Europe
Germany’s partial arms embargo unlikely to impact long-term defense ties with Israel
The deep and long-standing ties between German arms manufacturers and the Israeli military will continue despite Berlin’s decision to partially block arms sales to Tel Aviv.
Several high-value exports, including submarines and naval corvettes, are reportedly exempt from the ban, which only covers weapons likely to be used in Gaza.
Germany’s imports from Israel, including a major deal for the purchase of Arrow-3 missile defense systems, will also be unaffected.
“This is unlikely to affect the defense industry relations between Israel and Germany in the long term,” said Zain Hussain, an arms export expert at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), which monitors the global arms trade.
Germany is Israel’s second-largest supplier of “major weapons” after the US, and Hussain said, “Israel will continue to rely on these countries for most of its significant weapons capabilities.”
Merz’s restrictions ‘deliberately limited’
An unanswered question is whether shipments of German-made engines, transmissions, and spare parts for Israeli armored vehicles, which are widely used in Gaza and the West Bank, will continue.
A German government spokesperson declined to answer questions about tank parts on Monday, stating that each case would be evaluated individually.
Engine manufacturer MTU, reportedly among the suppliers, announced that it would comply with export control rules in the countries where it operates but would not comment on possible exports to Israel.
Muriel Asseburg, an Israel expert at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP), said that Merz’s restrictions were deliberately limited in scope and duration and therefore unlikely to have a long-term impact on defense relations, but added, “A partial embargo by Israel’s second-largest arms supplier still sends a message.”
German arms companies say they have not yet received information from the government
German defense industry players also remain in the dark on the matter. Hans Christoph Atzpodien, head of the German defense industry lobby group BDSV, told Euractiv on Monday that they “have no information beyond what is publicly available.”
Thyssenkrupp Marine Systems, which produces naval vessels for Israel, also said they “have not received any official information from the federal government.”
According to SIPRI, Israel’s Sa’ar 6 naval corvettes, built in part by Thyssenkrupp Marine Systems, are being used to strike targets in Gaza.
In an internal document addressing criticism from within his own CDU party, Merz said the ban would not apply to “air and sea defense equipment vital for Israel’s self-defense.”
Approval for 251 million euros in arms exports to Israel since the beginning of 2024
Details about Germany’s arms exports are largely confidential, and export licenses are secretly approved by Germany’s cabinet-level national security council. Apart from semi-annual figures on the total export value of defense products, very little information is officially disclosed.
Following the October 7 Al-Aqsa Flood operation, Germany granted arms export licenses to Israel worth approximately 326 million euros in 2023 after an expedited approval process. This figure is nearly ten times that of the previous year. In 2024, another 161 million euros were approved.
According to Ministry of Economy data, Germany exported approximately 90 million euros worth of weapons to Israel in the first half of 2025.
According to information obtained by Die Linke (The Left Party) through a parliamentary inquiry, the shipments included firearms, ammunition, weapon parts, special army and navy equipment, electronic devices, and special armored vehicles.
Asseburg said that it is not entirely clear from publicly available information which German-made weapons are being used directly in Gaza, but that even equipment used elsewhere enables Israel to use other weapons in its military operations.
She said that Germany’s deliveries of “corvettes, anti-tank weapons, mechanical parts for armored vehicles, armored vehicle ammunition, small arms, and small arms ammunition” are “important for Israel’s war in the Gaza Strip.”
Asseburg also added that Israel’s “extreme dependence on US arms deliveries and financing” means that the decisions of US President Donald Trump are “decisive” in influencing Israel’s behavior.
Renk threatens to move production out of Germany
German defense industry company Renk has threatened to move part of its production abroad to continue selling parts for Israeli tanks following Berlin’s announcement of an export embargo.
The head of the Bavaria-based group, which produces transmissions for Israeli tanks and armored vehicles, said it is their “responsibility” to ensure the country “maintains its deterrence capability.”
CEO Alexander Sagel told the Financial Times (FT) that Renk is still trying to understand the consequences of Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s announcement last week that he would suspend the sale of military products that could be used in Gaza.
Sagel stated that as a German company, Renk will comply with the country’s laws and regulations.
However, he added that the company, which has a market value of 6.3 billion euros, is considering other ways to fulfill its contracts if the ban is approved by Germany’s security council.
Sagel had previously told analysts that 2% to 3% of Renk’s sales are to Israel. “It is also clear that we are discussing a Plan B. Plan B is to move the production of these specific transmissions to the US,” Sagel said.
CEO Sagel: It is our responsibility to maintain Israel’s deterrence
When asked about the moral aspect of supplying tank parts to Israel, which is accused of widespread human rights violations, Sagel claimed it is a “difficult discussion.”
Sagel added, “Of course, we are following all the discussions regarding the Gaza Strip. But from Germany’s perspective, it is our responsibility to ensure that Israel maintains its deterrent power. This power is necessary not only in Gaza but also on other borders.”
Sagel declined to disclose the number of transmissions Renk is supposed to deliver to Israel but told analysts that the company is contracted to supply “hundreds” of products.
On Wednesday, Renk reported that its revenues for the first half of 2025 rose by 22% to 620 million euros compared to the same period last year, benefiting from an increase in defense spending in Europe. Adjusted profit before interest and taxes rose by 29% to 89 million euros.
Sagel said that if the embargo continues, it will affect Renk’s operating profit in the second half of the year by several million euros.
Armin Papperger, CEO of Rheinmetall, one of the continent’s largest defense companies, told the FT that his company, which produces a variety of products including tank ammunition, does not export any weapons to Israel.
Europe
China’s critical mineral restrictions challenge EU defence expansion plans
The European Union’s plans to expand its defence capabilities are being hindered by China’s export controls and sales restrictions on critical raw materials.
In response, EU leaders are urging member states to accelerate efforts to diversify supply chains.
According to Nikkei Asia, the European Commission announced last week that it would propose new legislation requiring companies across the bloc to broaden their supplier base in an effort to address economic imbalances, although it did not explicitly name China.
The war in Ukraine and growing uncertainty over Washington’s security guarantees have pushed European governments to increase military spending and defence production.
At the same time, according to a report published in May by Joris Teer, a policy analyst at the European Union Institute for Security Studies (EUISS), China accounts for at least 70% of global mining or refining activity in 17 of the 34 materials classified as critical by the EU. Eight of those 34 materials are currently subject to Chinese export controls.
“China is undermining Europe’s rearmament efforts,” Teer wrote. “Simply by activating this tool, China has already increased its leverage and demonstrated both the capability and willingness to restrict supply whenever it chooses.”
The Aerospace, Security and Defence Industries Association of Europe also warned that geopolitical developments and intensifying global competition for critical raw materials are further underscoring the need to strengthen European supply chains.
The organisation represents more than 4,000 companies, including Britain’s BAE Systems, France’s Thales and Germany’s Rheinmetall.
European defence manufacturers are pursuing a range of strategies, including vertical integration, recycling, diversification and stockpiling.
Rheinmetall told Nikkei Asia that it has “no dependencies” and is “well prepared” regarding critical minerals.
A company spokesperson said: “Rheinmetall has stockpiled key raw materials sufficient for several years. We have also implemented IT systems that allow us to centrally monitor and precisely manage raw material consumption across the entire group.”
Analysts, however, caution that stockpiling alone will not be sufficient. Maria Shagina, a researcher at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, said: “Stockpiling serves as an important buffer against sudden disruptions, but on its own it is unlikely to mitigate structural damage over the long term.”
Shagina added that replacing the volume and diversity of critical minerals controlled by Beijing with alternative sources would take years.
In 2024, the EU enacted the European Critical Raw Materials Act, aimed at rebuilding domestic supply chains for such minerals.
The legislation sets 2030 targets for domestic extraction, processing and recycling while limiting dependence on any single third-country supplier to 65%.
A €3 billion ($3.5 billion) fund was established last year to accelerate strategic projects.
Nevertheless, the European Court of Auditors has noted that the 2030 targets are not legally binding and that the EU remains far from achieving them.
Industry groups argue that policy inconsistencies could further slow progress.
The Cobalt Institute, which represents a sector vital to jet engines, advanced batteries and defence alloys, warned that proposed EU chemicals regulations risk undermining the industry.
“Europe has one foot in and one foot out,” said Michael Blakeney, head of government and public affairs at the London-based institute. “It says the right things, but its actions are inconsistent.”
Europe’s efforts are unfolding alongside a more aggressive US strategy to secure critical mineral supply chains.
Shagina said:
“The US is investing more capital to secure and expand capacity, taking greater financial risks and, in some cases, acquiring equity stakes. Europe, by contrast, is generally more cautious, which places it at a relative disadvantage in the competition for critical minerals.”
In April, the EU signed an agreement with the United States to coordinate supplies of critical minerals. Although some member states initially resisted over concerns that the deal could weaken the bloc’s strategic autonomy, they authorised the Commission in early June to join the US-led “Pax Silica” initiative, which coordinates investment and export-control policies.
Teer urged Europe to use ongoing US-EU-Japan negotiations as the nucleus of a broader coalition aimed at making critical mineral production outside China financially viable through state support, minimum-price mechanisms and supply rules.
“Particularly important are countries that either produce raw materials or possess significant mineral deposits, such as Malaysia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Brazil and Indonesia, as well as countries like India with large pools of skilled labour,” he said.
Teer also argued that the EU should activate its Anti-Coercion Instrument, which allows the bloc to impose tariffs and restrictions in response to economic pressure on countries outside the union, in order to deter China from introducing further restrictions.
A European Commission spokesperson said the bloc had “long been aware of the risks associated with the EU’s dependence on critical raw materials.”
“The objective is clear: to anticipate disruptions early and reduce the EU’s vulnerabilities while strengthening our industrial and defence capacities,” the spokesperson said.
Europe
Four European countries move to make citizenship harder to obtain
European countries are increasingly tightening their citizenship rules. Most recently, the Norwegian government has drafted legislation that would raise the minimum residency requirement for citizenship from three years to seven.
The proposed amendments to the citizenship law were presented by the Ministry of Labour and Social Inclusion.
Under the draft legislation, stateless individuals born in Norway, as well as those who arrived in the country as children, would be required to reside in Norway for at least five years before becoming eligible for citizenship.
The government also plans to increase residency requirements for foreign nationals who are married to or cohabiting with Norwegian citizens.
Language requirements are set to become more demanding as well. The proposal would raise the required level of spoken Norwegian proficiency from A2 to B1. The new rules would apply to applicants aged between 18 and 67.
Commenting on the changes, Minister of Labour and Social Inclusion Kjersti Stenseng said: “Obtaining and holding Norwegian citizenship should be a privilege.”
The government argues that simplifying administrative procedures while simultaneously tightening eligibility criteria will help reduce the country’s large backlog of pending applications and shorten processing times.
Norway is the latest European country to announce revisions to its citizenship rules.
In Finland, the minimum residency requirement for citizenship was increased from five years to eight years on October 1, 2024.
The country also plans to introduce a mandatory citizenship test for applicants aged between 18 and 64 from the beginning of 2027.
Finnish Interior Minister Mari Rantanen said: “The introduction of a citizenship test is the final component of a comprehensive reform aimed at making citizenship requirements more stringent.”
Sweden has also approved a similar reform. Beginning in June 2026, the standard residency requirement for citizenship will increase from five years to eight years. Authorities are also introducing a financial self-sufficiency requirement for applicants and expanding the scope of security screenings.
Explaining the rationale behind the changes, Migration Minister Johan Forssell said: “It was possible to become a citizen after living in the country for five years without knowing a single word of Swedish, learning anything about Swedish society, or even having one’s own source of income.”
The most far-reaching changes have been implemented in Portugal. Portuguese President Antonio Jose Seguro has signed legislation raising the minimum residency requirement for citizenship from five years to 10 years.
For citizens of the European Union and the Community of Portuguese Language Countries, the requirement has been set at seven years.
The residency period will now be calculated from the date a residence permit is granted rather than from the date a citizenship application is submitted. The new rules will also affect the children of immigrants.
Previously, children could obtain citizenship one year after birth if their parents held residence permits. Under the new rules, at least one parent must have legally resided in the country for a minimum of five years.
The law also introduces a mandatory examination covering Portuguese history, culture, values and social structures.
Migration policies are tightening across the European Union as well. On June 17, the European Parliament approved legislation allowing irregular migrants whose asylum applications have been rejected but who cannot be returned to their countries of origin to be deported to third countries.
The new EU rules permit the establishment of migrant detention centres outside the bloc’s borders. African countries are reportedly among the options being discussed for such facilities.
Europe
SpaceX warns EU satellite spectrum plan could disrupt connectivity in Ukraine
SpaceX has sharply criticised a European Union plan to restrict access to satellite spectrum, arguing that the proposal risks degrading connectivity in Ukraine and disrupting emergency communications services.
In a document shared with European officials and reviewed by the Financial Times, SpaceX warned:
“This proposal significantly increases the likelihood that Europeans will be deprived of direct-to-device satellite services, or that new European operations will create global interference issues, including for emergency services such as those operating in Ukraine.”
In a proposal unveiled in May, the EU recommended reserving part of the spectrum band used for direct satellite-to-smartphone connectivity for European operators, thereby limiting the frequencies available to US and Chinese providers.
The 2 GHz frequency band in question is currently used by two US companies, Viasat and EchoStar.
SpaceX argued that the EU plan prioritises “an operator’s country of establishment over economic, technical and regulatory realities.”
When the proposal was announced, EU technology chief Henna Virkkunen defended the move, saying the bloc wanted to “increase European capacity in this sector.” She added that other parts of the frequency band would remain open to international operators, arguing that prioritising European providers was justified.
Other participants involved in discussions over the proposal said some EU officials were specifically seeking to limit Elon Musk’s Starlink satellite network.
Europe’s initiative follows a warning from Washington. In March, the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) cautioned that it could take retaliatory measures if the EU chose to favour European satellite operators over alternatives such as Starlink.
At the time, FCC Chairman Brendan Carr told the Financial Times: “Some of the discussions in Europe regarding satellite sovereignty concern us. If Europe decides to move down that path, then, as you know, we will have to consider reciprocal measures.”
The European Commission’s proposal has not yet entered formal negotiations with EU member states or the European Parliament.
A source close to SpaceX said the company remained hopeful of influencing the outcome of the process, given concerns raised by both businesses and several European governments.
-
Europe2 weeks agoAfD says Ukraine should compensate Germany over Nord Stream sabotage
-
Asia2 weeks agoPentagon adds Alibaba, Baidu and BYD to list of firms with alleged Chinese military ties
-
Opinion1 week agoA voice rising from New Delhi: BRICS’s manifesto for a new world order
-
Europe2 weeks agoToyota and JLR warn EU ‘Made in Europe’ rules could threaten jobs and investment
-
America2 weeks agoWorld Cup referee from Somalia denied entry to US as immigration scrutiny intensifies
-
Middle East1 week agoMine clearing in Strait of Hormuz could delay shipping traffic for up to 50 days
-
America7 days agoData leak exposes Peter Thiel’s secret ‘Dialog’ network of politicians, regulators, and tech elites
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoTürkiye calls for Azerbaijan-Armenia peace treaty, highlights normalization steps with Yerevan
