标签： Europe

On a crisp Friday in Nuuk, the capital of Greenland, hundreds of local residents gathered outside the newly inaugurated American consulate to push back against what they see as growing United States overreach in the semi-autonomous Danish territory, sparked by former President Donald Trump’s long-stated ambition to expand U.S. influence over the Arctic island.

The demonstration capped a tense week that included the first official visit to Greenland by Jeff Landry, Trump’s special envoy for the region and the sitting Governor of Louisiana, a close ally of the U.S. president. Landry’s uninvited trip stirred immediate controversy, coming as high-stakes negotiations continue to resolve a diplomatic crisis triggered by Trump’s repeated public calls to acquire full control of Greenland for U.S. national security purposes. Landry departed for Washington D.C. on Wednesday evening and met with Trump at the White House Thursday, according to reporting from the BBC, though no readout of the closed-door meeting has been released.

Organizer Aqqalukkuluk Fontain made the crowd’s position clear from the start: Greenland’s elected government has already repeatedly rejected any U.S. claims to the territory, and that rejection remains unchanged. “Our government already told Donald Trump and his administration that Greenland is not for sale,” Fontain told reporters. Protesters marched through central Nuuk chanting “Greenland is for Greenlanders”, before gathering outside the new consulate to turn their backs on the building and stand in a united, silent demonstration against the U.S. presence. “Our message is for the American people and to the rest of the world,” Fontain, 37, told the BBC. “That in a democratic world, no means no.”

Many protesters echoed Fontain’s frustration, saying Landry’s trip and the opening of the new consulate represented a clear disregard for Greenlandic sovereignty. Inge Bisgaard, a protester in the crowd, told the BBC that residents were still recovering from the initial shock of Trump’s 2025 declaration that the U.S. should “own” Greenland, only for the debate to reignite early this year. “We get this fear from the United States. People were just recovering from last time, when it all began again in January,” she said. Twenty-five-year-old protester Parnuna Olsen went a step further, questioning why the U.S. required a large new diplomatic mission in Greenland at all.

The 3,000 square-meter consulate, a major upgrade from the United States’ previous small, cabin-sized diplomatic outpost, occupies a prominent central spot in downtown Nuuk. Locals have already nicknamed the high-rise building “Trump towers”, a nod to the president’s personal role in pushing for expanded U.S. presence, and for many Greenlandic residents, the new facility is an unwelcome marker of growing American influence at a deeply sensitive moment for regional relations. While U.S. Ambassador to Denmark Kenneth Howery opened the mission last week with a ukulele performance of the American national anthem and a plaque unveiling, Greenland’s top political leaders largely boycotted the event. Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen declined the invitation to attend, and no members of his cabinet were present. Naaja Nathanielsen, one of two Greenlandic members of the Danish parliament, also turned down her invitation, noting that the boycott was an intentional signal to Washington.

During his three-day trip, Landry attended a scheduled business summit but spent minimal time at the event, instead holding meetings with Nielsen, current and former Greenlandic foreign ministers, and local business leaders as part of what the U.S. describes as an effort to “build ties and make friends”. This so-called “charm offensive” failed to win over many local stakeholders, however, with multiple Greenlandic figures turning down meeting requests from Landry. In an interview with local newspaper *Sermitsiaq*, Landry stoked existing tensions by openly backing Greenland’s long-held hopes of full independence from Denmark, claiming “I think Greenland could have an equally good or even better economy as an independent country.” When pressed on whether the Trump administration would respect Greenland’s clearly stated red lines on sovereignty, Landry gave a provocative response: “There is only one line for us. It is red, white and blue.”

In a statement to the BBC following Landry’s meeting with Trump, a White House spokesperson offered only a vague, optimistic update on U.S. goals in the region, saying “The United States is optimistic that we are on a good trajectory to address U.S. national security interests in Greenland.” The spokesperson also praised Landry’s work, calling him “a strong asset to the world-class team that President Trump has put together.”

Trump has repeatedly framed his push for greater control over Greenland as a matter of critical U.S. national security, pointing to the island’s strategic location in the Arctic, where the U.S. competes for influence with Russia and China. A bilateral working group has been meeting to negotiate a new agreement that would expand U.S. military presence in Greenland, but no final deal has yet been reached. At the height of the Cold War, the U.S. maintained 17 active military bases across Greenland; today it only operates one, the Pituffik Space Base. Earlier this year, a U.S. Northern Command spokesperson confirmed the military is pursuing infrastructure upgrades at Pituffik, and is also evaluating additional potential base sites at Narsarsuaq and Kangerlussuaq.

While Greenland’s prime minister suggested this week that the working group talks were making gradual progress, a New York Times report published earlier this week laid bare deep sovereignty concerns among Greenlandic leaders and residents. According to the report, U.S. negotiators are demanding two key concessions: the right for U.S. troops to remain in Greenland indefinitely, and authority to veto major third-party infrastructure investments in the territory to block Chinese and Russian influence. The growing tensions come ahead of a key NATO security summit in Sweden Friday, where U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio is set to meet allied ministers to discuss Arctic regional security.

Fourteen years after one of the deadliest aviation disasters in modern European history, a Paris appeals court has upheld manslaughter convictions against two of France’s most iconic industrial firms, Airbus and Air France, over the 2009 crash of Flight 447 that claimed all 228 lives on board. But the ruling has sparked fresh legal wrangling, deep grief, and divided reactions among victims’ families, as the two companies immediately announced plans to appeal the verdict, extending a case that has already stretched for more than a decade.

The fatal flight, traveling from Rio de Janeiro to Paris on June 1, 2009, crashed into the Atlantic Ocean during a thunderstorm, disappearing from radar hours after departure. Recovery efforts took nearly two years, with search teams finally locating the aircraft wreckage and its critical black box flight recorders more than 13,000 feet (4,000 meters) below the ocean surface. Official investigations later confirmed that multiple overlapping failures led to the disaster: icing of the jet’s pitot tubes – external sensors that measure airspeed – combined with inadequate pilot response to the emergency caused the plane to lose control.

Longstanding scrutiny of the two companies has centered on systemic failures. An Associated Press investigation revealed Airbus had been aware of design flaws in the specific model of pitot tubes installed on the A330-200 aircraft as early as 2002, but did not order a replacement across the fleet until after the 2009 crash. Prosecutors also argued Airbus failed to promptly and clearly communicate the fault risks to partner airlines and flight crews, nor did it push for mandatory training to address potential sensor failures. For its part, Air France was found culpable for failing to implement specialized training for pilots to respond to pitot tube icing events, even after the hazard was documented.

The case has wound through French courts for years. In 2023, a lower first instance court acquitted both Airbus and Air France of manslaughter charges, a decision that triggered widespread anger and profound renewed grief among families who lost loved ones in the crash. Thursday’s appellate ruling overturned that acquittal, ordering each company to pay the maximum allowed fine of 225,000 euros (approximately $260,000). The conviction was welcomed by some victims’ representatives. Daniele Lamy, president of one victims’ association who lost her son Eric in the crash and attended both the original trial and this appellate proceeding, expressed support for the court’s decision. Victims’ lead attorney Alain Jakubowicz called the ruling a landmark win for ordinary people against global corporate giants, saying outside the courtroom, “there is no fight that it is unwinnable. Even when we are simply passengers, we can make global giants bend.” France’s National Union of Airline Pilots also endorsed the verdict, noting it was unacceptable to place full blame for the disaster solely on working pilots without accounting for the underlying institutional failures that set the stage for the crash.

Still, the fight for accountability remains far from over. Both Airbus and Air France have confirmed they will appeal the ruling to France’s highest court, a move that could extend the legal battle for years more. Air France said it regretted the conviction and acknowledged the appeal would prolong suffering for families, but defended its position noting its criminal liability had previously been thrown out by the lower court. Airbus said it seeks a reexamination of the core legal issues in the case before the highest judicial body.

For many families, the ongoing legal process has kept their grief raw, 15 years after the crash. Nelson Faria Marinho, a Brazilian victims’ association leader who lost his son in the disaster, says full justice remains out of reach. In his Rio de Janeiro home office, lined with newspaper clippings and photographs documenting his 15-year campaign for accountability, Marinho said the pain of losing a child is impossible to put into words. Unlike some victims’ groups, he has rejected the verdict as insufficient, saying he will not accept anything less than prison sentences for the corporate executives who led the companies at the time of the crash – a demand that goes beyond the scope of the current case, which has only examined institutional rather than individual criminal liability.

Marinho’s wife Maria Eva echoed the enduring pain of their loss, saying the disaster left countless families with permanent wounds. Still, she noted, “as long as there is life there is hope.”

While the legal battle continues, the crash has already left a lasting legacy on global aviation: in the years following the disaster, international regulators implemented sweeping changes to requirements for airspeed sensor design and maintenance, as well as updated mandatory pilot training for in-flight sensor emergencies, rules that have improved safety for passenger flights worldwide.

A mounting wave of wayward drone incursions into the airspace of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania has thrown the Baltic region into escalating security chaos, triggering multiple NATO jet deployments, the collapse of a national government, and a sharp diplomatic standoff between Russia, Ukraine and the three NATO-aligned states. On Wednesday, the highest levels of Lithuania’s government — including the country’s president and prime minister — were forced to evacuate to emergency bomb shelters inside the parliamentary complex in Vilnius after an air alert was activated over an unauthorized drone entry. The incursion forced a temporary shutdown of Vilnius International Airport, paused all urban traffic across the capital, and ordered ordinary residents to seek shelter alongside the nation’s top leaders.

This latest incident is part of a sharp uptick in unauthorized drone sightings that has disrupted daily life across all three Baltic states over the past week, a sharp escalation of a trend that has been unfolding since 2024. All three nations are longstanding NATO members and among the most unwavering supporters of Ukraine in its war against Russia, and the current crisis stems from Ukraine’s increasingly effective long-range drone campaign targeting Russian military and energy infrastructure along the Baltic Sea coast. As Ukrainian drones traverse northern Russian territory to reach targets such as the key oil export terminal at Ust-Luga, navigation disruptions and course deviations have repeatedly sent the unmanned aircraft straying across the Baltic border.

The growing frequency of incidents has already triggered major political upheaval: just last week, Latvia’s sitting government collapsed after facing widespread criticism over its handling of repeated Ukrainian drone incursions into Latvian territory. The day before Wednesday’s Lithuanian alert, a NATO interceptor shot down an errant drone over Estonian airspace. The following day, the incursion into Lithuania occurred, and by Thursday, both Lithuania and Latvia detected additional unauthorized drones, forcing NATO to scramble fighter jets for a second time in 48 hours.

Diplomatic finger-pointing has intensified alongside the security disruptions. Ukrainian officials have issued formal apologies for the incursions, arguing that Russian electronic warfare and GPS jamming are deliberately redirecting drones off their intended flight paths into Baltic airspace. For its part, Moscow has levelled fierce accusations that the Baltic states are complicit in allowing Ukraine to use their territory to launch attacks against Russian targets — claims that all three Baltic governments and Kyiv have vehemently denied.

Estonia’s foreign ministry flatly rejected Moscow’s assertions on Thursday, accusing Russia of waging a deliberate disinformation campaign of false claims, threats and provocations. “Let us be absolutely clear: Estonia has not allowed its territory or airspace to used for attacks against Russia. These claims are false and Russia knows it,” the ministry said in an official statement. Similar denials were issued by Latvia and Lithuania, with the claims drawing widespread pushback from European allies. Belgian Foreign Minister Maxime Prévot noted that the absurdity of Russia’s accusations would be laughable if they did not pose a serious threat to regional security. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen echoed that sentiment, placing full blame for the crisis on Moscow and Minsk: “Russia and Belarus bear direct responsibility for drones endangering the lives and security of people on our Eastern flank.”

Security analysts have put forward alternative explanations for the repeated errant drone strikes, which have already damaged an unused oil tank in Latvia and a power station pipeline in Estonia. While Russian jamming is the most commonly cited cause, some analysts note the relatively accurate strikes on infrastructure-like targets suggest artificial intelligence navigation errors may also play a role, with drones mistaking Baltic infrastructure for their pre-programmed Russian targets.

The case of Wednesday’s Lithuanian incursion has added additional layers of geopolitical uncertainty. Lithuania only shares a border with Russia via the small exclave of Kaliningrad, so any drone entering from the east must cross Belarusian airspace. The Lithuanian defence ministry confirmed Wednesday that it was actually Minsk that first notified Vilnius of the approaching drone, and that the unmanned aircraft was confirmed to have entered from Belarusian territory. That has sparked questions over why Belarus, a close Russian military ally, would warn its neighbor of the incoming drone rather than shoot it down itself. Minsk for its part has counter-accused Lithuania of allowing a Ukrainian drone to cross into Belarusian airspace.

Facing growing security pressure, the presidents of all three Baltic nations issued a joint public statement late Thursday calling on their NATO allies to upgrade the alliance’s current air policing mission in the region to a full, comprehensive air defence mission, to counter the rising drone threat.

The ongoing crisis has underscored the growing risk of escalation as Ukraine’s long-range strikes on Russian targets expand, bringing direct security disruption to NATO member states and raising the stakes for the alliance’s commitment to collective defence in Eastern Europe.

A shocking case of child abandonment has led to the arrest of two young French boys’ mother and stepfather, after the pair of children under five were discovered alone, crying, on the side of a rural highway in southern Portugal, law enforcement officials confirmed.

The children were located on Tuesday by a passing motorist close to the small town of Alcacer do Sal, according to Portuguese police. When they were found, the boys carried only small backpacks stocked with basic food and water, but no papers that could confirm their identities or connect them to their family.

The boys’ biological father had already filed a missing person report for his sons at their home in Colmar, eastern France, on May 11. Following the report, French authorities issued an international public appeal for assistance across the entire European Union to locate the missing children.

After a multi-jurisdiction search coordinated between law enforcement on both sides of the border, the suspect couple was tracked down and apprehended. Local Portuguese media reports indicate the pair was located after their vehicle was spotted parked outside a local cafe in Fatima, a popular pilgrimage city located roughly 180 kilometers north of where the children were found.

Portugal’s National Republican Guard confirmed in an official statement that officers took a 41-year-old woman and a 55-year-old man into custody. Authorities have not released the formal identities of the two arrested people, per standard investigative protocol. The pair are currently under investigation on three separate criminal charges: domestic violence, child endangerment, and child abandonment.

The good Samaritan driver who found the boys told reporters he first gave the hungry children food and comfort before contacting emergency services to notify police of the discovery.

Inquiries are now ongoing jointly between Portuguese and French law enforcement teams. Officials from both agencies noted that they have not yet reached any final conclusions about the case, and investigations are continuing to unfold. It remains unclear at this stage why the children were left on the roadside or what circumstances led to their disappearance from France.

Fifteen years after one of the deadliest aviation disasters in French history, a French appellate court has handed down a landmark guilty verdict against two major industry players: Air France and aerospace giant Airbus. On Thursday, the Paris Appeals Court reversed a 2023 lower court ruling that had cleared both companies of wrongdoing, finding them liable for corporate manslaughter in the June 1, 2009 crash of flight AF447.

The ill-fated flight, traveling from Rio de Janeiro to Paris, crashed into the Atlantic Ocean roughly 700 miles off the coast of South America, after its speed sensors failed during a storm, triggering an aerodynamic stall that sent the Airbus A330 plummeting 38,000 feet into the water. All 216 passengers and 12 crew members on board lost their lives, with victims hailing primarily from France, Brazil, and Germany.

The crash sparked one of the most complex and extensive search operations in aviation history. For nearly two years, the plane’s wreckage lay undisturbed on the deep ocean floor, spread across a 10,000-square-mile search area. It was only in 2011, after months of targeted deep-sea exploration, that investigators recovered the flight’s black box, which revealed the critical sequence of sensor failures and crew errors that led to the disaster.

Recovery efforts for victims’ remains were equally grueling. In the first three weeks of operations, just 51 bodies were pulled from the water, leaving many families waiting years to lay their loved ones to rest. Nelson Marinho, a father of one victim, told BBC News Brasil in 2019 that he did not get to bury his 40-year-old engineer son, Nelson Marinho Filho – the last passenger to board the flight that day – until more than two years after the crash.

When the first trial concluded in April 2023, the lower court had ruled there was insufficient evidence to prove the two companies bore legal responsibility for the disaster. Prosecutors and families of victims appealed that ruling, leading to the new verdict this week.

The court sentenced each company to pay the maximum possible fine under French law: €225,000 (approximately $261,700) apiece. But the fine has drawn sharp criticism from many victim families, who have dismissed the penalty as little more than a symbolic token. Even so, the guilty verdict marks a significant reputational blow to both companies, which have spent 15 years denying all liability in the crash.

During closing arguments in November, deputy prosecutors called the companies’ conduct “unacceptable,” accusing them of advancing baseless, unsubstantiated arguments to evade responsibility. Legal analysts in France now widely expect both firms to appeal the new ruling to France’s highest court. The BBC has reached out to both Air France and Airbus for public comment following the verdict, but has not yet received a response.