German environmental activists are facing increasingly harsh rhetoric and legal action from authorities as they mobilize to confront the climate crisis.

Last week, on May 21, Germany’s efforts to curb environmental activism took a disturbing turn when authorities used an offence typically reserved for prosecutorial pursuit of serious organized crime to indict Letzte Generation (Last Generation), a climate activist group known for disruptive protests such as roadblocks and other acts of civil disobedience, as a criminal organization. A conviction under federal law would pave the way for prosecuting anyone who participates in or supports Letzte Generation, including administratively or financially.

"This heavy-handed approach reflects a troubling trend in Europe of stifling civil society and climate activism", Human Rights,Watch says.

"Such actions chill public participation in protests against state policies or state inaction on a range of urgent issues."

The investigation into Letzte Generation as a criminal organization has involved armed police conducting predawn raids, storming private apartments while the activists were still asleep, and granting warrants for police to surveil the group’s communications, including calls made with media.

Last year the group’s website was temporarily seized during a fundraising campaign, with a notice from the police falsely labeling Letzte Generation a criminal organization and stating any donation constitutes illegal support for crime. This move by the police, despite no judicial assessment of the charges having taken place, exposes a deeply worrying bias against the group and raises questions about whether authorities are respecting due process.

International law protects the right to public participation in environmental matters and recognizes peaceful, nonviolent civil disobedience as a legitimate form of assembly. Disruptions like traffic blockades, while inconvenient, generally do not constitute violence under international standards, although damage to or destruction of private or public property may.

While civil disobedience often involves breaking national laws, authorities are required to respond proportionately, giving due weight to the right to protest and the importance to the public interest of the issues at stake.

The government’s extreme response to Letzte Generation’s activism appears disproportionate, threatens the very right to protest, and smears climate activists when their cause has never been more urgent. Instead of intimidating environmental defenders, Germany should live up to its commitment to ambitious climate action and investigate the concerns that groups like Letzte Generation raise.

- Volkswagen (VW) in 2023 commissioned a deeply flawed audit at a plant in China's Xinjiang province operated by a subsidiary of Volkswagen’s joint venture with SAIC, a Chinese state-owned carmaker.

- Although the audit found “no indications” of forced labor, audit manager Markus Löning, Germany’s former commissioner for human rights, conceded that the basis for the audit had been a review of documentation rather than interviews with workers, which he said could be “dangerous.”

- Löning added that “even if they [Chinese workers] would be aware of something [like forced labour], they cannot say that in an interview.”

- The NGO Human Rights Watch says that "the Chinese government’s pervasive surveillance and repression in Xinjiang means audits cannot credibly verify whether the facilities in the region are free from forced labor".--

Volkswagen should inform shareholders at its May 29, 2024 annual general meeting how the company plans to eliminate Uyghur forced labor in its operations and supply chains, Human Rights Watch and the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR) said today.

Since 2017, the Chinese government has perpetrated crimes against humanity in the northwestern Xinjiang region and subjected Uyghurs and other Turkic communities to forced labor inside and outside the region. Aluminum and other key materials used in car manufacturing are produced in Xinjiang by companies with links to government forced labor programs.

“Volkswagen’s ‘In China, for China’ strategy shouldn’t mean complicity in forced labor,” said Jim Wormington, senior researcher and advocate for corporate accountability at Human Rights Watch. “Shareholders should call upon Volkswagen to ensure that it will apply robust measures to tackle Uyghur forced labor in its supply chains.”

Volkswagen, which manufactures cars in China through joint ventures with Chinese carmakers, is failing to adequately investigate potential links between its supply chains in China and forced labor. The company in 2023 also commissioned a deeply flawed audit at a plant in Xinjiang operated by a subsidiary of Volkswagen’s joint venture with SAIC, a Chinese state-owned carmaker. The Chinese government’s pervasive surveillance and repression in Xinjiang means audits cannot credibly verify whether the facilities in the region are free from forced labor.

Volkswagen sells one in three of its cars in China. Volkswagen’s chief executive, Oliver Blume, on April 24 described China as the company’s “second home market.” Blume also announced the company’s updated “In China, for China” strategy, which includes expanded partnerships with Chinese car manufacturers, reduced manufacturing costs, and ambitious sales targets.

Volkswagen said in December 2023 that an audit overseen by Markus Löning, Germany’s former commissioner for human rights, found “no indications” of forced labor at the Xinjiang joint venture plant, which is used to road test cars assembled elsewhere in China. Löning conceded, however, that the basis for the audit had been a review of documentation rather than interviews with workers, which he said could be “dangerous.” He also said that “even if they [workers] would be aware of something, they cannot say that in an interview.”

Following the release of the audit, the German newspaper Handelsblatt on February 14 alleged that a contractor of a SAIC-Volkswagen Xinjiang subsidiary had used Uyghur forced labor during the construction of a Xinjiang test track, which was completed in 2019. In response, Volkswagen said that the 2023 audit of the Xinjiang plant did not include the test track, but that “to date, we have had no indications of human rights violations in connection with the test site.”

Volkswagen also said in February that it is “currently in talks with the non-controlled joint venture SAIC-Volkswagen regarding the future direction of the JVs [joint ventures] business activities in Xinjiang Province. Various scenarios are currently being examined intensively.” Shareholders should ask Volkswagen about the outcome of those discussions and push for the company to end its joint venture operations in Xinjiang.

The production of key materials for car manufacturing in Xinjiang also creates a risk that Volkswagen is sourcing products or materials linked to forced labor, both in factories across China and globally. Nearly 10 percent of the world’s aluminum, for example, is produced in Xinjiang before being shipped out, melted down, and made into products and parts used by car manufacturers and other industries. Aluminum producers in Xinjiang, and in the coal mines and coal plants that supply them, have participated in coercive labor transfers, a form of state-imposed forced labor.

In June 2023, ECCHR filed a complaint with the Federal Office for Economic Affairs and Export Control (Bundesamt für Wirtschaft und Ausfuhrkontrolle, BAFA), the German government authority overseeing the country’s Supply Chain Act. The complaint contends that Volkswagen, BMW, and Mercedes-Benz are violating their obligations under the law by failing to adopt appropriate measures to identify and prevent the risks of state-imposed forced labor in their supply chains. The BAFA has not yet responded publicly to the complaint.

Volkswagen in January told United States customs officials that a small electronic part was produced by a sub-supplier listed by US authorities in December 2023 as linked to Uyghur forced labor. US customs officials impounded vehicles containing the part while Volkswagen replaced it. Human Rights Watch asked Volkswagen on May 22 whether it has removed the part in vehicles sold outside the US but did not receive a response. A US Senate Finance Committee report in May found that Volkswagen had previously investigated the sub-supplier in 2020 and 2022 but found no connections to its supply chain.

Volkswagen is applying inadequate oversight to the supply chains of its Chinese joint ventures, such as SAIC-VW, which primarily manufacture cars for sale in China, the organizations said. Volkswagen contends that, under Germany’s supply chain law, it is not legally required to address human rights impacts in SAIC-VW’s supply chain because its joint venture agreement cedes operational control to SAIC.

Volkswagen in November 2023 told Human Rights Watch that the company “assumes responsibility … to use its leverage over its Chinese joint ventures to address the risk of human rights abuses.” But when asked about potential links between SAIC-Volkswagen and an aluminum producer in Xinjiang, Volkswagen responded: “We have no transparency about the supplier relationships of the non-controlled shareholding SAIC-Volkswagen.”

Volkswagen’s updated China strategy continues to rely on joint ventures and includes partnerships with SAIC and Chinese electric carmaker XPENG. ECCHR’s complaint said that cars manufactured by joint ventures should be considered as being part of Volkswagen’s supply chain, and therefore fall within the scope of its due diligence obligation under the German Supply Chain Act. Human Rights Watch asked Volkswagen on May 22 what steps it will take to ensure that strong human rights and responsible-sourcing standards apply to all current and future joint venture operations in China, but did not receive a reply.

“Volkswagen can’t simply wash its hands of responsibility for its Chinese joint ventures in full knowledge of the risks of forced labor,” said Chloé Bailey, senior legal advisor at ECCHR. “Shareholders should ask Volkswagen how it is responding to increased scrutiny over its operations in China and what steps it is taking to comply with its obligations under the German Supply Chain Act.”

cross-posted from: https://sopuli.xyz/post/13133455

It used to be that you could insert a coin into a washing machine and it would simply work. Now some Danish and German apartment owners have decided it’s a good idea to remove the cash payment option. So you have to visit a website and top-up your laundry account before using the laundry room.

Is this wise?

Points of failure with traditional coin-fed systems:

1. your coin gets stuck
2. you don’t have the right denomination of coins

Points of failure with this KYC cashless gung-ho digital transformation system:

1. your internet service goes down
2. the internet service of the laundry room goes down
3. the website is incompatible with your browser
4. the website forces 3rd party JavaScript that’s either broken or you don’t trust it
5. you cannot (or will not) solve CAPTCHA
6. the website rejects your IP address because it is a shared IP
7. the payment processor rejects your IP address because it is a shared IP
8. the bank rejects your IP address because it is a shared IP
9. the payment processor is Paypal and you do not want to share sensitive financial data with 600 corporations
10. the accepted payment forms do not match your payment cards
11. the accepted payment form matches, but your card is still rejected anyway for one of many undisclosed reasons:
    • your card is on the same network but foreign cards are refused
    • the payment processor does not like your IP address
    • the copy of your ID doc on file with the bank expired, and the bank’s way of telling you is to freeze your card
    • it’s one of these new online-only bank cards with no CVV code printed on the card so to get your CVV code you must install their app from Google’s Playstore (this expands into 20+ more points of failure)
12. your bank account is literally below the top-up minimum because you only have cash and your cashless bank does not accept cash deposits; so you cannot do laundry until you get a paycheck or arrange for an electronic transfer from a foreign bank at the cost of an extortionate exchange rate
13. you cannot open a bank account because Danish banks refuse to serve people who do not yet have their CPR number (a process that takes at least 1 month).
14. you are unbanked because of one of 24 reasons that Bruce Schneier does not know about
15. the internet works when you start the wash load, but fails sometime during the program so you cannot use the dryers; in which case you suddenly have to run out and buy hanging mechanisms as your wet clothes sit.
16. (edit) the app of your bank and/or the laundry service demands a newer phone OS than you have, and your phone maker quit offering updates.

In my case, I was hit with point of failure number 11. Payment processors never tell you why your payment is refused. They either give a uselessly vague error, or the web UI just refuses to move forward with no error, or the error is an intentional lie. Because e.g. if your payment is refused you are presumed to be a criminal unworthy of being informed.

Danish apartment management’s response to complaints: We are not obligated to serve you. Read the terms of your lease. There is a coin-operated laundromat 1km away.

Question: are we all being forced into this shitty cashless situation in order to ease the hunt for criminals?

Since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the name of blue-blooded Polish businessman Andre Mankowski has disappeared from the website of the Moscow-based IT company AMT Group, where he was formerly listed as president. Yet reporters found the EU citizen has continued to make money from the firm, which does business with Putin’s sanctioned regime.

> - Polish businessman Andre Mankowski, who is also a French citizen, has received payments worth almost $3 million in the past two years from Moscow-based companies AMT Group and AMT Group Telecom.

> - AMT Group has continued to do business with banks and other entities under U.S. and European sanctions since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

> - Mankowski founded AMT Group and was listed as its owner in public documents as recently as 2019. The company’s current ownership, however, could not be confirmed.

> - In the past two decades the Mankowski family, which is descended from Polish aristocracy, has poured money into a spa resort in the mountains of southern Poland. The company that manages the spa denies any of the funds have come from AMT Group.

Terry Reintke, the German Green MEP chair, said her group would “absolutely” not support von der Leyen – the incumbent centre-right commission president who is seeking a second term – if she made a deal with the Italian prime minister Giorgia Meloni’s group in the European parliament, the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR).

Reintke warned that if von der Leyen joined forces with the ECR, which has repeatedly voted against EU green policies, the EU’s plan to tackle the climate crisis would be in danger. “It’s much more likely that the green deal will be killed, or at least slowed down”. She said this would be “a disaster not only for the climate, but also for the economic standing of Europe” in the face of intense competition from the US and China.

"Ursula von der Leyen – when you look at her track record – she very often is a politician that follows the zeitgeist,” Reintke claimed. “And the zeitgeist in 2019 was towards green Europe. Now she has a lot of pressure from her own political group, and we know that EPP wants to turn back and basically say we do business as usual.”

Von der Leyen has twice refused to rule out working with Meloni, who she described as “clearly pro-European”. Rival candidates have excoriated von der Leyen for failing to mention the complaints of Italian journalists who have alleged “suffocating control” from Meloni’s government over their work. Von der Leyen has also glossed over the Italian government’s restrictions on LGBTQ+ rights, merely saying she took a “completely different approach”.

President Vladimir Putin said Tuesday that there would be “serious consequences” if Western countries allowed Ukraine to use their weapons to strike targets in Russia, as sought by Kyiv.

- Russian metal producers have primarily adopted blockchain-based alternatives to conventional payment systems to maintain their trading operations

- Previously, the Bank of Russia had considered a complete ban on all cryptocurrencies, but in November, Russian central bank governor Elvira Nabiullina said she supports experimenting with such payments in international transactions

Russian commodity firms have increasingly turned to cryptocurrency to circumvent financial hurdles posed by international sanctions.

With traditional banking channels facing challenges, companies are now leveraging stablecoins, notably Tether (USDT), to facilitate “seamless and swift cross-border transactions” with their Chinese counterparts, as reported by Bloomberg.

Major Russian metal producers have primarily adopted this transition, seeking efficient alternatives to conventional financial systems to maintain their trading operations.

How Stablecoins Are Transforming International Trade Finance

These developments respond to the extended economic ramifications of international sanctions following geopolitical tensions that began in early 2022.

According to Bloomberg, despite not being directly targeted by sanctions, these firms have encountered substantial obstacles in conducting business internationally, particularly in receiving payments and acquiring necessary materials and equipment.

Notably, adopting stablecoins appears to be a strategic move to preserve business continuity and mitigate the risks associated with frozen bank accounts and the slow pace of traditional banking transactions.

As disclosed, the appeal of using stablecoins like Tether’s USDT lies in their ability to facilitate transactions quickly and cheaply. Ivan Kozlov, a digital currency expert and co-founder at Resolv Labs, explained:

With stablecoins, the transfer may take just 5-15 seconds and cost a few cents, making such transactions pretty efficient when the sender already has an asset base in stablecoins.

Furthermore, Kozlov revealed that the use of cryptocurrencies in trade finance is gaining traction among unsanctioned firms and as a broader practice in countries facing financial restrictions or dollar “liquidity issues.”

This highlights a growing recognition of cryptocurrency’s potential to serve as a “reliable” medium for substantial international transactions, especially in environments where traditional financial systems pose considerable operational challenges.

Russia’s Current Crypto Stance

Meanwhile, integrating cryptocurrencies into Russia’s trade mechanisms also signifies a change in the country’s regulatory stance towards digital assets.

Bloomberg noted that initially skeptical, the Russian central bank has shifted its view, recognizing the potential benefits of cryptocurrencies in circumventing financial barriers.

The report read:

Previously, the Bank of Russia had considered a blanket ban on the use and creation of all cryptocurrencies, but in November, Governor Elvira Nabiullina told parliament that she supports experimenting with such payments in international transactions.

Amidst these developments, strategic advisors like Gabor Gurbacs from Tether and VanEck have advocated for the broader adoption of cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin by central banks, especially for those countries experiencing fiat currency devaluation.

Gurbacs suggests that adding Bitcoin to national reserves could provide economic stability and diversification, proposing that countries start allocating a small percentage to cryptocurrencies and gradually increasing their holdings.

Archived link

- Hungary takes over the rotating EU Council presidency on 1 July

- However, some EU diplomats say Hungary’s 'veto actions' might require a discussion about practical changes to the bloc’s decision-making processes

The foreign ministers gathered in Brussels focused on how the bloc could unlock funds from the EU’s off-budget European Peace Facility (EPF).

Hungary has been blocking partial reimbursements for weapons earmarked for Ukraine under the EU’s off-budget European Peace Facility (EPF) for almost a year, with the amount estimated at €6.5 billion – three reimbursement tranches and the new €5 billion-heavy Ukraine Assistance Fund (UAF).

Budapest initially cited Ukraine’s anti-corruption agency for having blacklisted Hungary’s OTP Bank as an “international sponsor of war” as one of the main reasons for their blockage. But while the bank has since then been removed from the blacklist, Hungary has kept the veto in place.

“There is growing frustration (to say the least), as the EU currently sits on €5 billion of support and very soon on the [Russian] windfall profits stemming from immobilised assets, which are at risk of not being used properly if there is no agreement,” one EU diplomat said.

In Monday’s discussion, Budapest was now quoted as saying that its economy is being discriminated against in Ukraine, according to people familiar with the discussions. The new explanation had drawn significant pushback from other EU counterparts, they said.

Inside the room, Germany’s Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock called on Budapest “to finally allow aid to Ukraine once again, because Europe is only strong if it is united.”

An increasing number of EU member states are starting to point to Hungary’s overall track record, rather than the fact that Budapest has ‘not yet completely vetoed’ any EU decision on Ukraine.

“We looked into this and about 41% of resolutions by the EU on Ukraine have been blocked by Hungary,” Lithuania’s Foreign Minister Gabrelius Landsbergis told reporters.

“The EPF is blocked; Ukraine’s accession talks are being held hostage by Hungary – and I could go on and on – the [EU’s] declaration on Georgia, the EPF [support] to Armenia – basically, almost all of our discussions and needed solutions and decisions (…) are being blocked by just one country,” Landsbergis said.

“We have to start seeing this as a systematic approach towards any efforts by the EU to have any meaningful role in foreign affairs – and we have to start talking about this,” he added.

Echoing the criticism, Belgium’s Foreign Minister Hadja Lahbib, whose country holds the EU’s rotating presidency, told reporters ahead of the talks: “We cannot accept that a single country, which also signed up to this amount a few months ago at the heads of state’s Council meeting, is now blocking this crucial aid for Ukraine.”

Estonia’s Foreign Margus Tsahkna said: “Every time we are coming here, we have to convince Hungary about not blocking very important initiatives.”

“This is crucial now for Ukraine, and also for Europe, to use these EPF funds,” Tsahkna added.

Italy’s Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani told reporters Rome would be “against the blocking. We want to move on.”

Hungary’s Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto did not answer questions from reporters heading into Monday’s talks.

EU diplomats said they expect the discussion on EU military aid to Ukraine now to shift towards Tuesday’s defence ministers meeting.

Should there be no breakthrough, EU ambassadors “will come together when needed to unlock this very unfortunate situation,” a second EU diplomat said.

Hungary takes over the rotating EU Council presidency on 1 July.

However, some EU diplomats have said they see Hungary’s veto actions as a pattern of behaviour that might require a discussion about practical changes to the bloc’s decision-making processes.

With Monday’s discussion having for the first time addressed the ‘overall picture’ of Hungary’s actions, a growing number of member states would increasingly see this as becoming a serious problem, people familiar with the discussion said.

Companies such as Avon Products, Air Liquide and Reckitt remain in country as bureaucratic obstacles to leaving increase

Western companies including Avon Products, Air Liquide and Reckitt have remained in Russia despite saying they planned to leave after the invasion of Ukraine, as bureaucratic obstacles increase and consumer activity rebounds. The Natura-owned cosmetics brand, the French industrial gas producer and the UK consumer group that produces everything from painkillers to condoms are among hundreds of western groups that have stayed in the country since the full-scale invasion in 2022. “Many European companies have found themselves really between a rock and a hard place,” said one executive working with western companies in the country. “They said they’d leave. They were presented with a choice of buyers that were unacceptable to them.” Overall, more than 2,100 multinationals have stayed in the Russia since 2022, the Kyiv School of Economics has found, compared with about 1,600 international companies that have either quit the market or scaled back operations.

Shortly after the 2022 invasion of Ukraine, scores of such groups pledged to scale back their presence in Russia as the west sought to starve the country’s economy and the Kremlin’s war coffers of foreign cash. But Moscow has gradually raised the cost of corporate departure, imposing a mandatory 50 per cent discount on assets from “unfriendly” countries sold to Russian buyers and a minimum 15 per cent “exit tax”. It has also been increasingly hard to find local buyers acceptable both to the seller and to Moscow and whose involvement does not fall foul of western sanctions. Air Liquide announced in September 2022 it had signed a memorandum of understanding to sell its Russia business to the team of local managers who had been running it. However, the deal never received Russian government approval, leaving the company in limbo.

Some companies no longer feel they are compelled to quit the country. Avon began a sales process for its Russian business and received offers but decided not to accept them. “For over 135 years, Avon has stood for women wherever they are in the world, regardless of ethnicity, nationality, age or religion,” the company said. While Reckitt announced in April 2022 that it had “begun a process aimed at transferring ownership of its Russian business”, its new chief executive Kris Licht has taken a more measured approach. “We continue to look at options but it has become more complex, not less complex,” he told the FT last month. “The initial conversation was, do you stay or go, and businesses paying taxes . . . I think we’re having a bit more of a nuanced conversation.” Multinationals have been mindful of the travails of western companies such as Carlsberg and Danone, which had their assets seized after announcing plans to leave. While Danone was eventually able to work out a deal to sell the assets at a steep discount, Carlsberg remains locked in a protracted legal battle with Moscow and one of the brewer’s former top executives is in a Russian prison. Alexandra Prokopenko, a non-resident fellow at Carnegie Russia Eurasia, said that rising wages and a rosier-than-expected economic situation had fuelled a spending boom, making Russia much more appealing for multinationals, particularly in the consumer sector. Prokopenko said that a recent wave of nationalisations that had targeted both foreign groups and local players remained “the major risk to foreign nationals in Russia”, adding: “So if they see this risk as manageable, why don’t they stay?” PepsiCo announced in March 2022 that it had suspended the sale and production of its flagship beverage in Russia but it continues to operate a dairy business in the country that employs 20,000 people directly and 40,000 agricultural workers indirectly. “As a food and beverage company, now more than ever we must stay true to the humanitarian aspect of our business. That means we have a responsibility to continue to offer our other products in Russia,” chief executive Ramon Laguarta wrote in an email to employees in September 2022. Rival Coca-Cola has stopped sending its soft drinks syrups to Russia, but the role has been filled by the drinks giant’s bottler in the region, Coca-Cola Hellenic, in which it holds a 21 per cent stake. In August 2022 the bottler created a standalone Russian company, Multon Partners, whose Russian versions of Coca-Cola brands include Dobry Cola, which has knocked the original Coke off the top spot as the country’s best-seller. “Dobry Cola is an extension of an existing brand in the market, produced and distributed by Multon Partners. It has no connection to The Coca-Cola Company or its brands,” said the bottler.

Among the more than 2,000 companies that have said they will stay in Russia — which include consumer groups Mondelez, Unilever, Nestlé and Philip Morris — some have become more open about their plans. Mondelez’s chief executive recently told the FT that investors did not “morally care” whether groups left the country. But there is a lack of clarity about some companies’ claimed divestments. US short seller Hindenburg Research revealed in March that Polish fashion retailer LPP’s goods were still being sold in Russia despite it announcing it had left the market in June 2022 after selling its business to an unidentified Chinese consortium. While LPP denied wrongdoing, it acknowledged it had been benefiting from sales to “transfer agents” to help fund the cost of the transition, a practice that would not be phased out until 2025. Austria’s Raiffeisen Bank International has also come under fire after the FT reported that dozens of Russia-based job advertisements it had posted indicated ambitious growth plans in the country, despite its pledge to quit the market. A second executive working with western companies in Russia said there had been a noticeable change in sentiment. While companies that left in the initial weeks after the invasion saw a moral imperative to do so, he said, “the current wave is more about, do you really have to leave? Do you want to leave? Some of these companies have built four, five factories over 30 years. They’re not going to sell that for a 90 per cent discount.” Activist investor and Unilever board member Nelson Peltz told the FT this year he had pressed the consumer goods group, which has explored options for a sale, not to leave. “If we pull out of Russia, they will take our brands for themselves. I don’t think that’s a good trade,” Peltz said, emphasising that rivals such as P&G and Colgate-Palmolive had not left the country. “Why the hell should we?”

Additional reporting by Sarah White in Paris and Max Seddon in Riga

The man, identified only as Thomas H, had been a captain in the army's procurement office when he contacted Russian embassy in Berlin and passed on secret military information.

German police arrested him in the city of Koblenz in August and accused him of sharing photographs of munitions training systems and aircraft technology.

The 54-year-old admitted to a Düsseldorf court on Monday to passing information to Russia, saying it was a "stupid idea" and that he regretted his actions.

"It is the biggest mess I have ever made in my life," he told the court.

Prosecutors said the man approached the Russian embassy in Berlin and the consulate in Bonn unprompted and "almost persistently offered himself to Russia".

They said he photographed sensitive military files and dropped information through a letterbox at the consulate building in Bonn.

In a closing statement, the man said he had contacted the embassy after becoming concerned about the risk of nuclear war driven by Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

He added that he was especially concerned that Germany's supply of heavy weapons to Ukraine could draw it into the conflict. According to government figures, Berlin supplied about €6.6bn (£5.62bn) worth of military hardware to Ukraine in 2022 and 2023. This included 40 Leopard 1 tanks and 100 infantry fighting vehicles.

The man claimed that chronic overwork had impaired his ability to think critically about his actions.

His lawyer said he had been influenced by a stream of pro-Russian propaganda and disinformation that he had been consuming on TikTok and Telegram at the time. He noted that his client had also joined the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party.

He added that the decision came during a four-day period "in which [his client] crossed red lines".

While prosecutors said the leaks had revealed sensitive military information, they noted that he had not disclosed state secrets, an act which would have attracted a much heavier lifetime sentence.

The trial comes as a slew of Russian spy affairs have hit headlines in Germany.

In April, two men with dual Russian-German citizenship were arrested, accused of spying on US army bases in Germany where Ukrainian soldiers were being trained.

Since December, an employee for German domestic intelligence, Carsten L, has been on trial accused of passing on classified data to Russian agents.

And in February 2023, a former security guard at the British embassy in Berlin was sentenced to 13 years in prison for passing on large amounts of sensitive information to the nearby Russian embassy.

The affairs have sparked a debate about whether security measures in Germany are tight enough. The government has admitted that more cases are likely to come to light.

In a recent television interview, Justice Minister Marco Buschmann said that Germany was a target for foreign powers. He added that over the next few months, more spies were likely to be “unmasked”.

Philip Lane brushed off fears that loosening eurozone monetary policy before U.S. Fed could backfire

France’s President Emmanuel Macron on Monday raised the alarm over the “ill wind” of the rise of the far right in European politics, during a state visit to Germany ahead of key EU elections.

European Union foreign ministers decided on Monday to impose sanctions on Russia's Federal Penitentiary Service and on 19 Russians for human rights violations after the death of opposition politician Alexei Navalny in a prison in February.

"Alexei Navalny’s shocking death was another sign of the accelerating and systematic repression by the Kremlin regime. We will spare no efforts to hold the Russian political leadership and authorities to account," EU Foreign Policy Chief Josep Borrell said in a statement.

The Kremlin has denied any state involvement in Navalny's death.

The sanctions include Russian judges, prosecutors and members of the judiciary. Their assets in the European Union, should they have any, are frozen and European companies are forbidden from making funds available to them.

The 19 people under sanctions also cannot enter, or transit through, the EU.

The new sanctions also restrict exports of equipment which might be used for internal repression and equipment, technology or software for use in information security and the monitoring or interception of telecommunication, the ministers said in a statement.

Poland will introduce restrictions on the movement of Russian diplomats on its territory due to Moscow's involvement in what it deems a hybrid war against the European Union, Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski said on Monday.

Relations between Poland and Russia have deteriorated sharply since Moscow sent tens of thousands of troops into neighbouring Ukraine in February 2022. Warsaw has also accused Moscow of spying and sabotage.

"These are national decisions, but we have evidence that the Russian state is involved in authorizing sabotage in our country as well. We hope that the Russian Federation will treat this as a very serious warning," Radoslaw Sikorski told journalists in Brussels.

The Russian embassy in Warsaw said it could not immediately comment as it had not received official information on the measures.

Sikorski said the embassy would receive a note on the matter soon and that the restriction would apply to all embassy and consulates' personnel except for the ambassador.

They will be allowed to travel only within the province where they are assigned.