Connect with us

Diplomacy

Palantir CEO Alex Karp says he would not vote for ‘pro-Russian’ AfD in Germany

Published

on

The co-founder and chief executive of Palantir, Alex Karp, has stated that while he understands the rise of the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, he would not vote for the group if he lived in Germany, describing it as “pro-Russian”.

Speaking as a guest on a programme hosted by Mathias Döpfner, the chairman of the German media conglomerate Axel Springer, Karp addressed a wide range of subjects, including the war in Ukraine, artificial intelligence (AI), Palantir’s surveillance technologies, and the state of German politics.

Döpfner noted that when they first met at a party in 2003, Karp was viewed as an “interesting left-wing intellectual”. Asked how he had since transitioned into what some describe as a “dark figure of the radical right”, Karp rejected the characterisation, asserting that the image is inaccurate and that he receives widespread support when meeting ordinary people.

“Every investor in Silicon Valley would cut off their right arm to have a fanbase like ours,” Karp said. “Probably their left arm too.”

Asserting that Palantir’s products—specifically its data analytics and investigative software, Gotham—have made history by preventing terrorist attacks and playing a central role in the defence of Ukraine, Karp argued that a cultural divide exists between Europe and the United States.

“In the US, when it comes to a new technology, the first question asked is not whether we find the person behind it likeable,” Karp said. “Instead, the key question is: does the technology work? Is it better? Does it make companies more successful? In Europe, however, these questions are often not asked at all. Or at least, not in the right way. Because if these questions were taken seriously, one might reach the uncomfortable conclusion that a significant portion of technological infrastructure will, for the foreseeable future, have to come from the United States.”

While acknowledging that Palantir face rejection from certain sections of the political and media elite, Karp maintained that the vast majority of Germans simply want to know whether the company’s products are effective.

Karp claimed that his firm possesses the world’s only industrial-scale “application layer” of its size, which he said prevents data from being harvested or misused by large language model providers.

According to Karp, the supreme irony is that “in Europe, in the name of data protection, technically uninformed bureaucrats are fighting the very company that makes this data protection possible in the first place.”

Arguing that Europe suffers from a fundamental deficit in technological competence, the Palantir founder added: “Economically, Palantir does not need the European market. But Europe is very important to me. That is why this debate interests me.”

Comparing concepts of freedom, Karp observed that in the US, rights are primarily understood as protections against the state, whereas Europe places greater emphasis on economic rights.

Identifying himself as a progressive, Karp defined his philosophy as defending the rights of individuals “even if I do not personally like them”.

He described the frequent depiction of Palantir’s other co-founder, Peter Thiel, as “anti-democratic” or a “religious fanatic” as a scandal.

“I have known him since our time together at Stanford,” Karp said of Thiel. “He was a political outlier on the right back then, but he was certainly no enemy of democracy. The narratives about Peter rarely withstand objective scrutiny. The same applies to Palantir. Therefore, I find the question of why people still want to believe these stories far more interesting. My impression is that a very American form of political polarisation is blending with German traditions. What emerges is no longer a German debate, but an imported American culture war logic. Yet historically, Germany would ask a completely different question: not ‘do we like this person?’ but ‘can we afford the luxury of learning nothing from him?'”

Germany, Karp argued, should currently possess the world’s second-most powerful technology sector.

“Yet Germany is now barely represented in this league,” Karp said. “Germany’s largest listed company is Siemens. Palantir’s value today is significantly higher than Siemens’. In fact, I believe Palantir is still undervalued at present.”

Turning to German domestic politics, Karp described the rise of radical parties in the country as entirely predictable.

The Palantir executive argued that those who accepted large-scale migration into Germany “without involving the public and openly discussing the consequences” should not be surprised by the political outcome. He pointed to an “incredibly difficult and painful inability to speak openly about obvious facts” in Europe, and particularly in Germany.

At this point, Döpfner intervened, suggesting that Karp was avoiding the question and pressed further: “What do you think of the AfD? Palantir is assisting Ukraine in its war against Russia. In contrast, the AfD has repeatedly demanded that Ukraine be forced to negotiate with Russia. Leading representatives of the party reverse the roles of perpetrator and victim. How do you assess this? I ask this question so directly because some imply that Peter Thiel or you share a certain affinity with the AfD.”

Karp responded by emphasizing that whilst he understands why the AfD has achieved success, this does not mean he supports them.

“If I were a German citizen, I would not vote for them,” Karp said. “I have no interest in supporting a party that shows understanding for Putin or harbours sympathy for the Chinese Communist Party.”

He suggested that many people vote for the AfD as a protest, believing that established parties no longer wish to take issues like migration seriously or resolve them, which drives voters toward the AfD.

Karp noted that people who genuinely care about Germany have pointed to this development for years and have often been publicly discredited. Addressing Döpfner directly, Karp said: “You are a good example of this. My impression is that on many social issues, you are slightly to the left of the centre-left. Fundamentally, you would probably be classified by many Americans as a classical liberal or even mildly left-wing. Yet you are regularly attacked in Germany. All this while you resolutely oppose the AfD. You have no sympathy for Putin; on the contrary, we both know that Russia poses a direct threat to the West.”

Karp added that both he and Döpfner defend democracy, the West, and support for Ukraine. When Döpfner stated that he also views the success of the AfD as the result of a weak political centre, whilst rejecting the party as an alternative due to its pro-Russian, anti-American, and anti-capitalist stances, Karp responded: “I largely agree with that.”

Nonetheless, Karp maintained that many voters support the party not because of its broader platform, but because they feel ignored by the political establishment.

Karp acknowledged that AI represents both an opportunity and a threat. However, he argued that European discussions on AI often focus on issues that have already been settled in the US, describing it as though Europe is discussing a “light” version of the technology.

“Germany must reshape its industry with the help of AI,” Karp said. “The automotive industry, the chemical sector—practically all key industries are on the verge of a profound transformation. At the same time, the workforce is shrinking, energy costs remain high, and international competition is intensifying. There is only one serious answer to this: AI.”

Karp asserted that nothing will change unless the German Chancellor publicly declares that the country is in a crisis. He argued that Germany requires individuals who have successfully built global enterprises in the past, naming figures such as Tobias Lütke, Philipp Schindler, and Peter Thiel.

“This task cannot be solved by people who have never established a global technology company,” Karp claimed.

“Germany must do everything it can to win back such entrepreneurs and provide them with the necessary freedom,” he continued. “Technology companies do not emerge from a four-day working week. They are built by people who work for years with an almost fanatical dedication. Around the clock. And of course, this includes the ability to replace teams when things do not work out. This does not mean I fundamentally question workers’ rights. On the contrary. But a top engineer working in AI requires a different employment law framework than many traditional industrial professions. I would also establish a special economic zone—a region where the same competitive conditions apply as those in the United States, Israel, or China. Because this is where the global technology competition is taking place today.”

While admitting that AI carries risks, Karp argued that the primary danger does not lie in the existence of AI itself, but in the prospect of democratic societies failing to utilise its potential out of fear.

The chief executive stated he is certain that AI will raise the standard of living for most people, though he noted that those who develop and control these technologies could become 10, 20, or 100 times wealthier than they are today.

Recalling that past industrial revolutions enriched entrepreneurs, Karp added: “But inequalities remained within a framework that society could accept. Today, however, the wealth gap is reaching dimensions that many people cannot even imagine.”

Karp observed that societies have been divided for much longer than people care to admit. “When you add an unprecedented concentration of wealth to this social distance, a politically explosive environment is created,” he warned. “Many people fear becoming redundant.”

When asked by Döpfner about the geopolitical tech race between the West and an alliance of authoritarian states including China, Russia, and Iran, Karp expressed confidence that the moral standards of the Western world would serve as a competitive advantage.

He attributed part of Ukraine’s military success to Palantir’s ability to protect data and strengthen digital sovereignty.

“Technology does not develop in a vacuum,” Karp said. “Those who gain experience under real operational conditions gain an advantage. This is why I view China’s supposed advantages partly as disadvantages. It is often claimed that China has much larger volumes of data. What matters is not the quantity of data, but what can be done with it.”

Karp said it remains impossible to predict whether the US or China will lead technologically in a decade. However, he warned that if the West restricts technologies critical to its competitiveness, Russia, China, and Iran will immediately exploit the gap.

While Karp said he did not believe every campaign against Palantir was orchestrated by adversaries, he added: “But of course, authoritarian states attempt to influence these very debates.”

Acknowledging China’s significant capabilities, Karp argued that the primary challenge lies not in Beijing, but in whether Europe and America can maintain their political capacity to act.

“We must fight with all our strength to avoid waking up in societies where freedom and the rule of law are nothing more than memories,” Karp said, calling for a society where the best can succeed.

He described his vision of a society where as many people as possible have equal opportunities, but where outcomes depend on “talent, discipline, effort—and yes, to some extent, luck.”

Concluding his remarks, Karp said: “A society where the rule of law applies to everyone. A society where freedom of expression does not depend on whether an opinion pleases us. A society where data protection applies even to those we personally dislike. A society where state power remains limited, where people can be creative and are rewarded for their achievements. At the same time, a sufficient number of people must share in this prosperity so that social cohesion can be preserved. But what worries me is this: today, many people who consider themselves progressive are fighting against this very order. They define people by their origins or identities. They no longer treat freedom as a universal principle, but as a privilege. Palantir and I are working precisely against this—by giving people greater sovereignty over their data, and by supporting democracies like Ukraine, Israel, or the United States to defend themselves against authoritarian adversaries.”

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Diplomacy

North Korean hackers blamed for record $6.3bn Binance theft

Published

18 hours ago

on

30/10/2026

By

The world’s largest cryptocurrency exchange, Binance, has suffered an industry-record cyberattack amounting to $6.3 billion.

According to The Guardian, experts say the likely perpetrator is the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK).

Binance moved urgently to freeze the affected assets, and approximately $3 billion has been identified so far.

The company has not provided any update regarding the remaining $3.3 billion.

Binance co-founder Yi He said the company would cover “all cyberattack losses.”

Analysts attributed the assault to state-sponsored hackers from the DPRK. According to The Guardian, the DPRK has a history of cryptocurrency theft and, according to the FBI, was behind the theft of approximately $1.5 billion in virtual assets from a Tokyo-based cryptocurrency exchange last year.

That incident had set the record as the largest cryptocurrency theft recorded up to that point.

Crypto analytics firm TRM attributed the attack “with high confidence” to TraderTraitor, North Korea’s elite hacking unit.

Another analytics entity, Chainalysis, also linked the heist to TraderTraitor.

Binance has not explicitly confirmed that funds were stolen. However, TRM and Chainalysis claimed that more than $6 billion had been taken. The company stated that its teams were “working around the clock” to resolve the issue.

According to Binance’s statement, initial investigation findings revealed that the security breach may have begun with a hacked laptop belonging to one of Binance’s engineers, enabling an attacker to gain access to one of the company’s systems and execute unauthorised withdrawals.

Binance, which allows users to buy, sell, and trade digital assets, has 335 million registered users worldwide, and the total value of assets under its custody was approximately $162.8 billion, according to the exchange’s 2025 annual report.

“The bottom line is that your funds are safe and we are covering all losses,” said Richard Teng, one of Binance’s co-chief executives.

In a statement, the company said:

“As a precautionary measure, all deposits and withdrawals have been temporarily suspended while our security teams, with close support from law enforcement and industry partners, conduct checks, secure wallet infrastructure, and track affected assets.”

Markets reacted immediately early in the Asian trading session on Friday, with bitcoin, by far the most popular crypto asset, dropping by more than 3% to a six-week low of $76,368.

Shares of crypto exchange Coinbase Global lost 4.8%, while shares of bitcoin buyer Strategy fell by about 6% in extended trading on US markets.

Binance was founded in 2017 by Changpeng Zhao. Zhao pleaded guilty in the US in 2023 over failures to prevent money laundering on the platform. Donald Trump pardoned him in 2025.

In a post shared on X on Thursday, Zhao said, “User funds are safe!” but added that the incident “looks like a hack on Binance.”

Stating that he no longer manages Binance, Zhao said, “As a shareholder, I expect all user funds to be fully covered.”

According to Chainalysis and other industry experts, if confirmed, this could become the world’s largest cryptocurrency theft.

“This is the biggest hack in history,” said Aravind Srinivasan, head of the systematic OTC business at major crypto market maker GSR.

Analysts noted that beyond the potential loss of assets, the security breach could have broader repercussions across the cryptocurrency market.

Indeed, the cryptocurrency market had already been under pressure recently due to interest rate increases in the US and weakening demand from exchange-traded fund buyers.

Binance operates a secure asset fund for users; as stated on the company’s website, this fund is an emergency reserve held entirely in bitcoin, intended to protect user assets in the event of security breaches.

Stablecoin issuer Tether announced that it had frozen approximately $1.57 billion in assets linked to the incident, while Circle froze more than $800 million.

World Liberty Financial, a crypto firm linked to Trump and his family, said in a statement on Thursday that it was collaborating with cryptocurrency custody provider BitGo to freeze funds stolen in what it described as the Binance attack.

Yi from Binance said $27 million in stablecoins and roughly $2 million worth of World Liberty tokens had been frozen.

This development adds to a successive series of cryptocurrency thefts. According to researchers at TRM Labs, attackers stole $2.9 billion worth of cryptocurrency across roughly 150 attacks last year.

In September, cryptocurrency exchange Bitget announced that about $350 million worth of cryptocurrency had been stolen from its platform, highlighting the industry’s vulnerability to hackers.

Continue Reading

Diplomacy

Canada pursues closer EU partnership as summit opens

Published

18 hours ago

on

30/10/2026

By

Canadians are weighing the economic opportunities, regulatory hurdles, and questions of identity that closer cooperation with the EU would bring.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney is hosting European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and European Council President António Costa for a two-day summit focused on bolstering trade, security, technology, and people-to-people ties.

The leaders are expected to advance an ambitious new partnership that includes proposals referred to as an “Alliance of the Future” between Canada and the EU, promoted as an “ever closer union”.

So, what do Canadians think about this new agreement?

According to a February 2026 poll by survey firm Abacus Data, reported by Rapporteur, 74% of Canadians support closer cooperation with the EU on foreign policy, defence, and economic priorities. Only 10% oppose it, while 15% remain undecided.

This broad support masks diverging political attitudes. According to the poll, 60% of Liberal voters rank the EU among Canada’s top two partners, compared to 36% who include the US on that list.

Among Conservatives, the figures are reversed: 65% prioritise the US, while the proportion favouring the EU stands at 36%.

According to the Abacus Data survey, 48% of Canadians support EU membership, while 28% oppose it.

In remarks to Rapporteur, the polling firm said:

“The US still occupies a central place in the Canadian mindset, but this situation continues to change. Today it is still seen as the most important partner, but it is no longer in an uncontested position.”

Catherine Fortin LeFaivre, Vice President of Strategic Policy and Global Partnerships at the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, is eager to turn towards Europe during the Donald Trump era, yet harbours concerns about EU bureaucratic obstacles:

“Canada’s relationship with the US will always be vital, but the last two years have made the need for diversification impossible to ignore. Europe is a natural place to deepen economic ties. But what we do not want is to open the door to an added layer of regulation.”

Ontario farmer Hannah Hutchings shares this concern.

“The US is still an indispensable business partner,” Hutchings said, arguing that closer ties with the EU could help Canadian agricultural goods reach European consumers, provided they deliver economic benefits to farmers without generating further competition and regulation.

Although the EU-Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA), applied provisionally since 2017, has reduced trade barriers, it has not opened every market to Canadian exporters.

Michael Harvey, Executive Director of the Canadian Agri-Food Trade Alliance, said: “Closer relations offer an opportunity to work on trade possibilities with the EU and give us greater leverage in negotiations. For certain agricultural products, non-tariff barriers still block market access because the EU wants to impose its own criteria on the entire world.”

Harvey pointed to EU restrictions on growth hormones and crop protection products:

“In this period of rapprochement, we must work through these issues. Closer ties are received largely positively by the public, but the details will make the difference. This must be a win-win situation for both sides.”

Noting that she also sees opportunities for collaboration in agricultural innovation and sustainability, Hutchings drew attention to shared challenges such as rising costs, labour shortages, climate change, and attracting younger generations into farming.

For Canadian businesses, Europe’s appeal also lies in its predictability.

“Forecasting the cost of doing business with the US has become difficult. Europe is more reliable and makes it possible to conduct business planning, understand market entry costs, and anticipate trading conditions,” Fortin LeFaivre said.

The Canadian Chamber of Commerce has developed a tool named “Trade Explorer”, which helps businesses identify new export opportunities, particularly in Europe.

Jonathan Audet, co-founder and CEO of Quebec-based ski manufacturer Ferreol, entered the French market in late 2025 and generated 5% of his sales there.

Audet anticipates that his European market share will eventually outstrip Canada:

“The business environment is more favourable than in the US. Forging closer ties with the EU will boost exports and allow us to build commercial partnerships and co-innovation partnerships.”

However, Audet wants administrative procedures simplified, particularly when transporting product samples to trade missions in Europe.

“We are not going to sell them; we are only taking them to display the products, but from a customs perspective, this process is complicated. I have to apply for an ATA Carnet, a kind of passport for goods,” he said, citing delays, fees, and airport customs procedures.

Students see opportunities as well. Alex Simion, a Carleton University student in Ottawa and chair of the student union board of directors, supports easier access to education and employment opportunities in Europe.

“Carleton is a university with a large engineering student body. Students enthusiastically welcome the establishment of closer ties with the EU,” Simion said, calling for simplified visa procedures and improved access to student housing.

Yet uncertainty has not disappeared. “Most of us started high school while the Brexit process was unfolding, so growing up, we saw that something was wrong in the EU,” Simion said.

For him, this debate also raises deeper questions about Canadian identity.

“What does it mean to be Canadian? We are still trying to figure that out,” Simion said, questioning whether EU membership would erode Canada’s distinct identity:

“A closer bond makes it even more important that we find an answer to what being Canadian means before joining the EU.”

Continue Reading

Diplomacy

Ukraine economy set to shrink for first time since 2022, bank says

Published

18 hours ago

on

30/10/2026

By

Ukraine’s economy is set to shrink for the first time since 2022, according to a Bloomberg report citing projections from the National Bank of Ukraine.

The central bank forecasts that the country’s gross domestic product will contract by 0.4% by the end of this year.

The National Bank of Ukraine had previously projected that the economy would grow by 1.8%.

The country’s last economic contraction was recorded in 2022, when gross domestic product plunged by more than 30%.

The National Bank of Ukraine attributed the worsening forecast to Russian strikes, which it said led to a “sharp drop in business activity.”

The Russian Defence Ministry has repeatedly stressed that the strikes target only Ukrainian military and energy facilities, as well as infrastructure linked to them.

President Vladimir Putin said that the Russian military’s strikes against Ukrainian infrastructure were effective and timely actions because they helped troops resolve the combat tasks before them.

The National Bank of Ukraine expects the economy to return to a 0.4% growth path next year, driven by rising investment in the defence industry and other projects.

According to Bloomberg, the National Bank of Ukraine raised its policy rate following the deteriorating economic forecasts.

The central bank’s updated assessments point to higher inflation than previously expected.

Government cuts spending and switches to austerity mode

Ukrainian Prime Minister Sergey Koretskiy announced in late September that the country had switched to a maximum austerity regime and postponed all non-urgent spending.

Koretskiy had previously stated that the state of the country’s public finances was nearing a critical level.

Ukraine’s 2026 budget was approved with a deficit of approximately 1.9 trillion hryvnias, or $47.5 billion.

Describing the upcoming 2026 winter as “objectively difficult” for the country, Koretskiy pointed out that the funding gap in Ukraine’s energy sector remained at around 650 million euros ahead of the winter period.

The Ukrainian Finance Ministry estimates that the country will require nearly $146 billion in external financing between 2026 and 2029.

The International Monetary Fund, meanwhile, projects that Ukraine will face a financing gap of up to $54 billion through 2029.

At the beginning of the year, the European Union agreed on a 90 billion euro loan package for Kyiv, allocating 60 billion euros for defence spending and 30 billion euros for budget and economic support.

As of 14 October, Ukraine had received only 19.8 billion euros of the agreed loan, representing just 22% of the total amount.

The Moscow government condemns military support provided to Kyiv.

Russian Security Council Secretary Sergey Shoigu, assessing the EU loan to Ukraine, claimed that this policy was driving European states toward “the ultimate loss of their sovereignty.”

President Vladimir Putin stated that “the entire West” was helping Ukraine.

Putin said Russia reserves the right to use weapons against the military facilities of countries that allow their delivered weapons to be used in attacks on Russian territory.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey