Deutsche Tageszeitung

Biden and Marcron, help against the Russian terror beasts

Ukraine: President Zelenskyy visits wounded soldiers

Ukraine: Pregnant woman and baby die after hospital attack

Ukraine: Pregnant woman and baby die after Mariupol hospital attack

Aftermath of a deadly attack on a residential block in Kyiv

Glory to heroic Ukraine! Слава героїчній Україні!

Ehre der heldenhaften Ukraine - Слава героїчній Україні - Glory to heroic Ukraine - Honneur à l'Ukraine héroïque - ¡Gloria a la heroica Ucrania!

Ehre der heldenhaften Ukraine! Слава героїчній Україні! Glory to heroic Ukraine! Honneur à l'Ukraine héroïque! ¡Gloria a la heroica Ucrania!

Call Russia: Speak of Russia's WAR against Ukraine

Ukraine President Zelenskyy slams the West for unkept "promises"

Against russian Terror-Army: Kherson citizens protest Russian occupation

'See what your friend Putin has done': A Polish mayor mocks Salvini for his previous support of Putin

Annamaria one of a million children: 10-year-old child who fled the war in Ukraine

Russians turn to VPNs to stay connected as online censorship tightens over Ukraine war

Is this Europe's plan for China?

Relations between Europe and China have changed rapidly in recent years. While China, as the world's second largest economy, has become an indispensable trading partner, concerns about dependencies, human rights issues and technological competitive conditions are also increasing. This raises the question for the European Union: how should it, as a union of states and an economic power, deal with China in the future?Economic opportunities and dependenciesChina is now the largest trading partner or at least one of the most important sales markets for numerous European countries. European export companies, particularly in the automotive and mechanical engineering sectors, are benefiting from the rapid development in the Far East. At the same time, there is a growing awareness that over-reliance on Chinese supply chains – for example, for the procurement of critical raw materials or important electronic components – entails economic and geopolitical risks.The European Union therefore wants to diversify its supply chains and markets. Part of this strategy lies in the targeted promotion of European technology and innovation projects, for example through the ‘European Chips Act’ or the advancement of its own battery cell and semiconductor production. The aim is to become a global engine of innovation and to reduce the one-sided dependence on imports from China.Value-oriented foreign policyEurope sees itself not only as an economic union, but also as a community of values that upholds the protection of human rights. In its cooperation with China, however, these principles regularly collide with Beijing's ideas of sovereignty and governance. For example, issues such as the situation in Xinjiang, the situation in Hong Kong or questions about freedom of expression and freedom of the press cause tensions.This leads to a balancing act: on the one hand, Europe wants to promote trade and investment with China, but on the other hand, it feels it has a duty to criticise human rights violations. At the diplomatic level, this means a combination of dialogue and, where necessary, economic or political pressure. The EU and individual member states are trying to send clear signals by imposing targeted sanctions or suspending certain agreements.Technology and competitionEurope also faces the challenge of safeguarding its technological sovereignty without losing access to the lucrative Chinese market. Whether it's 5G expansion, artificial intelligence or high-speed trains, China has shifted the innovation focus in many key technologies and is increasingly penetrating areas in which European companies have so far been leading. Conversely, European companies in sensitive sectors are reconsidering their cooperation with Chinese partners.Conclusion: constructively shaping mutual dependenceIn view of global challenges such as climate change or pandemics, pragmatic cooperation between Europe and China is unavoidable. The EU should pursue a multi-pronged approach: it must strengthen its economic and technological independence, represent clear values and assert its interests with confidence. At the same time, cooperation with Beijing is required to combat common problems, for example in climate protection.The key task for Europe is to find a way to promote trade and innovation without sacrificing important values and standards. The motto is: engagement where it makes sense for both sides – but also drawing clear boundaries when crucial principles are at stake.

Argentina, Milei and the US dollar?

Argentine economist and politician Javier Milei garnered significant attention with his proposal to dollarise Argentina’s economy. Renowned for his outspoken views, Milei argues that switching to the US dollar would tame the country’s runaway inflation and stabilise the monetary system. Yet, despite widespread debate, this radical measure has not been implemented. What factors are preventing a swift transition to the greenback?Complex Economic RealitiesOne of the chief barriers to immediate dollarisation is Argentina’s chronic lack of sufficient foreign reserves. Converting an entire national currency into US dollars requires a robust stockpile of hard currency to back deposits and transactions. Argentina’s reserves, however, have been under persistent pressure due to debt obligations, trade imbalances, and capital flight—hardly an ideal foundation for a large-scale monetary overhaul.Domestic Policy ConstraintsFurthermore, the proposal faces a host of domestic policy challenges. Any government considering dollarisation must align its fiscal policies with the new currency regime. This includes placing strict limits on deficit spending and overhauling public expenditure practices. Argentina’s entrenched budget deficits and reliance on monetary financing complicate these reforms considerably. Even if Milei could muster enough political support, balancing the budget and enacting austerity measures would likely spark domestic unrest.Institutional and Legal HurdlesThe Argentine Constitution does not explicitly prohibit the adoption of a foreign currency, yet the legal framework surrounding bank regulations, contracts, and state obligations complicates an abrupt switch. Existing debts, wages, and pensions—often denominated in pesos—would need to be recalculated. Moreover, securing approval from multiple layers of government, including Congress and provincial authorities, is no trivial task.IMF Concerns and International RelationsArgentina’s longstanding relationship with the International Monetary Fund further complicates attempts at dollarisation. The IMF, which has extended substantial loans to Argentina, tends to advocate for stable monetary frameworks but is often wary of extreme measures that might undermine the viability of sovereign financial systems. Any plan to scrap the peso would likely invite further scrutiny from international lenders and bondholders.The Road AheadWhile Javier Milei remains a vocal proponent of dollarisation, his vision must contend with Argentina’s political realities, economic constraints, and external obligations. Without broad consensus on budgetary discipline and robust foreign reserves, an abrupt adoption of the US dollar could prove disruptive. As a result, the push for dollarisation may be relegated to political rhetoric unless Argentina’s policymakers find the means and the will to enact deep structural changes.ConclusionFor now, Milei’s ambition has not materialised, serving instead as a flashpoint in Argentina’s ongoing economic debate. Whether the country will one day fully embrace dollarisation remains an open question—one hinging on both domestic consensus and international confidence in Argentina’s financial and institutional stability.

The Roman Empire and its downfall?

The fall of the Roman Empire has fascinated historians, political analysts, and history enthusiasts for centuries. Once an unparalleled power that stretched across much of Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East, Rome eventually succumbed to a complicated web of internal weaknesses and external pressures. But what factors most decisively contributed to its downfall?Overextension and Resource StrainOne prominent reason for the Empire’s decline lies in its vast territorial expanse. As the Empire expanded, maintaining military and administrative control over far-flung provinces became an immense challenge. Garrisoning remote frontiers and sustaining essential infrastructure, such as roads and aqueducts, placed enormous financial and logistical burdens on the imperial administration. Over time, these obligations led to heightened taxation and social unrest, eroding the Empire’s stability from within.Political Instability and Weak LeadershipAnother fundamental weakness was Rome’s inability to establish a consistent and resilient political structure. Frequent coups, civil wars, and assassinations destabilised the imperial government. Short-lived emperors were often more focused on consolidating power and eliminating rivals than enacting long-term reforms. This lack of continuity in governance engendered bureaucratic inefficiency and thwarted coherent policymaking, leaving Rome ill-prepared to address growing internal and external threats.Economic Decline and HyperinflationEconomic disruptions also played a pivotal role. As wars grew costlier, silver coinage was devalued repeatedly, leading to rampant inflation. Confidence in the currency eroded, triggering a cycle of price increases and diminishing trade. Many farmers abandoned their land, amplifying rural depopulation and further undermining agricultural productivity. Trade routes, once the arteries of Roman commerce, became perilous, stifling economic growth and rendering the state increasingly vulnerable.The Rise of External ThreatsSimultaneously, external forces took advantage of Rome’s weakening grip. Germanic tribes and other barbarian groups pressed against the Empire’s borders, sensing the growing fragility of Roman power. Although Rome had once managed to integrate or repel these incursions, mounting economic strain and military overextension hindered an effective response. Over time, repeated invasions culminated in the sacking of Rome by the Visigoths in 410 CE and the eventual deposition of the last Western Roman Emperor in 476 CE.Social and Cultural TransformationLastly, shifting social and cultural dynamics played a role. Traditional Roman values of civic duty and loyalty to the state gradually gave way to localised loyalties and a reliance on mercenary forces. The rise of Christianity, while not the sole cause of the Empire’s decline, reoriented cultural and political power away from older Roman institutions and towards the Church, reducing the emperors’ influence and the old civic order’s authority.Conclusion No single event or factor can wholly explain the collapse of the Roman Empire. Rather, it was the convergence of overextension, economic instability, political turmoil, and shifting social foundations that led to Rome’s ultimate disintegration. While debates on the precise causes continue, most historians agree that the empire’s downfall underscores the fragile balance between power, governance, and societal cohesion—an enduring lesson for any ambitious political system.

Trump needs to avoid debt Collapse

As Donald Trump commences his second tenure—this time as the 47th President of the United States—one of his administration’s most pressing challenges is preventing a potential debt collapse. The U.S. government’s outstanding liabilities have surged in recent years, raising concerns among economists, financial markets, and global partners alike. But why is it imperative for President Trump to avert such a crisis?Safeguarding Economic StabilityA default or debt crisis could trigger a chain reaction, undermining confidence in the U.S. financial system and sending shockwaves through global markets. The American dollar serves as the world’s primary reserve currency, underpinning countless international transactions. A significant disruption in U.S. debt repayments would thus erode trust in treasury bonds, widely regarded as one of the safest investment vehicles worldwide.Preserving Global StandingThe United States has long been viewed as a pillar of financial stability. Should Washington struggle to meet its debt obligations, both diplomatic and economic repercussions would be swift. Trade agreements might be thrown into disarray, with key allies reconsidering their long-term partnerships. Ensuring fiscal integrity is crucial if President Trump wishes to maintain America’s influence and credibility on the world stage.Protecting Domestic ProsperityA debt collapse would not merely affect international investors; it would have tangible consequences at home. Interest rates on consumer and business loans could spike, making mortgages, car payments, and credit more expensive for ordinary Americans. Additionally, a government scrambling to stabilise the budget might be forced to cut essential services or postpone vital infrastructure projects. President Trump’s electoral base, which seeks job growth and economic opportunity, would be disproportionately impacted by such austerity measures.Upholding Investor ConfidenceFinancial markets thrive on predictability. Even rumours of a potential default can destabilise share prices and unsettle bond markets, discouraging both domestic and foreign investors. President Trump’s administration aims to foster a business-friendly climate; allowing the national debt situation to spiral would stand at odds with this objective. Maintaining robust investor confidence is vital for job creation, entrepreneurship, and sustained economic expansion.ConclusionFor the 47th U.S. President, averting a debt collapse is about more than safeguarding government finances. It is about preserving America’s economic dynamism, retaining global leadership, and reassuring citizens that growth and stability remain priorities. A carefully managed fiscal strategy could prove decisive in cementing President Trump’s legacy as a steward of American prosperity.

Germany: Migration reform package

The German CDU/CSU party has received a majority in the Bundestag for its demands for a drastic tightening of asylum policy. Parliament approved a five-point motion that, among other things, calls for permanent border controls, the rejection of those seeking protection and the detention of foreigners who have been ordered to leave the country.The German FDP and AfD parties (Alternative for Germany) had signalled their support for the motion, meaning that the SPD and the Greens, including Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD) and Robert Habeck (Greens), failed miserably to prevent a change in asylum policy in Germany. The shameful fear of the SPD and the Greens of a complete loss of power in the outgoing Bundestag was almost tangible.AfD Chancellor candidate Alice Weidel addressed the issue of migration in her speech and said that the current SPD and Green policies were deadly and affected the whole country. She accused the red-green coalition of organising demonstrations ‘at the expense of the victims’. Weidel also criticises the incomprehensible grin photo of the Greens at the demonstration in Berlin, on the occasion of a memorial service for the victims of the murders of Aschafenburg.Before the vote, the ‘still’ Chancellor Olaf Scholz (66, SPD), who after almost four years has completely failed with his policies in the Federal Republic of Germany, made a government statement in which he could do nothing more than praise his government's work, as always. This was followed by a battle of words between the head of government and the opposition! In his speech, Merz emphasised that the SPD and the Greens are also ‘becoming smaller and smaller’. Friedrich Merz said: ‘Now they have to accept that the right decision will be made without them, but on the merits of the case. A right decision is not wrong if the wrong people agree to it’.

Russia's "Alliance" in the Balkans is sinking

Over the past decade, Russia has prided itself on maintaining strong relationships with several Balkan nations. This bond, often rooted in shared Slavic heritage, Orthodox Christian traditions, and historical ties, was once perceived as a strategic platform for Moscow to expand its influence in Southeast Europe. Yet recent developments suggest that Russia’s alliance in the Balkans is beginning to unravel, leaving the Kremlin facing new diplomatic challenges in a region long considered sympathetic to its interests.Eroding Political InfluenceSerbia has historically been Russia’s most steadfast partner in the Balkans, buoyed by a sense of cultural kinship and mutual geopolitical interests. However, Belgrade has gradually moved closer to the European Union, seeking membership and deepening economic cooperation with Western nations. While Serbia has not openly broken away from Russia, analysts point to its growing emphasis on European integration as a signal that Belgrade may be distancing itself from Moscow’s orbit.Montenegro, once firmly in Russia’s sphere of influence, joined NATO in 2017. This move was seen by many as a major blow to the Kremlin’s strategic goals in Southeast Europe, undermining the perception that the region was decidedly pro-Russian. The country’s pivot toward Western defense structures continues to stand as a stark reminder that Kremlin-friendly governments can rapidly realign when broader interests are at stake.Economic Factors and Energy TiesOne of Moscow’s most effective levers of power in the Balkans had been its role as a key energy supplier. Gas agreements and oil contracts bolstered Russia’s foothold, offering local governments reliable—if sometimes politically fraught—access to affordable energy. Yet Europe’s ongoing efforts to diversify its energy supply and reduce dependence on Russian resources have started to weaken Moscow’s sway.In Serbia, plans to link up with alternative pipelines from neighboring countries could mitigate Russia’s longstanding energy dominance. Meanwhile, Bosnia and Herzegovina, another state traditionally viewed as within Russia’s sphere, is actively discussing more diversified energy routes. These shifts dilute Russian economic clout and further complicate Moscow’s capacity to maintain a strong presence in the region.Shifting Public OpinionWhile Russia has long relied on cultural diplomacy to foster goodwill among Balkan citizens, recent surveys suggest a notable shift in public sentiment. The economic and social benefits of closer ties with the European Union—such as access to scholarships, visa-free travel, and foreign direct investment—have made many Balkan citizens view Brussels as a more appealing partner than Moscow.Moreover, Russia’s military actions on other fronts have prompted anxiety among certain Balkan populations who fear that aligning with Moscow could strain relationships with the West and hinder their own EU accession hopes. In societies where European integration is a near-universal aspiration, it is becoming increasingly challenging for pro-Russian narratives to maintain broad popular support.Geopolitical RamificationsRussia’s diminishing influence in the Balkans highlights a broader global trend: competing blocs vying for regional sway, with the EU, NATO, and other Western entities making decisive inroads. For the Kremlin, losing ground in Southeast Europe carries political and strategic consequences that ripple beyond the region. By the same token, Balkan states searching for reliable alliances may shift even more decisively toward Western institutions.Diplomatic experts note that unless Russia reevaluates its strategy—perhaps by offering new forms of economic or security cooperation—it risks being sidelined in a part of Europe it once considered a reliable staging ground for extending its influence.ConclusionAs Serbia edges closer to EU membership, Montenegro cements its position in NATO, and other Balkan countries explore alternative partnerships, the solid ties that once bound the region to Moscow are fraying. Historical and cultural connections remain, but for many Balkan governments, the imperatives of economic development and European integration are taking precedence over maintaining a robust alliance with Russia. Unless Moscow adapts its approach, it may find its influence in Southeast Europe reduced to a shadow of its former strength, marking the end of an era in Balkan geopolitics.

EU vs. Hungary: Lawsuit over ‘national sovereignty’ law

Brussels has stepped up its legal action against Hungary's "national sovereignty law," arguing it violates a wide range of fundamental rights.

Ukraine: Zelenskyy appeals for international aid

Ukrainian President met with several entities on Wednesday to discuss strengthening Ukraine's defence, as well as securing aid in preparation for the winter.

Lebanon: Is a new wave of refugees coming to the EU?

A representative for the UN's refugee agency told Euronews that Europe could be seen as a refuge amid fears of a growing humanitarian catastrophe in the Middle East, prompted by the conflict between Israel, Iran, Lebanon and Hamas.

Deutsche Tageszeitung - Last videos