Good morning, Revolutions need patience, and Serbian protestors might have finally run out of it. Over the weekend, the protests escalated after president Vučić refused an ultimatum. More people, more violence, and a near nationwide standstill. Our top story has more. We once again cover Italy's disastrous migrant hubs in Albania. A new investigation has revealed that, in addition to other failures, the hubs were a lot more pricey than we thought.  Editor's noteHazar Deniz Eker  Elections, anyone? Asking for 140,000 friendsNevena Vračar Serbians took to the streets once again this weekend, but this time song and optimism were replaced by teargas, rubber bullets, blood, and violent arrests – more than on all previous rallies combined. And there were many. According to CRTA, at least 5,242 protests and 901 citizens' assemblies have taken place in Serbia during the last eight months. Reminder – the protests began as a call to bring to justice those responsible for the Novi Sad railway station canopy collapse, strengthen the rule of law, and end rampant corruption in the country. By official estimates, more than 140,000 citizens followed students into the streets on 28 June to present president Vučić with an ultimatum: if you don't meet student demands, you must announce national elections by 21.00 Saturday, or the peace act ends. Unsurprisingly, he didn't budge. With no elections announced, the students declared Vučić's government illegitimate and gave citizens the green light to take over and radicalise the protests. As of 29 June, the country was brought to a near standstill with 96 simultaneously blocked main roads and bridges, as well as protests across the country, of which 40 are currently taking place in Belgrade. Citizens demand snap elections, for Ćaciland to finally be disbanded, and for all those unlawfully arrested during Saturday's protest to be released. But police pushbacks didn't end with the protest; they too have spilled into the streets, and tensions seem only to be escalating. This is no longer a student movement, but country-wide civic disobedience, and nothing about it feels destined to end peacefully.
When migration policy becomes a costly performanceItaly's "out-of-the-box" migration hubs in Albania aren't just a total failure, but also cost the Italian taxpayer more than expected. Newly published figures from Follow The Money (FTM) reveal that Italy has spent over €670 million since 2021 on the Albania deal: far higher than the early government estimate of around €200 million. By comparison, Italy's own migrant hubs cost about €20 million per year and are regularly used – though often criticised for violent and unlawful treatment. The Albanian hubs, designed for 1,000 beds, remain mostly empty due to legal blocks, making the €670 million+ spending shocking and wasteful. As of the first months of 2025, just 36 asylum seekers were transferred: a fraction of the capacity, following repeated legal setbacks. Italian courts have blocked more than 20 transfers, citing violations of constitutional and EU law. The project, co-financed with €150 million in European funds, is now drawing criticism from experts and opposition politicians, who view it as a costly exercise in political symbolism. With rising costs – reported to have increased by 12% last year – and minimal impact on arrivals, the deal raises questions about the allocation of public funds. According to the investigation, the hubs were financed through reallocated and emergency funds drawn from several unrelated ministries, including health, education and infrastructure. Approximately €15 million originally earmarked for healthcare services and €10 million from education budgets were diverted to support the project, alongside emergency funds totalling around €8 million from the ministry of interior.  | Benedetta Di Placido
These funds are essential for public services, but are instead used to prop up Italy's most violent and ineffective migrant pushback project to date. Not only is it failing, but it also directly undermines critical sectors, which are already struggling with inefficiency across most Italian regions. |
 Defence What does NATO's 5% spending pledge mean? Darius Kölsch Last Tuesday, next to breathtaking displays of submission to Trump, NATO countries agreed to up their defence spending pledge from 2% of GDP to 5% of GDP by 2035. It follows the broader trend of European governments massively ramping up their defence budget commitments. But what does this pledge mean for the continent, and how did leaders agree to such a large increase, despite many struggling to even meet 2%? Dissecting the 5%At least part of the answer is that not all of the 5% go directly to defence. For the new pledge, 'only' 3.5% of GDP shall be committed to the same categories as the original 2% pledge, such as new equipment, ongoing operations, and military personnel. But even those have considerable definitional wiggle room, including everything from retirement pensions and humanitarian missions to funding dual-use infrastructure such as airports or meteorological services. The remaining 1.5% are committed instead to "protect our critical infrastructure, defend our networks, ensure our civil preparedness and resilience, unleash innovation, and strengthen our defence industrial base." In other words, as long as you can plausibly explain that a civil project can have military value (for instance, by building or renovating a bridge or railways, or funding cybersecurity), it can fall under these 1,5%. For instance, civil defence could very well apply to investing in public transport or social welfare to minimise the effects of major disruptions that are already occurring through sabotage – something NATO Secretary-General Rutte mentions at every occasion. So, are these 5% attainable? Given the broad scope of the agreement's text, the answer is clearly yes. The more important question, however, is what it will be spent on. And while there's no way of knowing that yet, if the current securitisation trend is any indication, the 5% pledge will be used to justify cutting social spending and taking on debt that will have to be repaid by future generations – neither the only nor the best solution. Dodging the bulletThe next part of the answer is that the pledge does not apply to all NATO countries. The USA, NATO's top spender in absolute terms (thought not in percentage of GDP), secured an exemption from the 5%, arguing that the US' persistently high defence spending – as well as being the main security guarantor for the alliance – means it does not need to rearm like European countries. Most notoriously, Spain's prime minister Pedro Sanchez fought for – and got – an exemption for his country as well, changing the initial draft's 'we commit' to the final version's 'allies commit' to spending 5% on defence. But even among those who did commit, almost none of the governments in power at the moment will actually have to reach the 5% spending during their tenure. The goal to reach the 5% is set for 2035, far away enough for it to be another government's job to make unpopular decisions, allowing leaders now to claim decisive action on security and defence. Why 5% in the first place?The number was first brought up publicly by US president Trump in early January, where it was met with little credulity. Germany's chancellor Merz, then still running for office, said that "the 2, 3, or 5 percent is irrelevant", while Italian defence minister Crosetto noted that 5% would be "impossible for almost all nations of the world." And now, Europeans don't seem happy about the 5% either, with Crosetto commenting that NATO has "no reason to exist as it is" and called for a counter-summit just a week before the meeting in The Hague. But European countries – including Italy – have agreed to it anyway, because across the board, their leaders are bending the knee to the United States. For some, the deal is clearly viewed as horse-trading to avoid a further deterioration in trade relations. For most, the deal clearly aims to keep an increasingly authoritarian and uncooperative United States within and committed to the alliance, although it is hard to say whether that is to buy time until Europe's defence is ready, or simply to kick the can down the road.
Europe overseas The most distant point from continental Europe that is still technically part of Europe lies in New Caledonia. This island group in the southwest Pacific Ocean is located more than 16,000 km from France but remains one of its overseas territories. Across the world, 37 European overseas territories and outermost regions exist, each with varying degrees of autonomy. Some are integrated into the European Union, while others maintain broad self-governance. In several of these territories, debates over independence continue. In Greenland, separation from Denmark was a key issue in its last election earlier this year while the UK returned the Chagos Islands handed to Mauritius in late 2024.  Created by Laura Bejder Jensen.
Meet Italy's oldest and bloodiest sportAh, Florence! A city of art, culture, and centuries-old traditions. And every year in June, a city of brutal injuries – lots of them. If you have never heard of the Florentine historic football ("calcio storico" in Italian), picture this: 54 huge men fight each other with little to no rules, combining wrestling, rugby and boxing to steal the ball from the opposite team and score a goal. The sport originates from ancient Rome's military training, but the most iconic game occurred in 1530: while Florence was kept under siege by Charles V's troops, citizens started playing to mock the enemy, showing the invaders that they were having fun in spite of the siege. The modern version is an homage to that game, representing the symbol of the city's spirit, which no siege or attack could ever break. After almost 500 years, last Tuesday marked the final match of the 2025 edition: to many, it was the most important event of the year. With all the broken bones, endless runs across the field by first responders, and matches occasionally interrupted after turning too violent, calcio storico is still a unique part of Florentines' identity, pride, and history.  | Ludovica Di Meco
While performing at the Firenze Rocks festival on 15 June, Weezer's frontman Rivers Cuomo commented: "I saw the calcio storico on TV. You guys are crazy. I want to do that." Well, Rivers, I am not sure that I would. But someone else might be preparing for it right now: to be strong and ready for the next battle, players have to train all year long. |
Update: Greek newborns' DNA is now safeRemember the Greek newborn DNA scandal? The Greek health ministry had attempted a secret deal with two private companies, granting them access to the DNA data of 100,000 newborns. Following growing pressure and public outcry, the Greek health minister distanced himself from the deal that bore his signature and announced live on a radio station that the agreement had been put on hold. After investigative journalists revealed the deal, the public Child Health Institute took a strong stance and refused to deliver any blood samples without parental consent. In the days that followed, other scientific associations condemned the deal, opposition party MPs raised the issue in both the Greek and European Parliaments, and most importantly, 195 scientists signed an open petition calling for the project's cancellation. | | Nikos Goudis
This is a perfect example of how independent investigative journalism can drive real change, even in a tightly regulated field like public health. |
Every day, our correspondents recommend one song to you. Today, Hazar Deniz Eker chose this one. We hope you enjoy!  Ces p'tits Je t'aime Daniel Forestal There's no better way to cool down from the climate-change induced apocalyptic heatwaves across our continent than some tunes from Guadeloupe. Daniel Forestal's contribution to a diverse album featuring many artists from the French oversea territory is an addicting refresher amid the totally normal temperatures around us. Enjoy.
Listen on YoutubeListen on Spotify 〉Recommend a song for our next edition
I'm no expert on health policy, but it's probably a good call to not engage in backdoor dealings centred around the DNA of babies. Just a thought! Hazar Deniz Eker Leading Editor for Southern Europe PS: Can you tell us what you think of today's edition of the newsletter? Every day, as a small reward for your feedback, we will show you a cute animal picture. This newsletter was edited by Hazar Deniz Eker, the visuals were created by Hazar Deniz Eker, the language editor was Hannah Salih and the executive producer was Julius E. O. Fintelmann. |
|
|
|
|
