reported this week that Ottawa is considering tariffs on US steel, ceramics, glass, flowers and Florida orange juice, among other goods.

"They [The Canadian side] have only identified a handful of sectors because they don't want to put everything on the table yet to undermine their negotiating position," Stillo said.

But with mostly bluster and outlandish threats to go on, Canada's leaders are yet to know exactly what Trump is seeking. Are his tariff threats a negotiating tactic to improve border control, boost energy and automotive cooperation or hike Canada's contributions to NATO?

"We're not dealing with an enlightened multi-step US policy," Huggins said. "We're dealing with a bully who said, 'Give me your lunch money,' so we're probably going to give them the change in our pockets."

But despite the short-term disruption to both nations' economies, the McMaster University economist thinks policymakers in Ottawa will look to play the long game, for one obvious reason.

"30 years from now, Donald Trump won't be alive, but Canada will be," Huggins told DW.

Edited by: Uwe Hessler

Editor's note: This article was updated on January 12, 2025, to reflect that the US Census Bureau data for 2024 shows trade from January through November.

Trump withdrawing US from WHO would be a 'strategic mistake'

Matthew Ward Agius

DW

January 13, 2025

It's widely expected that the United States will leave the World Health Organization when Donald Trump becomes president. Experts say it would be a lose-lose for the US and global health.

What you need to know

Donald Trump is expected to withdraw the United States from the World Health Organization when he becomes president on January 20.

The United States is the largest financial contributor to the WHO, mostly through voluntary payments to its preferred programs.

The WHO's funding model has been criticized for being too dependent on such "strings attached" donations.

Donald Trump is set to pull the United States out of the WHO on the first day of his presidency. Experts warn that the move would be harmful for both parties.

Trump, who will be inaugurated for a second and final term as US president on January 20, also tried to withdraw from the WHO in July 2020, at the end of his first administration.

But fully cutting ties with the WHO couldn't happen overnight due to a long-standing congressional resolution requiring the president to give a year's notice and pay back any outstanding obligations.

Because of that timeline, Joe Biden's election to the presidency in 2020 just months after Trump's decree, enabled the Democrat to reverse the decision.

Trump's likely move will face no such barriers this time around. On his first day in office, he could give notice of a US withdrawal from the WHO, which would then take effect in January 2026.

The US is the biggest source of WHO funding

If the US did withdraw from the WHO, it would be a major blow to the organization's budget and its ability to coordinate international health programs and policy.

The WHO is a United Nations agency comprised of 196 member countries, which pay into the organization via "assessed contributions" — effectively a membership fee — based on GDP and population figures on a two-year funding cycle.

The US accounts for nearly a quarter of these funds, ahead of China, Japan and Germany.


Nations can also make voluntary contributions, which the US does. In the current cycle, the US has already contributed almost $1 billion to the WHO budget.

But about half of the WHO's funding comes from non-governmental organizations . For example, hundreds of millions were donated by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which makes it the second-biggest contributor overall.


Donor-directed or "specified" contributions — where the giver dictates how and where the money is used — account for more than 70% of the total budget.

That presents a deep structural problem for the operation of the WHO, according to Gian Luca Burci, a former WHO lawyer now working as a global health law specialist at the Geneva Graduate Institute.

"Donors attach a lot of strings, so the WHO becomes very donor-driven," Burci told DW. "The US gets quite a bit in terms of return for relatively little money."

"There are many issues that the US attaches a lot of importance to, regardless of who sits in the White House," Burci added, "in particular on health emergencies, on pandemics, on disease outbreaks, but also on getting data of what happens inside countries."

The loss of its top financial contributor would leave the WHO with few options to make up the shortfall. Either other member states would need to increase their funding, or its operations budget would need to be stripped back.

Leaving the WHO would also hurt the US

The relationship between the WHO and Donald Trump began to deteriorate in 2020, when he accused the WHO of being a "puppet of China” during its response to COVID-19.

"He continues to rail against China and says that WHO is in the pocket of China, that China influences it," said Lawrence Gostin, a professor of global health law and director of the WHO Collaborating Center on Public Health Law and Human Rights at Georgetown University, US.

Gostin said exiting the WHO would be an "own goal" for the US and would come at the cost of the "enormous influence" the country has in global health.

"I think it would be deeply adverse to US national security interests. It would open the door to the Russian Federation, China and others. That might also be true with the BRICS: South Africa, India, Mexico," Gostin told DW.

Leaving the WHO would increase health risks of disease outbreaks

Withdrawal would also make the world a less healthy and safe place. Isolating itself from the global health community would put the US at a protective disadvantage during disease outbreaks.

"There are many things the United States can do alone, but preventing novel pathogens from crossing our borders simply is not one of them," Gostin said.

He points to the current concerns around H5N1 avian influenza in the US: "We're not going to have access to the scientific information that we need to be able to fight this because avian influenza is a globally circulating pathogen."

"WHO has an influenza hub where it monitors all the strains around the world. [The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] is a very close partner and we use those data to develop vaccines and therapeutics. We'd be flying blind," Gostin said.

Will the WHO have to make do without US money?Image: Fabrice Coffrini/AFP

Threat could force more change, and US win

Trump's withdrawing the US from the WHO would certainly transform the US-WHO relationship, but it wouldn't necessarily end it.

Burci is open-minded about what that future relationship could look like.He suggests the US could act like non-governmental organizations and charities by making voluntary contributions to programs it ideologically supports.

"[They] may continue to fund some projects [and] activities so it's possible that the WHO would not lose the entirety of the US contribution," Burci said.

Trump also casts himself as a dealmaker president, so he could use the withdrawal as a stick to force US-endorsed reforms in Geneva.

The WHO's performance in a modern world has long been criticized, and not just by the US. However Gostin notes some reforms have begun in the wake of its handling of COVID-19.

While WHO's "transformation agenda" has also been in place for nearly eight years, Trump may be able to further strong-arm change.

Gostin would rather see Trump engage his dealmaker than isolationist persona in his WHO dealings.

"He could send a letter withdrawing, or, he could do a deal with WHO to make it a better, more resilient, more accountable and transparent organization, which would be a win-win for the United States, for WHO and the world," Gostin said.

Edited by: Fred Schwaller

Matthew Ward Agius Journalist with a background reporting on history, science, health, climate and environment.

Germany: CDU, CSU prioritize Ukraine, defense. Voters don't

Rosalia Romaniec  

DW

January 12, 2025

During their election campaign, Germany's conservatives have prioritized defense spending and supplying more arms to Ukraine. Though they are polling well, their proposals do not reflect the priorities of German voters.



Merz (left) and CSU head Söder are divided over the issue of military support for Ukraine

Image: Michael Kappeler/picture alliance/dpa

The joint election manifesto for the Christian Democrats (CDU) and their Bavarian allies, the Christian Social Union (CSU) includes security guarantees for Ukraine that Germany could make good on along with the US and its European partners in NATO.

"Ukraine also defends us," the manifesto reads. "If Ukraine falls, there is the threat of an attack on another EU country."

The CDU and CSU consider it possible that Germany would participate in negotiations toward a ceasefire in Ukraine, even if that were to mean the deployment of Bundeswehr soldiers to keep the peace. Politicians for the parties are reluctant to talk about that part, as security is not a high priority for voters in February's election.
The Taurus question

The greatest skepticism about further arms deliveries to Ukraine comes from eastern Germany and the wealthy southern state of Bavaria.

So far, the government, led by Chancellor Olaf Scholz, of the center-left Social Democrats (SPD), has refused to supply Taurus cruise missiles on the grounds that Ukraine could use them to hit targets within Russia, which would make Germany a party to the war.

The US, the UK and France have already supplied similar longer-range weapons that allow Ukraine to strike targets across the border.

The argument that Germany should not allow itself to be drawn into the war was also used by Bavarian State Premiere Markus Söder, of the CSU, at his election campaign launch in Seeon.

But Söder did not respond to a question from DW about Taurus missiles, saying the decision would be up to the next chancellor.

Thomas Erndl, a CSU deputy who sits on the Bundestag's foreign affairs committee, told DW that "the opinion has become entrenched among the population that arms deliveries fuel war, while stopping deliveries slows it down."

"We have to contend with this mood," Erndl said.

CDU leader Friedrich Merz right, pictured meeting Ukrainian President Zelenskyy

Image: Efrem Lukatsky/AP Photo/picture alliance

The CDU's candidate for chancellor, Friedrich Merz, has publicly declared his willingness to supply Taurus missiles, but only in consultation with European NATO partners. However, the CDU/CSU election manifesto stakes out no clear position on the issue.

In contrast, the neoliberal Free Democrats (FDP) are in favor of "the immediate delivery of Taurus cruise missiles," while the SPD is clearly against it.

How decisively Germany's next government will ultimately act largely depends on two factors.
Money for defense

The first has to do with the geopolitical dynamics after January 20, when Donald Trump will be sworn in as US president for the second time. Trump is likely to put considerable pressure on Germany, both economically and in terms of security policy.

Decisions would have to be made more quickly, and more money would be needed, a high-ranking CDU politician from eastern Germany told DW. "When the ceasefire in Ukraine comes," the politician said, "we will have to pay for it."

The populist-presenting parties, the far-right Alternative for Germany and the Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance, have been particularly successful with their pro-Russia stance in eastern Germany.

The CDU and CSU have stated that they will not cave to Trump's demands that Germany spend 5% of GDP on defense, noting that the United States does not spend that much either.

The policy platform states that Germany would spend 2% of GDP on defense. The parties even advocate a target of 3% in a country where the arms industry holds considerable political sway.

The SPD 'handbrake'

The second factor on which Germany's security policy depends is the question of the makeup of any future coalition government.

"If the CDU/CSU were to govern with the SPD, security policy would proceed with the handbrake on," Gustav Gressel, a former senior research fellow with the European Council of Foreign Relations whose areas of expertise include Russia and defense policy, told DW.

Gressel said he expected members of the SPD who "continue the 'peace policy,' which is actually 'peace populism,'" to join such a government.

"The SPD would then fall back into its old position and use the fear strategy to distance itself from its larger coalition partner," Gressel said.

Merz would likely face critics on foreign and security policy issues both from within the coalition through the SPD and within the CDU and CSU, he said.

CDU/CSU, Greens aligned

A coalition between the CDU/CSU and the Greens, the junior partners in the current government, could put Germany in a leading position in terms of security policy more quickly.

The Greens have done a complete U-turn on security policy since Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. The party, which has many pacifists among its ranks, used to categorically reject arms deliveries to crisis regions.

Now, the Greens are among the biggest supporters of military aid for Ukraine — including the delivery of weapons systems.

CDU/CSU's policy plans

Though Taurus cruise missiles would not be a "game changer" in the war, Gressel said, they have become a powerful symbol of German angst.

Chancellor Scholz has "deliberately stirred up fear among the population with made-up arguments," Gressel said.

There is little doubt among experts and within the CDU/CSU that Germany would supply the Taurus missiles to Ukraine with Merz as chancellor as part of an overall effort to appear more robust on foreign policy than his predecessor.

This article was originally written in German.

Russia's Rosatom threatens to sue Germany's Siemens Energy

Andrey Gurkov  

DW

January 12, 2025

Russia's Rosatom energy company is building Turkey's first nuclear power plant. But construction has been delayed because of the nondelivery of German-made parts.

Construction of the power plant underway at Akkuyu, as at December 2024

Image: Serkan Avci/Andalou/picture alliance

The Russian state-owned energy corporation Rosatom reportedly plans to sue a German manufacturer for not delivering equipment meant for the construction of the Akkuyu nuclear power plant in southern Turkey.

The plant would be the first of its kind in Turkey. It is also the largest energy project in Turkey's history. On January 4, Rosatom boss Alexey Likhachev made serious accusations against the German supplier and referred to German industrial giant Siemens, even though he was actually talking about another company, Siemens Energy.

"We have noticed media reports about this, but we do not currently have a lawsuit," Siemens Energy's spokesperson Tim Proll-Gerwe told DW.

Rosatom chief Likhachev has accused Germany's Siemens Energy of delaying construction in TurkeyImage: Alexander Ryumin/ITAR-TASS/imago images

Siemens Energy was previously the energy technology division of Siemens, but in 2020 it became an independent company and was listed on the stock exchange. Siemens currently owns 17% of Siemens Energy.

Proll-Gerwe confirmed that Siemens Energy was supposed to supply gas-insulated equipment for the nuclear plant's power distribution system, critical equipment needed to connect it to the Turkish power grid.

The contract to do so was signed with the Russian company Elektroavtomatika in 2020, two years before Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine. According to its website, the St. Petersburg-headquartered company is a regular Rosatom supplier.

Export permissions granted

Siemens Energy had been waiting a "long time" for export permissions from the Federal Office for Economic Affairs and Export Control, or BAFA, Proll-Gerwe told DW, adding that the company adheres to all local regulations.

The necessary permits for exporting the components have, in the meantime, been obtained, Proll-Gerwe said, adding that Siemens Energy could meet its contractual obligations in Akkuyu "if the customer still wants."

However, substitute products have apparently already been found for the delayed Siemens Energy components, and Rosatom could be seeking compensation for its losses. That's what Likhachev seemed to allude to in comments about additional expenses and the "adjustment of installation dates" for the power plant.




It appears the Russian firm would like to blame construction delays in Turkey at least partially on Siemens Energy and on German bureaucracy. The contract for the construction of nuclear power plants in Turkey was first signed in 2010. The cornerstone for the first section of the plant was laid in 2018, and the first reactor is supposed to go online, at the earliest, this year. The whole project is supposed to be finished by 2028.

The substitute components in Turkey appear to be Chinese. Last September, Turkish Energy Minister Alparslan Bayraktar said Rosatom had ordered alternative parts from China. According to Russian news agency Interfax, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak explained that substitute components had been purchased from "friendly countries" and that some had already reached the power plant in Akkuyu.

In the time it took for German authorities to approve the exports, permission to export other equipment was granted much faster, German news outlet ntv reported in September 2024.

The contract between Rosatom and Turkey was first signed in May 2010 by former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev (left) and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan

Image: Burhan Ozbilici/AP Photo/picture alliance

Security issues?

But is it permissible for German companies to work with Russian businesses in a sector as sensitive as nuclear energy, given current tensions between Russia and the European Union?

"Siemens Energy ended all activities in Russia earlier and no longer has any contractual relationships there," Siemens Energy spokesperson Proll-Gerwe told DW. "Siemens Energy now only has to fulfill older, outstanding contracts, concluded before the start of the war in Ukraine. But, of course, this should always take place in accordance with any applicable sanctions and export control restrictions."

The Akkuyu nuclear power plant is in southern Turkey, sitting directly on the Mediterranean coast

Image: DHA

If BAFA has now issued an export license, it means Siemens Energy's equipment delivery to the Turkish nuclear power plant violates neither German export rules nor EU sanctions on Russia.

It seems unlikely, however, that Rosatom would replace Chinese deliveries with the delayed German equipment. So, there is a chance Siemens Energy could end up in court across from the Russian energy firm.

This story was originally published in Russian.

'Dubai chocolate' must come from Dubai, German court rules

A German court has had its say in the trademark battle over what legally constitutes "Dubai chocolate." Discount chain Aldi had been selling "Alyan Dubai Handmade Chocolate" — which is made in Turkey.


Dubai chocolates are filled with pistachio cream and crispy pastry threads

Image: Wolfgang Maria Weber/IMAGO

DW

January 12, 2025

A German court has banned a supermarket from selling a product as "Dubai chocolate," ruling that the trendy confectionary may only be labeled as such if it actually comes from the Emirate.

The court in the western city of Cologne ruled that the discount supermarket Aldi could no longer sell its "Alyan Dubai Handmade Chocolate" since the product in question was actually made in Turkey.

Aldi argued that this was made clear on the reverse label, but the court concluded that the product's name could lead consumers to assume "that the product is actually produced in Dubai and imported to Germany."

What's in a name?

The case had been brought by German candy importer Andreas Wilmers, who sells "Dubai chocolate" made by the brand "Fix" in Dubai.

In December, Wilmers filed similar complaints against Adli discount rival Lidl and Swiss confectioner Lindt that are ongoing.

Lidl has argued that the term "Dubai chocolate" merely refers to a type of chocolate with a creamy pistachio and "kadayif" filling, not to chocolate that specifically comes from Dubai.

The Association of the German Confectionary Industry (BDSI) also argued that "Dubai chocolate" could be produced anywhere in the world.

The court in Cologne disagrees, but Aldi could still appeal.

mf/lo (AFP, EPD)

Germany investigating suspected Russian drones over air base

Manching Air Base recorded at least 10 mysterious drone sightings in just one night. Authorities suspect that the activity is related to Russia's war in Ukraine.

DW

January 12, 2025

Authorities in Germany's southern state of Bavaria confirmed on Monday that up to 10 mysterious drones had recently been spotted above an air base.

Investigators have not ruled out espionage as a motive behind the drone flights, floating the possibility that they are connected to Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

Bavaria's State Criminal Police Office (LKA) said that officers had been able to detect at least ten drones flying above Manching Air Base near the city of Ingolstadt on Sunday evening.

String of similar incidents

Similar events were reported in December at Manching and nearby Neuburg an der Donau. The LKA believes the drone operators are trying to take pictures of military installations.

Later on Monday, it was announced that the Munich Public Prosecutor General's Office would be taking over the investigation.

Manching is used to test the airworthiness of new aircraft ordered for the German military.

Also in December, drones of unknown origin were spotted over Ramstein, the US air base in Germany.

es/lo (dpa, Reuters)

German-Iranian woman Nahid Taghavi released from prison

Amnesty International and Nahid Taghavi's family say she has been released from an Iranian prison after over four years. The women's rights activist had been sentenced to over 10 years for "propaganda against the state."

Women's rights activist Nahid Taghavi was arrested in October 2020

Image: Mariam Claren/dpa//picture alliance

DW

January 12, 2025

Women's rights activist Nahid Taghavi returned to Germany after over four years in custody in Iran late on Sunday, her family and Amnesty International announced early Monday.

According to Amnesty, she was tortured and put in solitary confinement, spending over 1,500 days in jail in Iran.

"It's over. Nahid is free! After more than 4 years as a political prisoner in the Islamic Republic of Iran my mother Nahid Taghavi was freed and is back in Germany," Taghavi's daughter Mariam Claren wrote online, posting an image of her and her mother at an airport.


Taghavi was arrested in October 2020 on a visit to Iran.

Her more than 10-year sentence for spreading "propaganda" and for membership of an illegal group was passed down in August 2021.
Daughter thanks supporters, says justice served

Mariam Claren had been campaigning for her mother's release while in Germany.

Taghavi's daughter Mariam Claren had publicly campaigned for her release, at events like this one in 2023 in Berlin

Image: Metodi Popow/picture alliance

"My mother is finally home," Claren said on Monday. "Mere words can't describe our joy. From Berlin to Tehran: your solidarity helped to achieve justice."

In Germany alone, more than 30,000 signatures were gathered demanding her release in recent years, with demonstrations in Berlin, Cologne and elsewhere.

However, Claren also said her mother was one case of many.

"Many more non-violent political prisoners like my mother are still in Iranian jails," she said. "The impunity of the Iranian authorities must come to an end."

Cologne football club also publicized Taghavi's case, with this big screen appeal for 'freedom for Cologne's Nahid Taghavi'

Image: Wunderl/BEAUTIFUL SPORTS//picture alliance

Taghavi, an architect who's lived in Cologne since 1983, was a vocal advocate of democratic and particularly women's rights in Iran.

The speaker of the Bundestag parliament, Bärbel Bas, said in a prior appeal for her release that she was "arrested as a political prisoner solely because of her peaceful realization or her rights to free expression and freedom of assembly."

European countries pressing Iran on prisoners

Late last week, both Switzerland and France summoned Iranian officials to protest their nationals in prison, a day after Iran reported the "suicide" of a Swiss national in jail.

A few days before that, another prominent prisoner in Iran, Italian journalist Cecilia Sala, was freed.

Like Taghavi, Sala had spent time in Tehran's notorious Evin Prison.

The fate of a German-Iranian US resident, Jamshid Sharmahd, was also in sharp focus late last year.

First Iran reported that the activist had been executed, prompting consulate closures and other reactions in Germany, before claiming around a week later that Sharmahd had in fact died shortly before a scheduled execution.

msh/ab (AFP, dpa)

DEUTSCHE WELLE

The unions have called for a strike at DW from January 14 to 15. We regret that current programs may be affected. The right to strike is protected by German law.