Didžiausia opozicinė partija Tėvynės sąjunga-Lietuvos krikščionys demokratai (TS-LKD) šeštadienį Vilniuje rengia tarybos posėdį, kuriame aptars politinę padėtį, kalbėsis apie pasirengimą būsimiesiems savivaldos rinkimams.

Vilniuje, Šeimyniškių gatvėje, šeštadienio naktį žuvo automobilio partrenktas elektriniu dviračiu važiavęs nepilnametis, pranešė Policijos departamentas.

The Scandinavian country is currently grappling with children being recruited into violent gangs.

The Pope is appealing for a humane approach and respectful welcome for migrants seeking a better life.

Musk is now worth $1.11tn according to the Bloomberg rich list, while SpaceX listed on the Nasdaq stock exchange with a value of $2.2tn.

The ban forms part of the government's package of sanctions on Moscow due to the ongoing war with Ukraine.

Ivo Daalder, a former U.S. ambassador to NATO, is a senior fellow at Harvard University’s Belfer Center and host of the weekly podcast “World Review with Ivo Daalder.” He writes POLITICO’s From Across the Pond column. When news broke that the Pentagon wouldn’t sell long-range Tomahawk missiles to Germany, it suggested Washington might fear Moscow would view such a capability in Europe’s hands as dangerous escalation. The move came on the heels of similar signs of U.S. disengagement that had been going on for weeks, including the decision to withdraw 5,000 troops from Germany, halt the planned deployment of a U.S. battalion equipped with Tomahawk missiles, and make severe reductions in planned U.S. contributions of bombers, fighters, destroyers, submarines and other forces needed to bolster NATO defenses in a crisis or attack. The Pentagon claims these steps are necessary to rebalance European and U.S. contributions to the continent’s defense, but the decision to halt the Tomahawk sale points to a far more disquieting reality: Not only is Washington no longer deploying deep precision strike systems to Europe, it’s also denying its European allies the capacity to arm themselves with these systems out of fear of Russia’s reaction. In other words, the U.S. is now actively looking to decouple its security from Europe’s. This isn’t the first time decoupling has become an issue in transatlantic relations. Concerns over such decoupling first surfaced in the late 1950s, when the Soviet Union developed the capability to target the U.S. landmass directly and, again, in the mid-1970s, after the Soviet deployment of SS-20 nuclear ballistic missiles that could reach all of Europe — but not the U.S. After then-German Chancellor Helmut Schmidt called for a NATO response to this, alliance countries agreed in 1979 to deploy long-range nuclear missiles that could reach the Soviet Union while offering to negotiate limits on this type of missile. By 1987, NATO had deployed hundreds of nuclear missiles, leading Washington and Moscow to agree on a ban of all intermediate-range nuclear forces with ranges between 500 and 5,000 kilometers — including the Soviet SS-20s and NATO’s ground-launched cruise and Pershing II missiles. After then-German Chancellor Helmut Schmidt called for a NATO response to this, alliance countries agreed in 1979 to deploy long-range nuclear missiles that could reach the Soviet Union while offering to negotiate limits on this type of missile. | Keystone/Getty Images The Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, signed that year, remained in effect for more than 30 years — that is until 2019, when U.S. President Donald Trump’s first administration decided to withdraw from the agreement due to Russia’s clear violations of its terms. And NATO nations have been discussing the need to deploy long-range missiles capable of reaching targets in Russia ever since. The Tomahawk deployment and sale to Berlin looked to close that gap until Germany and other NATO countries could develop and deploy their own long-range missile systems. European missile development efforts are ongoing, but their expected deployment is still many years away. Now, Washington’s decision to halt the sale effectively reopens a major gap in NATO’s deterrence strategy. Moreover, though the fear of decoupling runs deep through NATO’s history, there is a major difference between the decoupling concerns expressed by Schmidt in the 1970s and those experienced today. Back then, decoupling was the result of Soviet actions, whereas today it’s the result of U.S. actions. Indeed, the Pentagon appears more influenced by Russia’s anxieties than NATO’s deterrence requirements. Fifty years ago, Europe feared U.S. disengagement. Today, as Washington shifts its attention and capabilities to other theaters, disengagement is explicit U.S. policy. And while ending what NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander in Europe Alexus G. Grynkewich called an “unhealthy co-dependence” on U.S. capabilities may be appropriate, denying European allies the ability to defend themselves is an entirely different matter. NATO has become “a one-way street where America is simply in a position to defend Europe,” but allies won’t reciprocate, maintained U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio. | Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images The timing of these U.S. decisions is especially ironic, following weeks of complaints by the Trump administration that NATO hasn’t done enough to support the U.S. and Israel’s war against Iran. NATO has become “a one-way street where America is simply in a position to defend Europe,” but allies won’t reciprocate, maintained U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Yet, when Europe steps up to defend itself — even asking to buy American equipment to do so — the answer is suddenly, “no.” That negative response isn’t just a temporary problem either. It goes to the very core of what makes a security alliance work. Classic alliance theory distinguishes between two fears: abandonment, when an ally won’t come to your defense; and entrapment, when an ally drags you into war. Trump and his aides have long complained about European abandonment. Europeans now fear U.S. abandonment. Both are right — and both are responding by decoupling further. As the U.S. pulls back, Europe is increasing defense spending and building a variety of long-range strike capabilities — some with dual conventional and nuclear capabilities. These are sovereign systems. The U.S. will have no say on when or how they would be used. As a result, Washington will have an even greater incentive to try and decouple itself from Europe and avoid getting entangled in a war with Russia. Decoupling does not mean Europe will be undefended. It means European and American security are no longer seen as intertwined. Washington may no longer automatically regard a crisis that threatens Warsaw or Tallinn as a threat to U.S. security. And that means the end of the integrated deterrence system that has kept the peace for the last 80 years. Schmidt understood that security is indivisible in Europe. Trump is betting it isn’t. We’re about to find out who was right. POLITICO occasionally publishes opinion pieces from guest authors to offer our readers a range of perspectives on the intersection of power and politics. The views expressed are those of the authors and do not reflect the views of POLITICO.

BRUSSELS — EU countries on Friday cleared the way for an overhaul of air passenger rights, approving a compromise deal that will affect everything from how easily passengers can file claims for canceled or delayed flights, to airline seating and baggage rules. The agreement, reached by the Cyprus Council presidency with the European Parliament after fraught, yearslong negotiations, was backed by a large majority of member countries. Only Spain and Latvia voted against, while Austria and Finland abstained, four diplomats told POLITICO. Parliament’s negotiators must still sign off on the compromise, obtained by POLITICO, by Monday before a final plenary vote of all MEPs in July, with the new rules expected to take effect in the second half of 2027. “The deal enshrines key air compensation rights in the law, in cases of cancellations or delays,” said Agustín Reyna, director general of the European Consumer Organisation. However, airlines were not impressed. The compromise is “bad law that infringes existing EU consumer protection rules without fixing the real issues of reducing delays and cancellations,” said Ourania Georgoutsakou, managing director of Airlines for Europe. Here are five takeaways from the new rules. Baggage and seating rules When the reform enters into force, airlines will have to include in the basic airfare not only a small bag that fits under the front seat, but also a trolley bag. That will probably make prices appear more expensive, particularly for low-cost airlines that charge travelers to bring a carry-on bag. But passengers will also be able to opt out of bringing a trolley bag and receive a discount on the ticket price. However, the rule leaves it up to airlines to decide the size and maximum weight of the trolley bag included in the basic airfare. The new rules will also prohibit airlines from charging fees to seat parents, or people accompanying children under 14, together with their kids, as well as passengers with disabilities and their accompanying person. Cash for delays or cancellations Most rules protecting passengers when a flight is delayed or canceled remain unchanged. When a flight is canceled or delayed by at least three hours, passengers will retain the right to compensation — in addition to a refund for a canceled flight — ranging from €250 to €600, depending on the length of the flight. The new rules also clarify that, for all flights over 3,500 kilometers, passengers would receive €300 for delays of of three to four hours, rising to €600 for delays exceeding four hours or for cancellations. Ease of applying for compensation Obligations for airlines to make it easier for passengers to file compensation claims — or at least be made aware of their rights in case of delay or cancellation — were among the most contentious points of the negotiations. Consumer rights advocates wanted to make more passengers aware of their rights, while airlines were worried this would lead more of them to file claims, driving up carriers’ costs. According to current rules, carriers must simply inform passengers of their rights when a disruption occurs. In the end, EU policymakers decided to require airlines to send passengers “clear instructions on how to submit a request” for compensation. This rule does not require airlines to include a link to the compensation form or a pre-filled form — two ideas pushed by Parliament but rejected by EU countries. Criteria for extraordinary circumstances The criteria was also revised for so-called extraordinary circumstances — cases in which airlines do not have to pay compensation to passengers for flights canceled or delayed because the disruption is outside carriers’ control. EU policymakers agreed that this concept “should refer to events which, by their nature or origin, are not inherent in the normal exercise of the activity of the air carrier concerned and are beyond that carrier’s actual control.” This means, for example, that if an airline cancels a flight because of an extreme weather event, it would only be required to refund the ticket to stranded passengers, who would not be entitled to any other compensation. “Unexpected flight safety shortcomings on aircraft equipment” was excluded from the criteria. Parliament negotiators vetoed this wording because they considered it too broad, potentially covering most technical problems that, according to case law, fall under airlines’ responsibility. Who gets paid? Passengers claiming compensation on their own will receive the money directly, while claim agencies seeking compensation on behalf of passengers will also be able to continue to receive payments from airlines. An earlier proposal would have made it possible only for a passenger to request compensation, threatening to put claim agencies out of business. Parliament successfully pushed to keep compensation payable to intermediaries, which sometimes go to court to defend passengers.

Members of a self-funded athletics club in Meru are proving that competition does not end with age.

UK court has sentenced four pro-Palestine activists to jail for a raid on an Israeli arms factory near Bristol in 2024.

Celebrated painter was known for works including the ‘Swimming Pool’ series

Resignation of UK defence secretary shows some governments will struggle to find the money

Team USA made a commanding statement in their World Cup campaign, defeating Paraguay 4-1 in their Group D opener at SoFi Stadium in Los Angeles. Despite a late Paraguayan rally, the co-hosts' attacking prowess proved too much for La Albirroja, with Folarin Balogun scoring twice to set the tone. 

Team USA put on a dominant display in their Group D opener, defeating Paraguay (4-1) at SoFi Stadium in Los Angeles. Folarin Balogun scored twice and Giovanni Reyna added a fourth as the USMNT made an emphatic statement on home soil, despite visa concerns and ticket prices that have overshadowed the tournament's opening days. Read our blog to see how the match unfolded.

Hundreds of mourners gathered in Kenya’s town of Gilgil to pay tribute to 16 students who lost their lives in a devastating school fire.

Police were deployed in large numbers in Nigeria’s capital as protesters took to the streets to denounce worsening insecurity and a surge in kidnappings.