King Charles and Queen Camilla will travel to Italy and the Vatican in April to meet with Pope Francis, as the Catholic Church celebrates a special Jubilee year, which takes place every quarter of a century.

The British monarch will join the expected 32 million people set to make the pilgrimage to the “Eternal City” this year. The Catholic Jubilee Year – or Holy Year – was established in the 14th century by Pope Boniface VIII and is 12 months focused on forgiveness and reconciliation.

Pilgrims are encouraged to pass through one of the “Holy Doors” located in Rome’s four major basilicas, while Francis has called for this jubilee to be centered on “hope,” which he underlined by opening the first “Holy Door” in a prison.

“Their Majesties The King and Queen will undertake State Visits to the Holy See and the Republic of Italy in early April 2025,” Buckingham Palace said on Thursday. “During Their Majesties’ State visit to the Holy See, The King and Queen will join His Holiness Pope Francis in celebrating the 2025 Jubilee Year.”

While in the country, Charles and Camilla are also set to shore up the bonds between Italy and the United Kingdom, carrying out engagements in Rome and Ravenna in the northern Emilia-Romagna region.

King Charles – who as the supreme governor of the Church of England is known to be deeply faithful and regularly attends services – has met Francis on several occasions. In fact, the upcoming trip will be their third encounter – though their first since Charles acceded the throne.

It will also be the second time that Francis has met a British monarch, with the pontiff having hosted Queen Elizabeth II and the Duke of Edinburgh in the Vatican in 2014.

Despite the turbulent past of the Reformation and King Henry VIII’s break with Rome almost 500 years ago, relations between the Vatican and the British monarchy are today marked by warmth and mutual respect. The UK and the Holy See have had full diplomatic relations since 1982.

King Charles and Francis are both passionate defenders of the environment and champion the importance of interfaith dialogue – topics that are likely to come up during their meeting. The King has also expressed support for persecuted Christians in the Middle East through his collaboration with a Catholic charity.

Relations have also been boosted by the King’s interest in religious faith and respect for the Catholic Church, while the Pope gifted relics of the True Cross, two wooden splinters from what is believed to be the cross on which Christ was crucified, for Charles’ coronation. The fragments were incorporated into a new processional cross that was specially made for the lavish religious ceremony in 2023 and was then gifted to the Church in Wales. Charles’ coronation was attended by two cardinals, one of whom was a personal representative of the Pope. It marked the first time in almost half a century that Catholic prelates were involved in a British coronation.

As Prince of Wales, Charles visited Vatican City on five occasions. He was present in St. Peter’s Square for the 2019 canonization ceremony of Saint John Henry Newman, an influential theologian who converted to Catholicism after years as an Anglican priest. At that time, the King wrote an article praising Newman and thanked the Pope for his environmental efforts.

Francis, who regularly meets world leaders when they visit Italy, will see the meeting as a chance to deepen relations with the King. In 2017, the Pope encouraged Charles to be a “man of peace,” to which the future King replied: “I’ll do my best.”

But it hasn’t always been plain sailing for the King when it comes to the Vatican.

In 2005, the then-Prince of Wales had to postpone his wedding to Camilla Parker-Bowles as it clashed with the funeral of Pope John Paul II. The prince himself attended the papal funeral but, awkwardly, during the service he shook hands with Zimbabwe’s brutal then-president Robert Mugabe while performing the sign of peace.

While the exact dates of the King and Queen’s forthcoming Italy trip have not yet been revealed, speculation is mounting that the visit could coincide with their 20th wedding anniversary on April 9.

Charles’ other two visits were in 2009 and 1985.

At the end of their meeting, Francis and Charles are expected to exchange gifts. When the Pope met Queen Elizabeth II, Francis gave her a gift for Prince George (then 8 months old). It was a Lapis Lazuli orb, decorated with a silver cross of the 11th century monarch Edward the Confessor, and on the base was engraved: “Pope Francis, to His Royal Highness Prince George of Cambridge.” The Queen in return gifted the Pope a hamper of produce from the royal estates.

And in 2017, the Pope gave Charles a copy of his encyclical on climate change, other papal writings, and a bronze olive branch signifying peace. Charles, who was accompanied on that trip by Camilla then as well, hadn’t come empty handed. He gave the Pope a hamper of produce from Highgrove, telling Francis: “It may come in handy.”

Donald Trump has begun his second term as president by ramping up pressure on Panama – threatening to “take back” the Panama Canal and accusing the country of ceding control of the critical waterway to a US rival: China.

“Above all, China is operating the Panama Canal. And we didn’t give it to China. We gave it to Panama, and we’re taking it back,” Trump claimed in his inaugural speech last month.

There’s no evidence that China controls the canal, which is run by an independent authority appointed by Panama’s government. Beijing has repeatedly denied that it has interfered in canal operations.

But the US concern comes as the Trump White House seeks to shore up national security, especially in its own neighborhood, and win an economic competition with China.

At the heart of Trump’s contentions are a Hong Kong-based company that operates two key ports at either end of the 50-mile long waterway – and broader concerns about Beijing’s expanding influence in a region of the world where the US has long been the dominant power.

Panama’s President José Raúl Mulino has said Panama’s sovereignty over the canal was not up for debate, but the country has made other concessions to US pressure.

Following a meeting with top US diplomat Marco Rubio last Sunday, Mulino said Panama would exit China’s Belt and Road infrastructure drive – a blow for Beijing, which had celebrated Panama as the first country in Latin America to join the program.

Panamanian officials last month also launched an audit of the Hong Kong-owned firm that operates two ports at either end the canal.

Chinese companies have become increasingly caught in the crosshairs of Washington’s national security concerns. Chinese-owned app TikTok and telecoms giant Huawei have been among private firms facing intense scrutiny in Washington over concerns that they are ultimately beholden to Beijing, despite their denials.

Here’s what to know about China’s involvement in the strategic channel.

Does China have a presence in the Panama Canal?

The Trump administration’s key concern is found at either end of the waterway, where two of the five ports that service the canal are operated by Panama Ports Company (PPC), part of a port operator owned by Hong Kong-based conglomerate CK Hutchison Holdings.

Based in a gleaming skyscraper in downtown Hong Kong, CK Hutchison is a publicly listed company and one of the world’s largest port operators, overseeing 53 ports in 24 countries, according to the company. It was first granted the concession over the two Panama Canal ports in 1997 when Panama and the US jointly administered the canal. That concession was renewed in 2021 for another 25 years.

Rubio ahead of his visit to Panama said Hong Kong-based companies “having control over the entry and exit points” of the canal is “completely unacceptable.”

Hong Kong, which came under Chinese control in 1997, is meant to have a high level of autonomy from mainland China, but Beijing has dramatically tightened its grip on the city in recent years following widespread pro-democracy protests.

“If there’s a conflict and China tells them, do everything you can to obstruct the canal so that the US can’t engage in trade and commerce, so that the US military and naval fleet cannot get to the Indo-Pacific fast enough, they would have to do it,” Rubio said in an interview with journalist Megyn Kelly, without directly naming the company.

The Hong Kong-owned operator PPC, however, does not control access to the Panama Canal.

The Hutchison ports are not the only China-linked firms involved in canal infrastructure.

A consortium comprised of state-backed China Harbour Engineering Company and China Communications Construction Company was awarded the contract to build a $1.4 billion highway bridge over the canal to ease traffic in Panama City.

Meanwhile, state-owned COSCO Shipping is a major canal client, with nearly 300 of its cargo ships navigating the waterway each year, including container ships, dry bulk carriers, and oil tankers, according to company data from 2018.

Does that give China ‘control’ over the canal?

There’s no evidence that the Chinese government controls the canal or of Chinese military activity in Panama, experts say.

But US officials’ concerns come amid a global scrutiny of Beijing’s efforts to build or secure access to commercial ports around the world – which could also benefit China’s expanding navy.

When it comes to the Panama Canal, some observers say that Chinese firms’ involvement in the canal and its infrastructure could give Beijing leverage – both in terms of commercial advantage and in the event of a potential future conflict with the US.

Rubio referenced this concern during a confirmation hearing for his post in January, saying that a “foreign power” possesses the ability, through their companies, “to turn the canal into a choke point in a moment of conflict.”

The strategic risk from a military perspective is that the more commercial assets that are linked to China around the canal, the more options Beijing has to block the US from moving military equipment through the waterway in the event of a conflict between them, according to R. Evan Ellis, a research professor of Latin American Studies at the U.S. Army War College Strategic Studies Institute.

“All of these operations, and the relationships with Panama Canal Authority … plus the technical knowledge that you get as a regular operator of the canal basically multiplies the possibilities that if you are (China) and you want to shut down the canal at a time of conflict, there are a thousand ways to do it,” he said, pointing to actions like attacking lock control systems or physically blocking the waterway. “Their physical presence, influence and technical knowledge … would make it harder for us to defend against.”

Federal Maritime Commission Chairman Louis Sola last week told Congress the US must also guard against “any effort by other interests in Panama to diminish the independence or professionalism of the (Panama Canal) Authority.”

A 1977 treaty laying out the return of the canal from the US to Panama requires the canal to remain neutral and allows for the US to intervene militarily if the waterway’s operations are disrupted by internal conflict or a foreign power.

However, some observers see little or limited sway from China at present.

The US is so firmly established as a the “pre-eminent” partner for Panama that any leverage over goods passing through the canal that China could hope for by enhancing its ties in the country is “capped and limited at best,” according to Brian Wong, a fellow at the University of Hong Kong’s Centre on Contemporary China and the World.

What kind of relationship does China have with Panama?

A 2018 state visit from Chinese leader Xi Jinping to the country of roughly 5 million underscored just how much emphasis Beijing – a major global exporter – has placed on building its ties with the strategically vital country.

Then, the countries inked some 19 agreements to collaborate on trade, infrastructure, banking, and tourism, while Xi declared their relations had “turned over a new chapter.”

That certainly was the case then. China and Panama only established diplomatic ties a year prior, after Panama stopped recognizing Taiwan as the government of China. That same year Panama became the first country in Latin America to join Xi’s flagship Belt and Road global infrastructure development initiative.

Those changes were accompanied by a flurry of bids from Chinese companies to build and invest – projects ranging from a $1 billion container terminal to a high-speed rail. Both those projects ultimately fizzled, as a change in Panama’s leadership brought greater scrutiny over such plans and US concerns drove more caution.

But Chinese firms have also had successes.

A China-built cruise ship terminal was inaugurated last year, while Chinese companies also have a significant presence in special trade zones near Colon and Panama Pacifico, experts say. Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei in 2015 opened a large distribution facility for its electronic systems from one of those zones.

Mulino’s decision not to stay involved in the Belt and Road initiative may signal a new stage of scrutiny on China’s presence in the country. But some observers say Beijing may not be phased.

“China will continue to make investment in Panama if the Central American nation needs the money, and China will continue to trade with Panama,” said Jiang Shixue, director of the Center for Latin American Studies at Shanghai University. Panama’s decision will merely signal to Beijing that “American pressure is so huge,” he added.

Meanwhile, there are signs that while China has an interest in expanding its footprint in the country, it may have other goals, in places with less potential resistance.

“Control of strategic chokepoints like the Panama Canal is probably among China’s goals,” said Will Freeman, Fellow for Latin America studies at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York.

“But it’s dwarfed in importance by a project like Chancay, the new Peruvian mega-port which will accelerate South America-China trade.”

US officials kept around 100 deported Indian migrants in shackles for their 40-hour flight home, including during bathroom breaks, in the latest incident to spark anger overseas at President Donald Trump’s migration crackdown.

Indian lawmakers demonstrated outside parliament on Thursday, some wearing shackles and others mocking the much-touted friendship between Trump and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

Elsewhere in New Delhi, members of the youth wing of India’s main opposition party burned an effigy of Trump.

Last month, the spectacle of Colombian deportees being shackled as they boarded a US deportation flight sparked a bitter dispute between the two countries, with Colombian president Gustavo Petro initially refusing the military plane permission to land.

The anger in India comes days ahead of an expected visit by Modi to meet Trump – whom he has called a “true friend” – at the White House.

S. Kuldeep Singh Dhaliwal, a government minister in the western state of Punjab, where the deportation flight landed, urged Modi to “now use his friendship to resolve the issue.”

Dhaliwal also questioned “the usefulness of this friendship if it cannot help Indian citizens in need,” his office said in a statement.

The flight to India was the longest in distance since the Trump administration began deploying military aircraft for migrant deportations, according to a US official.

“Our hands were cuffed and ankles tied with chains before we took the flight,” said 23-year-old Akashdeep Singh, who arrived in Punjab on Wednesday with 103 other deportees.

“We requested the military officials to take it off to eat or go to the bathroom but they treated us horribly and without any regard whatsoever,” Singh added.

“The way they looked at us, I’ll never forget it… We went to the bathroom with the shackles on. Right before landing, they removed (the shackles) for the women. We saw it. For us, they were removed after we landed by the local police officials.”

US Border Patrol Chief Michael W. Banks posted a video of the Indian deportees being put onto a plane on X. In the video, shackles are seen on the wrists and ankles of several men who shuffle slowly up the ramp.

‘Better life, better future’

Deportee Sukhpal Singh, 35, also said the shackles were kept on throughout the flight, including during a refueling stopover on the Pacific island of Guam.

“They treated us like criminals,” he said. “If we would try to stand because our legs were swelling due to the handcuffs they would yell at us to sit down.”

Young Indians looking for work opportunities have made up a sizeable portion of undocumented migrants in the US, many after making the dangerous trek through Latin America to reach the US southern border.

Many say they see no future at home where a jobs crisis is stifling young hopes in the world’s most populous country.

In just four years, the number of Indian citizens entering the US illegally has surged dramatically — from 8,027 in the 2018-19 fiscal year to 96,917 during 2022-23, government data showed.

“I had gone for work, for better life, for a better future,” said Sukhpal Singh, who has a son and daughter and hoped to better provide for them by getting a job in the US.

“You see it in movies and you hear from people around you that there’s work there and people are successful there so that’s why I also wanted to go.”

People on the streets of Ecuador can rattle off the places they have encountered criminals: On the bus, at the park, on the sidewalk, in a cab, by the mall, next to a restaurant.

And, while finger-counting, they can just as easily list what they lost in the multiple robberies or hours long kidnappings they have experienced: A full month’s salary; a second, third or fifth cellphone; a wallet.

So many of them have become crime victims since violence erupted in their country four years ago that they are no longer shaken by their friends’ stories of burglaries, carjackings or other offenses. Still, their personal and collective losses will be a determining factor Sunday, when they head to the ballot box to decide if a fourth president in as many years can turn Ecuador around or if incumbent President Daniel Noboa, deserves more time in office.

“Nothing has improved since the violence broke out,” Briggitte Hurtado said on a recent evening when her fashion jewelry stall and others on the boardwalk in the port city of Guayaquil had no customers.

“People used to go out more, and there was more activity on this area. I still don’t know who to vote for.”

Hurtado, 23, said she remains skeptical of Noboa because of her experiences since he became president in November 2023. She was robbed twice leaving work last year, but even worse, she said, was being driven around the city in a cab for four hours with her boyfriend until the driver and an associate managed to withdraw $800 from his account.

The spike in violence across the South American country is tied to the trafficking of cocaine produced in neighboring Colombia and Peru. Mexican, Colombian and Balkan cartels have set down roots in Ecuador and operate with assistance from local criminal gangs.

Sunday’s ballot features 16 candidates, including Noboa and leftist lawyer Luisa González, whom he defeated in the runoff of a snap election triggered by the decision of then-President Guillermo Lasso to dissolve the National Assembly and shorten his own mandate as a result. Noboa and González had only served short stints as lawmakers before launching their 2023 presidential campaigns.

Noboa and González, a mentee of former President Rafael Correa, are the frontrunners.

To win outright Sunday, a candidate needs 50% of the vote or at least 40% with a 10-point lead over the closest opponent. If needed, a runoff election would take place on April 13.

“People start thinking ‘How’s Noboa?’ But they immediately ask, ‘Do I want to return to Correismo or not?’” Will Freeman, a fellow for Latin American relations at the Council on Foreign Relations, said referring to the free-spending socially conservative movement labeled after Correa who governed Ecuador from 2007 through 2017, grew increasingly authoritarian in the latter years of his presidency and was sentenced to prison in absentia in 2020 in a corruption scandal.

“That to me is the biggest thing playing in Noboa’s favor right now, and obviously, he’s extremely lucky that’s the way people assess politics because I do think people are voting a bit less for him than against Correismo still.”

González, 47, held various government jobs during Correa’s presidency and was a lawmaker until May 2023. She was unknown to most voters until his party picked her as its presidential candidate that year.

Noboa, 37, is an heir to a fortune built on the banana trade. His political career began in 2021, when he won a seat in the National Assembly and chaired its Economic Development Commission. He opened an event organizing company when he was 18 and then joined his father’s Noboa Corp., where he held management positions in the shipping, logistics and commercial areas.

Under his presidency, the homicide rate dropped from 8,237, or 46.18 per 100,000 people, in 2023 to 6,964, or 38.76 per 100,000 people, last year. Still, it remained far higher than the 1,188 homicides, or 6.85 per 100,000 people, in 2019.

Kidnappings increased from 1,643 cases in 2023 to 1,761 through November 2024.

But while Noboa has delivered with the type of no-holds-barred crimefighting that some voters find appealing, he has also tested the limits of laws and norms of governing.

The country has been under a state of emergency since he authorized it in January 2024 in order to mobilize the military in certain places, including prisons, where organized crime has taken hold. To the shock and bewilderment of world leaders, Noboa also authorized last year’s police raid on Mexico’s embassy in the capital, Quito, to arrest former Vice President Jorge Glas, a convicted criminal and fugitive who had been living there for months.

Further, he entrusted presidential powers earlier this year to a government official, not elected Vice President Verónica Abad, while he campaigned. Both began feuding before taking office.

The origins of the dispute are unknown, but shortly after becoming president, Noboa dispatched Abad to serve as ambassador to Israel, effectively isolating her from his administration. She has described her monthslong posting as “forced exile.”

Voting in Ecuador is mandatory. On Thursday, thousands of inmates who await sentencing cast ballots at voting centers set up in more than 40 prisons

Despite the multiple options from which to choose a president, some voters in Guayaquil, the epicenter of Ecuador’s violence, prefer to cast blank votes to express their discontent.

Resident Dario Castro plans to do that Sunday. Last year, he was robbed twice while riding the bus and his brother was kidnapped. He now only sees two radical options to end the crisis.

“Either you make a pact with the mafia, or you attack it with everything you have, otherwise the people will be left unprotected,” Castro, 46, said.

Colombian President Gustavo Petro has said that “cocaine is no worse than whiskey” as he suggested the global cocaine industry could be “easily dismantled” if the drug was legalized worldwide.

Colombia is the world’s top producer and exporter of cocaine, mainly to the United States and Europe, and the government has spent decades fighting drug trafficking.

“Cocaine is illegal because it is made in Latin America, not because it is worse than whisky,” the president said on Tuesday during a six-hour ministerial meeting that was broadcasted live.

“Scientists have analyzed this,” he claimed.

The leftist leader, who assumed office in 2022, has vowed to tackle drug trafficking and regulate the use of illegal substances. However, since he came to power, Colombia’s cocaine production has surged.

Cultivation of coca leaves in Colombia increased 10% in 2023 from the previous year, while potential cocaine production reached a record of more than 2,600 metric tons, a 53% increase, the United Nations’ Office on Drugs and Crime said in October.

In his remarks at the meeting, Petro suggested that cocaine should be legalized like alcohol to combat trafficking.

“If you want peace, you have to dismantle the business (of drug trafficking),” he said. “It could easily be dismantled if they legalize cocaine in the world. It would be sold like wine.”

Petro highlighted fentanyl, a synthetic drug at the heart of the opioid crisis in the US, in contrast, saying “(it) is killing Americans, but it’s not made in Colombia.”

“Fentanyl was created as a pharmacy drug by North American multinationals” and those who used it “became addicted,” he said.

His comments come nearly two weeks after a diplomatic standoff with President Donald Trump after he blocked the landing of two US military flights of deported migrants, accusing the US of treating Colombian migrants like criminals.

Colombia later agreed to accept the deportees and deployed its own planes to assist in their return, after a flurry of threats that included steep tariffs, a travel ban for Colombian nationals and the revocation of visas for Colombian officials in the US.

Colombia has been a major non-NATO ally of the US, and for decades has been its closest partner in South America, working closely on anti-drug trafficking efforts.

Cocaine is the fourth most consumed drug globally, according to the UN, and illegal in most countries. However, some governments have decriminalized possession of the drug in small amounts.

Serious medical complications can occur with its use, including cocaine use disorder – compulsive use of the addictive stimulant – and overdose, according to the US National Institute on Drug Abuse. Adulteration of the drug with synthetic opioids such as fentanyl has also contributed to a rise in overdose deaths, according to the NIH.

Meanwhile, the NIH warns alcohol use can lead to injuries, violence, alcohol poisoning or overdose, with side effects of excessive use such as liver disease and cancer.

“How to prepare for a power outage?” reads the Facebook post from the Estonian Rescue Board, the country’s civil defense agency. The picture shows a young woman holding up a power bank, over a table loaded with water bottles, a flashlight and other emergency supplies.

Estonia, along with fellow Baltic states Latvia and Lithuania, is counting down the days to finally ridding itself of one of the last vestiges of 50 years of Soviet occupation: an electricity grid controlled by Russia.

Preparing the population for what most see as the unlikely scenario of power outages is the final stage in a years-long project. “Everything should flow smoothly,” reads the rescue board post, “but unexpected situations can arise… whether that be because of the actions of our hostile neighbor to the East, unexpected weather conditions or technical failures.”

The Baltics have been getting ready for this moment for almost the entire two decades since they joined the EU and NATO in 2004. They’ve renovated existing infrastructure, and built new power lines including several undersea cables to Finland and Sweden and a crucial overland link to the mainland European grid, the LitPol line linking Lithuania and Poland.

That meant that just a few months after Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, all three countries were able to stop buying electricity from Moscow.

But Russia was still in total control of the functioning of the grid, balancing supply and demand, and maintaining the frequency, said Susanne Nies, project lead at the German energy research institute Helmholtz-Zentrum. And, in another holdover from Soviet times, it was still providing these services for free.

Six months ago, the Baltic countries officially notified Russia of their intention to “desynchronize” and so, on February 7, the so-called BRELL (Belarus, Russia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania) agreement that governs the shared grid will expire.

On February 8, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania will simultaneously disconnect from that grid, at which point they will need to briefly function as an “island,” surviving only on the electricity they produce. On February 9, they plan to synchronize their newly independent grid with the Continental Europe Synchronous Area, which covers most of the European Union.

It’s a highly symbolic moment. Outside the Energy and Technology Museum in the center of Lithuania’s capital, Vilnius, a countdown clock has been ticking down the last 100 days to “energy independence.” “This is the final break from its Soviet-era occupation,” said Jason Moyer, a foreign policy analyst at the Wilson Center, a think tank in Washington. “Psychologically, this is a huge step forward.”

The project has involved significant investment, most of it from the European Union, which has provided grants worth over $1.2bn. But for the Baltics, the price of allowing Moscow to maintain that leverage over their power grid was too high. “We understand fairly well that the cheap Russian energy, it always comes at a price that no democratic European country should be able to afford,” said Päi.

And lest there be any doubt as to their resolve, last year Lithuania’s grid operator Litgrid started cutting old Soviet cables that formed connections to Belarus so the lines could be repurposed.

The question plaguing Baltic leaders now, as some of the most vocal opponents of the war in Ukraine and some of the most generous donors (as a percentage of GDP) to Ukraine’s military, is whether Russia will try to exploit the moment of disconnection, be it through physical sabotage or another hybrid tactic like cyberattacks or disinformation.

Ukraine had in fact disconnected from the Russian grid for a test just hours before Russia launched its full-scale invasion on February 24, 2022. It never reconnected.

Russia has shown itself more than willing to weaponize electricity supply, not only through repeated attacks on the Ukrainian energy grid, but also through its almost three-year occupation of the Zaporizhzia nuclear plant, which before the war provided about a fifth of Ukraine’s electricity.

For Russia, the loss of leverage over the Baltics, former Soviet vassals, is a geopolitical defeat, said Moyer, adding: “I think this really shows that Russia is losing influence in the region,” one that was “traditionally more receptive to Russian business.” The Kremlin declined to comment, noting only that Russia had taken all necessary measures to ensure the “uninterrupted and reliable operation of our unified energy system.”

“We are increasing our surveillance efforts, we are increasing our additional security measures, and… we are going to watch this with an eye of a hawk,” Šakalienė said.

NATO has now set up a new mission to protect undersea cables in the Baltic Sea, after the Estlink 2, a critical part of the Baltics’ post-Soviet electricity infrastructure, was damaged on Christmas Day, the latest in a series of incidents involving disruption to the complex web of cables criss-crossing the Baltic Sea floor.

Grid operators in Finland and the Baltic states assured customers in the days afterward that supplies were secured. But electricity prices did tick up in late December, and the repairs, according to Finnish authorities, will take until August.

Finland is still investigating the incident, but police have detained a ship carrying Russian oil products, suspected of dragging its anchor across the cable. A lawyer representing the owner of the ship last week called any allegation of sabotage “nonsense.”

One area neither NATO nor the Baltics can police is Kaliningrad. The tiny Russian exclave sandwiched between Lithuania and Poland will now have to function as an electricity “island,” and while Russia has carried out multiple successful tests of its ability to cope, experts are not ruling out deliberate action by Moscow to stir up tensions.

“Russia might even provoke a fake blackout in the region and say ‘Hey, Kaliningrad, this is even the result of the Baltic synchronization,’” said Nies. She believes Russia could then accuse the Baltics of plunging the one million residents of Kaliningrad into darkness and use that to exact concessions, and assess NATO’s appetite to come to the aid of its eastern flank.

The risk may be higher now, with a new administration in Washington that is critical of NATO and determined to end the war in Ukraine. “(The Russians) want to see if NATO is alive, and where do you test it other than in the Baltics?” said Nies.

Ukraine’s air force got a boost in its fight against Russia on Thursday with the arrival of Mirage 2000-5 fighter jets from France, along with F-16s from the Netherlands.

French Defense Minister Sebastien Lecornu confirmed the transfer of the Mirage jets in a post on X, adding the fighters were flown by Ukrainian pilots who have been training for months in France. French President Emmanuel Macron had promised the Mirage jets to Ukraine last summer.

“The Ukrainian sky is becoming more secure!” Defense Minister Rustem Umerov said in a post on Facebook.

Welcoming the arrival of “the first French Mirage 2000 fighter jets and F-16s from the Kingdom of the Netherlands,” Umerov said: “These modern combat aircraft have already arrived in Ukraine and will soon begin carrying out combat missions, strengthening our defense and enhancing our ability to effectively counter Russian aggression.”

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky thanked Macron on Thursday for “his leadership and support.”

“France’s president keeps his word, and we appreciate it,” Zelensky said in a post on X.

The new fighters are expected to boost Ukrainian forces’ ability to provide air cover for troops, attack ground targets, take on enemy planes, and intercept missiles.

The latter role could be vital. Russia has stepped up missile attacks on Ukrainian cities, often sending dozens in one night, taxing Ukraine’s air defense batteries.

Last weekend, a Russian strike on a residential building in central Ukraine killed at least 14 people, emergency services said.

In January, the Ukrainian Air Force reported in a Facebook post that one of its F-16 pilots had destroyed six Russian missiles in one night in December.

Military aviation analyst Peter Layton at the Griffith Asia Institute said the Mirages might be best suited for the air defense role, freeing up the F-16s for other missions.

Mirages can get airborne more quickly than an F-16, Layton said.

“I would have the (Mirages) standing ground alert and able to take off within a few minutes to intercept incoming cruise missiles (primary targets) and Shahed drones (secondary targets),” Layton said.

Mirages could also be used to launch longer-range missiles such as the SCALP, also known as the Storm Shadow, at targets well inside Russia, said Layton, a former Royal Australian Air Force officer.

Ukraine’s air fleet

Ukraine needs all the help it can get in its nearly three-year long war, triggered by Russia’s 2022 invasion of its neighbor.

There has been no let-up in the fighting, even with US President Donald Trump having promised to reach a ceasefire quickly with his return to the White House last month.

Ukraine’s army continues to be pushed back on the eastern front lines, in the face of superior Russian manpower and resources.

Thursday’s announcements did not specify the number of fighter jets transferred from the two NATO allies to Ukraine, but the country has to date had few Western warplanes in its fleet.

Ukraine received its first F-16s last summer, with Zelensky at the time thanking the Netherlands, Denmark and the United States – where the F-16s are built – for the aircraft, without saying how many were delivered.

Reports since indicate two F-16s have been lost. A list of the world’s combat aircraft from Flight Global shows two F-16s in Ukraine’s fleet as of the beginning of this year, with 58 on order.

France had 26 Mirage 2000-5s active in its air force at the beginning of 2025, according to Flight Global. The aircraft are the oldest jets in France’s fleet and are slated to be replaced by Rafale jets in the coming years. It is not known how many will be transferred to Ukraine.

Leighton said current estimates show Ukraine getting a total of 95 F-16s and around two dozen Mirages.

“Neither airframe will be made available to Ukraine in sufficient numbers to provide the air combat capabilities Ukraine needs at this stage in its war with Russia,” he added. “In ideal circumstances, the Ukrainian Air Force should have around 200 – 220 fighter jets at its disposal.”