countries

The countries with the most billionaires in the world, gathered in a graph with a surprising winner

by

Guess, guess: Where do the majority of the world’s billionaires live today? Answer the first thing that comes to mind and without cheating. Probably most of us would say that the United States and the reality is that this was true until very recently, but the map of wealth has changed: China has just snatched the throne and already has 1,110 Chinese billionaires compared to 1,100 Americans, according to the latest Hurun Global list. The most striking thing is not so much this surprise, but the speed at which it has happened: a decade ago, three of those four Chinese billionaires were not even on the list, which gives an idea of ​​the industrial, technological and business panorama of the Asian giant. Of course, the “land of opportunity” thing seems to have changed zip codes. The Hurun Global Rich List 2026 is an annual ranking prepared in China that has been measuring the fortune of the world’s billionaires for 15 years. It is not as popular as Forbes, but it is also one of the great references for quantifying billionaires. Both estimate net worth in dollars based on shares in listed companies, real estate and other assets, but each has its own methodologies, so there may be divergences between the two. The list is not very intuitive to visualize, so Visual Capitalist, through its Voronoi data platform, has prepared this graph that reflects how many billionaires (in dollars) live in each country in the world in 2026. We have already discovered gold and silver, but there is another curious fact: China and the United States alone concentrate more than half of the global billionaire population. To the surprise of few, wealth is concentrated. Beyond statistical curiosity, there are two reasons why it is interesting to know where the rich are concentrated: according to Oxfambillionaires are 4,000 times more likely to reach political office than the average person. Simply put: wealth is concentrated and it also tends to concentrate power. On the other hand, global billionaire wealth grew more than 16% in 2025, three times more than the average of the last five years, according to Oxfam. The rich are getting richer. The countries with the most billionaires in the world After China and the United States, India is at a certain distance but far away from the rest of the European squad, with 308 people. And the old continent already appears, with Germany (171), the United Kingdom (150), Switzerland (114), Russia (105), among others. According to Hurun, China added 287 billionaires compared to the previous year, compared to 130 in the United States and 24 in India, which explains why the list has changed so much. Spain appears in 20th place with 34 billionaires, behind countries of comparable or smaller economic size such as Sweden or Turkey and an abysmal distance from Switzerland, which has 114 and a trick to achieve it despite its small size that it shares with Monaco: favorable taxation. Where billionaires live in 2026. Visual Capitalist Where do these new billionaires come from? Although we already know that Most rich people are born and not made and the Hurun list confirms this, with 144 fourth-generation fortunes, this rise of the new rich has specific origins such as the market or technology. But technology is a very broad sector and the phenomenon that concentrates it is a boom that we have been finding in the soup for some time: artificial intelligence. Thus, there are 114 billionaires who owe their fortune to AI companies, of which 46 are newcomers to the list. Furthermore, there are countries and countries: despite representing 79% of the world’s population, Southern countries only own 31% of global wealth. In wealth there is also migration, but quite concentrated in one country: the United States. Of this 14% of “luxury” migrants there are famous cases such as those of the South African Elon Musk or the Taiwanese Jensen Huang. It is important to remember that a ranking of the number of billionaires is not the same as how rich a state is or the average well-being of the population. On the other hand, the country of residence can sometimes be somewhat ambiguous: some billionaires have dual tax residence or assets distributed internationally and both the geographic allocation criteria and the estimation of their assets may differ from Hurun compared to other sources. In Xataka | Tell me where you are from and I will tell you if the rich in your country were self-made or inherited wealth In Xataka | Where the ultra-rich are growing the most: the graph that proves that Europe is playing something else

On HBO Max you have the most brutal action comedy just a few weeks after hitting theaters, and it is already number one in 50 countries

by

Asia Reaves needs a job and accepts the first one offered to her: housekeeper at The Virgil, an exclusive skyscraper in New York. But that building has been swallowing its tenants for years without leaving a trace: well, not the building, but the cult that hides behind its walls. That premise holds ‘They are going to kill you‘, action and horror comedy that tiptoed through the theaters a couple of months ago and is now one of the most refreshing and forceful proposals in the catalog of HBO Max. A whole hodgepodge of genres to which its director, Kirill Sokolov, is no stranger. His debut, ‘Why don’t you die?’, already stood out for its extreme use of violence. In “They Will Kill You” he repeats that approach but with a much larger budget and a visual work that links the film to aesthetes of the trumpet and the fountains of blood like Tarantino or Sam Raimi. All of this seasoned with a little bit of ‘The Devil’s Seed’ due to the Satanist element, its fabulous supporting cast (where Heather Graham and Patricia Arquette stand out) and the imposing prominence of the art-deco building. The film coincided in theaters with the sequel to ‘Wedding Night’, with which it shares more than one common plot detail: female protagonism, cults in mansions and a bilious forcefulness in his anti-rich message. A great double bill for one night that will send you to bed with a few bruises (you have ‘Wedding Night 2’ on Disney+, in fact). The film suffered a small and undeserved setback in theaters, but it has found its place on the Warner platform, where it started as number one in 51 countries just one day after its arrival on streaming. As happens with so many other films that find a place in digital after a lackluster track record in theaters, the playful, direct and second-round format suits it wonderfully in small spaces. Don’t forget the raincoat, the devil carries katanas. In Xataka | Today “a masterpiece that will go down in history” arrives on Netflix, thanks to an original approach to a unique science fiction story

the graph showing which countries suffer the most from FIFA schedules

by

I don’t know about you, but there are sports broadcasts that I have saved in the calendar of my mobile phone, like the Barcelona Masters Finals of paddle tennis or the Tour de France. There is one that is much longer, more variable and also almost obligatory viewing: the World Cup. Although it is essentially always played on these dates, the venues change and that is sometimes a real chore… if you want to see it live. This 2026 edition is played in the United States, Canada and Mexico and that means it takes up my afternoons, but there are places in Asia and the Middle East where it is literally stealing their sleep: if they want to watch the games live, it is better to leave sleeping for another day. Is the “dream fee” to pay if you like football. When FIFA awarded the 2026 World Cup to North America, it implicitly set prime time in the Eastern time zone of the United States. That is equivalent to between 00:00 and 04:00 in the Maghreb, between 01:00 and 05:00 in Saudi Arabia and between 02:00 and 06:00 in Pakistan. As we have already suffered in our flesh, such as in the last finals of the King’s Cup in Spain, the schedule of the host state is taken into account and the rest of the global audience there manages. That the World Cup headquarters is traveling is a way to publicize football throughout the planet, but also to make a profit from a lucrative business in addition to sports tourism: broadcasts (there is another indirect one in the impressive infrastructures that are built). According to the official FIFA financial report For the 2023-2026 cycle, total income from television rights amounts to $4,264 million. And in that scenario there is a clear winner: Europe is the most valuable individual market with nearly 1.4 billion. It is followed by North America, which exceeds 1,000 million. Both regions concentrate more than 60% of the total, according to SVG Europe with data from the consulting firm Caretta Research. So someone on Reddit has decided to calculate that “Sleep Tax” with the 48 teams participating in the World Cup ordered by the cost of sleep that their fans will accumulate during the group stage. From FIFA match schedulethe IANA time zone database, WikipediaPython and little else. The result is what you see below these lines: The sleep rate of the 2026 World Cup. tohigh12 via Reddit How have you calculated it? This sleep rate assigns a weight to each minute of the game based on which time zone it is in, taking into account the start time in the local time of each team’s fans and using a visualization model that takes into account the start of the game + 120 minutes. Thus, the minutes between 22:00 and midnight are worth 1x, between 0:00 and 02:00 they are worth 2x, between 02:00 and 06:00 they are worth 3x and between 06:00 and 08:00, 1.5x. Those periods in which most people sleep are worth more (although it is a simplification, because maybe I go to bed at 11 p.m. and you at 1 a.m.): the more points, the less you sleep. The final score is obtained by dividing the weighted minutes by 60. An example: a match that starts at 23:00 local time accumulates 3 points: 60 minutes at 1x plus 60 minutes at 2x. It is true that this Sleep Tax method has obvious limitations such as assuming that the fans follow the three group stage matches, it does not distinguish between work days and holidays and that fixed window of 120 minutes may fall short between overtime and the pre-match, but it is a clear, transparent and reproducible methodology. Which country is sleeping the least following its team in the 2026 World Cup The longer the bar, the worse the fans sleep: Their matches fall at late night or early morning hours. Algeria leads the ranking with 18 points and seven countries, including Mexico and Canada, have 0.0: they do not lose a minute of sleep. But this is not something new: without going any further, the last World Cups steal those hours of sleep in other latitudes. Thus, in Brazil 2014 those who paid this most expensive fee were the fans from Asian countries. In Qatar 2022, geographical concentration benefited Europe and Africa, which followed the matches in the evening. Sleep deprivation has real and measurable consequences: executive functions deteriorate if there are lack of hours of rest, something that we pay in decision making, impulse control, behavior or memory, which affects our day-to-day tasks such as driving, working or interacting. In fact, according to the study Sleep Duration and Executive Function in Adultscognitive impairment after a single night of poor sleep is equivalent to having a blood alcohol level comparable to the legal limit for driving. Stringing together a couple of weeks of early morning matches is more than a sacrifice: in a football country that is also excelling in the tournament, it can become a public health problem. Who wins and who loses. Thus, the big dream losers of this edition of the 2026 World Cup are the countries of North Africa and the Middle East: Algeria (18.0), Tunisia (14.5), the Czech Republic and Scotland (12.0), Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Norway and Iraq (11.0). Spain obtains a 6.0, with a match starting at 02:00 peninsular time. The hosts Mexico and Canada, along with Ecuador, Panama and South Korea, score 0.0: they play at schedules completely aligned with their daily lives. In Xataka | Where you can watch the 2026 World Cup depending on the operator you have In Xataka | The good news is that there is a World Cup this summer. The bad news is that the exams are going to be worse Cover | Data is Beautiful

1,300 km, three countries and tickets from 10 euros

by

When you are in no hurry and everything is going smoothly, traveling by train may be one of the best experiences. And if you are a fan of traveling long distances by this means of transportation through several countries, you have a good number of options in Europe. One of them starts on June 25, with a new train service between Poland and Germany that runs more than 1,300 kilometers, crossing the Czech Republic, and with tickets starting at 10 euros. We tell you all the details. What you need to know. The Czech company Leo Express, 50% owned by Renfe since 2021launches this summer one of the longest direct rail connections on the continent. The route connects the Polish city of Przemyśl, just 10 kilometers from the border with Ukraine, with Frankfurt airport, in Germany, and passing through the Czech Republic. It is about 1,300 kilometers which are completed in around 18 hours. Connections. Peter Köhler, CEO of Leo Express, account that “with this new route we are removing the iron curtains between Eastern and Western Europe, connecting important European centers and facilitating access to Ukraine.” Forty years after the fall of the Soviet bloc, rail communications between Eastern and Western Europe remain scarce. This route comes to fill that gap. The journey, stop by stop. The train leaves Przemyśl at 13:31 and heads towards Krakow before crossing into Czech territory, where it stops in Ostrava and Prague. From there it enters Germany and stops in Dresden, Leipzig and Erfurt, before arriving in the center of Frankfurt and the city’s airport at 7:53 the next day. The service in the opposite direction leaves the airport at 8:27 and arrives in Przemyśl after two in the morning. There will be a daily service in each direction. The operator states that on board users will have Wi-Fi, plugs to charge devices, air conditioning and beverage service. The price. Tickets will start at 10 euros, according to inform National Geographic. And that really is the main attraction, especially for those who want to get around the center of Europe without spending a fortune. At the moment, the train will not have business class, but its incorporation is planned from 2027. Although it should be noted that the most basic proposal is already attractive for those who have some time and desire to see the landscape. It is one of the longest in Europe Although it does not top the list, according to collect Hosteltur, the Leo Express route will become the fifth longest direct connection on the continent. Ahead are the Malmö-Innsbruck night route, with 1,720 kilometers and up to 22 hours of travel; the Optima Express service between Villach (Austria) and Edirne (Türkiye), which can exceed 32 hours of travel; the historic Polar Circle Train between Stockholm and Narvik, which will precisely stop operating in 2026; and the train that crosses Italy from south to north, from Palermo to Milan, in 1,431 kilometers. Outside the European Union, Russia has a connection between Adler and Vorkuta that exceeds 4,000 kilometers and takes around four days of travel. Renfe’s role in all this. The operator acquired 50% of its capital in 2021 for seven million euros, with the declared intention of expanding throughout the European railway market. This route is the most visible step so far in that strategy, but not the only one, since the company is also working on a night connection between Prague and Venice scheduled for 2027, and in March of this year it launched a service between Warsaw and Krakow with tickets from two euros. Cover image | Leo Express In Xataka | Renfe offers its juiciest contract: 4,000 million euros to buy trains. And everything indicates that he will not stay in Spain

the countries that are doomed to extinction and those that are not

by

Geographically speaking, the world is divided in two. On the one hand there are countries where more people are born than die: as a result, the population grows naturally. On the other hand, those countries where more people die than are born, which implies a population contraction and eventual disappearance… unless someone remedies it from the outside. What this map reveals Our World in data At a glance it is not something that comes overnight nor are its consequences. Behind these two colors hides the future of the economies and public systems of the different states of the planet. The map represents the natural population change during 2023, that is, the difference between how many people are born and how many die based on data from the official demographic report World Population Prospects 2024 of the UN. To prepare it, the UN used data from 1,910 censuses, birth and death records from 169 countries and 3,189 demographic surveys, so this is a fairly exhaustive compilation. Countries in blue have more births than deaths and those in orange have more deaths than births. Migration is excluded from the calculation, which allows us to see only the reproductive dynamics of each society without the corrective effect of flows of people. This reality is important because a country can appear orange on the map and still not lose inhabitants if it receives enough migrants. Note: the historical “magic” figure for a society to remain stable considering only reproduction it has been 2.1 babies per woman on average. That in a state more people die than are born on a sustained basis ago let all the alarm signals go off insofar as it causes a structural problem: the population ages, the population pyramid is inverted and there are fewer and fewer working people to finance the welfare system. Health, education and social protection systems were designed for younger and larger populations. According to the United Nationsby 2070 the number of people aged 65 or over will exceed those under 18 years of age globally. And spoiler: most states in demographic decline are world powers. And in some cases, the decline is practically irreversible. The countries that are born and the countries that die Where more people die than are born. Our World in Data A look at the countries that die returns places like Japan, China, South Korea, Russia and almost all of Eastern Europe. The most extreme case is Japan, where there are twice as many deaths as births (1.2 children per woman). South Korea, Hong Kong and Taiwan are between 0.7 and 0.9, well below that 2.1. China has a 1 and a particular history: the one-child policy applied between 1980 and 2015 artificially reduced entire generations. It is true that it was abandoned years ago, but the structural damage has already been done. On the old continent, Germany has had more deaths than births since the 70s and France, which was practically the only state that was saved thanks to decades of public aid for motherhood, has seen how that balance was broken. Although this map uses data from 2023, in 2025 France record more deaths than births for the first time since World War II. The block in blue includes almost all of Latin America, sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East, and South and Southeast Asia. And although the map is a simplification that reduces the world in two colors, Ethiopia should be extremely blue: it has more than five times as many births as deaths. The populations of these countries have high fertility rates and a young population. Of course, this growth is not synonymous with well-being: some of these places combine high birth rates with high infant mortality, low life expectancy and precarious infrastructure to sustain this population growth. Africa is the great demographic hope in terms of growth, which is also a challenge in terms of employment, education and resources. Among the bulk of countries that are growing, there are many developing countries, but there is also the particular case of the United States: it has 20% more births than deaths. Talking about countries that are born and die sounds alarming, but let’s remember that migration is not present on this map, which means that states like Germany, Italy or Spain are not losing population in absolute terms. This means that generational replacement becomes directly dependent on migratory flows, which generates integration, coexistence and institutional challenges that cartography does not reflect. In Xataka | Europe’s brutal demographic crisis can be explained on a single map with one country as the protagonist: Nigeria In Xataka | Europe is divided in two: the devastating map of deindustrialization Cover | Our World in data

Someone has calculated which countries in the world have increased their military spending the most and there is a surprise: Spain is in the lead

by

With the beating of war drums in the background, the invasion of Ukraine encystedthe tension climbing in the Middle East and Donald Trump feinting with removing the US from NATO at the same time required more investment military to its partners, in 2025 the world has chosen a clear path: spend more money on defense. Quite a bit more. SIPRI calculations show that global military spending increased by 2.9% last year to almost 2.9 trillion dollars. This increase is largely explained by the effort made in Asia, Russia and Europe, where an unexpected protagonist stands out: Spain. Despite the differences With the leadership of NATO and the loud friction with Trump, the reality is that Spain is one of the countries that has increased its investment most clearly and is already in the “Top 15” in volume of war spending. What has happened? Which the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) has just published a study on military spending in 2025. It is a valuable tool because it helps us understand two things: how much the planet is investing in strengthening its war capacity and, more importantly, how that flow of money is distributed geographically. Reading it is particularly interesting in Spain for another reason: it shows that, despite the friction that Madrid has had with the White House and the address of NATO on account of military spending, Spain has made a notable investment effort. In fact, on the SIPRI list it stands out as one of the countries that has increased its defense spending the most, surpassing other European partners. Click on the image to go to the tweet. How much does Spain invest? If we base ourselves on the SIPRI data, 34,256 million of euros. The figure is important because of its scope, but above all because of the trend it shows: it shows that last year military spending increased by 50% in Spain. If we look back even further, to 2016, the increase is 122%. It is also the first time Since the mid-90s, the allocation for weapons exceeds 2% of GDP. If these data were not sufficient in themselves, they stand out even more when compared with the rest of the countries analyzed. Although the US, China and Russia lead the investment effort in terms of spending volume, when we look at the increase in spending there is only one nation that exceeds 50% of Spain. Which? Belgium, with an increase of 59%, although its level of spending is much lower than that of Spain (14.5 billion dollars). In fact, the increase in investment has allowed our country to position itself in the global “TOP 15”, behind Poland or South Korea and ahead of Canada. How is it possible? That jump is largely due to Industrial and Technological Plan for Security and Defense approved a year ago and that, according to the ministrycontemplated an initial investment of 10,471 million already in 2025. However, the SIPRI tables reflect that Spain continues to dedicate much fewer resources to defense than other EU (and NATO) partners, such as Germany, France, Italy or Poland, which in the last decade has skyrocketed its spending. Why is it important? For what we mentioned before: 2025 will be remembered for many debates, but there was one in particular that grabbed headlines for months and made Spain stand out worldwide. Despite Trump’s pressure for NATO partners to increase their defense spending from 2% to 5% of GDP, Madrid claimed that it could meet its commitments with an investment of ‘only’ 2.1%. His position was not liked in the White House, but it ended up leading to a pact with those responsible for the Atlantic Alliance. How much does the rest spend? That is another of the readings that leaves the study of SIPRI. In general, its technicians estimate that military spending increased by 2.9% worldwide in 2025, to around $2.9 million. It is the eleventh consecutive year in which the amount of resources that the planet allocates to the war machine has increased and explains that today the “global military burden” (its weight with respect to GDP) reaches 2.5%, marking its highest level since 2009. Are there differences? Yes. That increase was not distributed equally throughout the world. While in the US military spending suffered an annual contraction of 7.5%, in Europe military spending grew by 14% to reach 864,000 million of dollars. The same trend continued in Russia (+5.9%) and Ukraine (+20%), immersed in a war since 2022, or China (+7.4%) and Japan (+9.7%). That the US distances itself from this trend is something purely circumstantial. If its war expenditure decreased in 2025, it was due to the change in policy regarding the military support offered by Ukraine. In fact, SIPRI recalls that the US Congress has already given the green light to a considerable increase in military spending for this year and it is not unreasonable that something similar could happen in 2027. Image | Ministry of Defense In Xataka | Nobody saw it coming: Ukraine’s scariest drone doesn’t move, just waits for a Russian soldier to appear

The Pentagon wants to invest $54 billion in drones. It is more than the entire military budget of countries like Ukraine

by

The defense budget that the Pentagon has presented for fiscal year 2027 amounts to $1.5 trillion. It is the largest year-on-year increase in military spending since World War II, but in that colossal figure there is another that deserves special attention. This is the $53.6 billion allocated exclusively to drones and autonomous warfare technologies. That amount alone exceeds the Ukraine’s full defense budget either of countries like South Korea or Italy. Spain is even further away. autonomous defense. The money for this specific program will be managed by the Defense Autonomous Warfare Group (DAWG), an agency created at the end of 2025. In the 2026 budget it received 226 million dollars, but in 2027 that figure would be multiplied almost by 240. The United States has realized the relevance that drones have gained in war conflicts and wants to be prepared for this new era of defense. Obsolete investment. The Pentagon itself recognized something striking: the vast majority of the money requested will be used to buy technology that already exists, not to develop future solutions. One of the top officials of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Lieutenant General Steven Whitney, admitted that technological evolution on the battlefield currently happens in weeks, not years. It’s like admitting that what you buy now may become obsolete almost immediately. Ukraine showed that change has changed. The urgency of this budget does not come from nowhere. The war in Ukraine has rewritten the rules of modern combat In such a way that there are many countries that are processing how to assume these changes. Iranian Shahed droneswhich cost about $20,000 per unit, have proven capable of saturating air defense systems that cost hundreds of times more. Relatively affordable quadcopter drones have destroyed multi-million euro tanks and armored vehicles. Defense budgets in 2025. The US already spent 921 billion dollars last year, this year it wants to spend 50% more. Everything goes very fast. The speed of tactical adaptation on the Ukrainian front has been so high that innovations and tactics that work in January may be obsolete by March. Not because someone has invented something better, but because the adversary has found a way to counter those strategies. The Pentagon has reached an unusual conclusion: the traditional model of weapons acquisition that operated in cycles of years or even decades is structurally incompatible with the speed at which current war conflicts are developing. The irony of the Shahed. Among the most striking details of the budget is the confirmation that the American army has adapted the technology of the Iranian Shahed dronewhich is the same one that has been attacking cities and energy infrastructures in Ukraine for years. The US has done reverse engineering of your adversary’s design to incorporate it into your own arsenal. This clearly illustrates the current war reality: the origin of the technology does not matter, but its effectiveness. Risks. This tension between “we have to spend more” and the speed at which it is necessary to adapt to this reality poses an enormous risk. Buy en masse what works today guarantees that solutions will be available tomorrow. The problem is that these solutions may be technically inferior to those that the adversary has developed in the meantime. The same thing happens if you decide not to buy anything until you have the perfect technology, because that means arriving late (or not arriving at all). It is a dilemma similar to that of technology companies and their investment in infrastructure: they have to buy solutions now that they know that they will end up being obsolete in the short or medium term. Final approval is missing. The US Congress will have to approve the budget, which introduces an important political variable. Beyond that, there is a fundamental question in those 54,000 million in this budget. If drone technology evolves in weeks, there is no money that will be able to buy that adaptability to the modern battlefield. And that even with this immense budget superiority cannot be guaranteed makes clear the sign of the times. In Xataka | The percentage of GDP that each country allocates to Defense, shown in this graph with an unavoidable protagonist

The US is already considering withdrawing bases from some European countries. You don’t have to be a genius to know who he’s talking about.

by

More than 80,000 soldiers Americans are permanently deployed in Europe, spread across dozens of bases that function as key nodes for operations in the Middle East, Africa and the continent itself. In many cases, these facilities not only have military value, but also generate thousands of jobs and millions in investment local. Therefore, any change in its location usually says much more about global politics than about geography. Spain changes the theater. It we count weeks ago. Spain decided from the beginning of the conflict to mark a clear line: not participate in the war against Iran, nor facilitating the use of bases such as Rota and Morón nor allowing transit of American planes through its airspace. The position, defended by Pedro Sánchez under the argument of avoid escalation and respect international law, was not symbolic but operational, forcing the United States to redesign air routes and military logistics. At the same time, he placed Spain in a unique position within Europe, differentiating itself from other allies that did collaborate, even if in a limited way. That decision, apparently defensive, has ended up having much deeper strategic implications. Washington’s response. A few hours ago and through an exclusive from the Wall Street Journalit was known that Donald Trump’s administration has begun to outline a response that goes beyond rhetoric, with plans to punish allies who did not support the war, reorganizing military deployment American in Europe. The idea is clear: withdraw troops and possibly close bases in countries considered unreliable, while reinforcing the presence in those that did support the operation. In that list of “unfriendly” countries, Spain appears as one of the most obvious cases, not only because its operational refusal but for his open political position against intervention. The consequence is a change in logic in NATO, where support for specific conflicts begins to outweigh formal membership in the alliance. Spain in red. Within this new strategic map, Spain emerges as the clearest example of a break with Washington, having actively blocked military operations and publicly criticized the war. The tensions have not remained at the diplomatic level, with threats of a trade embargo and questions about its defense spending. But what is relevant is that the country goes from being a key logistics partner on the southern flank of Europe to becoming candidate to lose American military presence. In practice, this means that the foundations that for decades have been strategic nodes They could cease to be so or lose strength if the United States decides to prioritize loyalties more aligned with its foreign policy. A military redesign to the east. According to the Journal, the withdrawal in countries like Spain or Germany would be accompanied by a reinforcement in Eastern Europewith destinations such as Poland, Romania and Lithuania gaining weight due to their support for the operation in Iran and their greater commitment to defense. There is no doubt, this movement not only reconfigures the US military presence, but also brings Washington’s forces even closer to the Russian borderincreasing tension with Moscow. At the same time, it turns the war in Iran into a factor that redefines the European security balance, something that until now was dominated by the conflict in Ukraine. The implicit message is that political alignment has direct consequences on military architecture. The political clash. Not only that. After the ceasefire in the war, Sánchez’s statements criticizing the war They have intensified a clash that had already been brewing since the beginning of the conflict. “Ceasefires are always good news. Especially if they lead to a just and lasting peace. But momentary relief cannot make us forget the chaos, destruction and lives lost. The Government of Spain will not applaud those who set the world on fire because they show up with a bucket. What’s up now: diplomacy, international legality and PEACE”, has communicated through networks. Thus, while other European leaders chose to nuances or partial supportsSpain has adopted a frontal stance that has made people uncomfortable especially Washington. This confrontation reflects a broader fracture within the West over how to address conflicts like Iran, and highlights the lack of prior coordination between allies. The war has not only opened a front in the Middle East, but also a political rift in the transatlantic relationship. From sovereign decision to strategic cost. In short, what began as a sovereign decision to avoid getting involved in a war is becoming a possible strategic cost long term for Spain. The truth is that with Trump’s words you never know the actual scopeand although it seems difficult for Washington to want to get rid of such a key node Due to its geographical position, the eventual loss of bases, military investment and weight within the NATO structure could alter Spain’s position in the European security balance. At the same time, it shows how national decisions in global conflicts can have unexpected collateral effects on historical alliances. In this new scenario, Spain has not only said “no” to a warbut could face the consequences of having done so at a key moment for the international order. Image | US Navy In Xataka | The same day that the US threatened Spain and said it did not need the Rota base, the US invested 13 million in expanding the Rota base In Xataka | Spain’s ‘no’ to the use of its bases in the offensive against Iran already has an answer: Trump threatens to “cut off all trade”

The countries of the Persian Gulf have adopted an unexpected civil protection measure against Iran’s attacks: teleworking

by

When an employee in Riyadh receives an email from his company telling him not to come to the office the next day, the most common reason was usually a sandstorm, construction work, or a holiday. In recent weeks, the reason has been something else: the possibility that its offices, probably located in a downtown financial district, could become Iranian missile target. In the Persian Gulf, teleworking has ceased to be a post-pandemic convenience and has become a civil protection tool in the midst of a geopolitical crisis that has been repeated in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait and Bahrain since the start of the armed conflict between the US, Israel and Iran. Riyadh: the most visible offices, the first to be emptied. According to published Reutersseveral Western and Saudi companies in Riyadh this week expanded their teleworking recommendations via email or text message sent to their employees. The notices focused on employees working in the King Abdullah financial district, Faisaliah Tower, Business Gate and Laysen Valley, areas where major US banks, technology companies such as Microsoft and Apple, and the Saudi sovereign wealth fund itself are based. The arguments for adopting this measure were not unfounded. Iran threatened to attack American interests in the region in retaliation and, in fact, attacked several Amazon data centers in United Arab Emirates. The order to telework does not mean that this simple measure will keep the civilian population safe, but it does distance them from the international offices occupied by American companies. The Arab Emirates were the first to adopt teleworking. The United Arab Emirates were, in fact, the first in ordering teleworking for its employees, immediately after Iran’s first attacks. According to published the local newspaper Khaleej Times, The Ministry of Human Resources and Emiratization asked private companies to adopt teleworking as a precautionary measure, keeping only workers whose physical presence was essential in their jobs. In those first attacks, four people were injured by debris from intercepted drones that fell on residential buildings, and damage was reported to the dubai international airportthe Burj Al Arab and the Palm Jumeirah. Teleworking recommended, not mandatory. The authorities of other countries in the region, such as Bahrain, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, also followed in the footsteps of the United Arab Emirates and recommended private companies adopt teleworking and restrictions on influx to offices due to the risk of Iranian missile attacks. Qatar, also punished for reprisals against US interests during the conflict, was another of the countries that activated teleworking protocols for its officials. However, something that all of them have in common is that none of them consider themselves as an obligation to teleworkbut rather companies are recommended to adopt teleworking, leaving the risk assessment to their discretion and that of local authorities. The Government of Dubai Media Office confirmed that the emirate’s private sector continued operating normally, with most business activities uninterrupted despite the risk of attacks. A region that learns to work under pressure. Although these countries are not officially at war with Iran, they are involved and targeted in Iranian attacks in retaliation against US and Israeli companies in the area. In this context, many fear that any escalation would lead Iran to attack critical infrastructure in the region more forcefully, which explains the caution of companies even after the announcement of the ceasefire reached in extremis during the early morning. trump qualified the pact of “total and complete victory.” But as negotiators work in Islamabad to turn that provisional ceasefire into a lasting agreement, Gulf companies continue to watch the calendar with one eye on the news and another on their security protocols to protect their employees. In Xataka | Working from anywhere was the dream of teleworking: not notifying those location changes can get you fired Image | Unsplash (Kate Trysh, Microsoft Copilot)

twelve countries have just decided that much better with Bizum

by

Bizum has not only conquered the Spanish: now it is who leads the construction of the pan-European payment system that aspires to stand up to VISA and Mastercard. That is, who aspires to be the face of European sovereignty in payments against the great American solutions. The new company that will coordinate this alliance of national solutions will have its headquarters in Madrid. Why is it important. Europe moves trillions of euros in daily digital payments and almost all of that infrastructure passes through American hands. That twelve EU countries plus Norway have decided to join, and that they have chosen Spain as their headquarters, is a declaration of geopolitical intentions. “We want to not depend so much on American solutions,” said Fernando Rodríguez, deputy general director of International Expansion at Bizum. Difficult to explain it more clearly. The context. The project starts from a previous alliance between Bizum, the Italian Bancomat Pay and the Portuguese SIBS, which was later joined by Blik (Poland and Slovakia) and Vipps MobilePay (Nordic countries). In parallel, the scheme werodriven by the European Payments Initiativealready operates in Germany, France and Belgium. All of them now converge under a common architecture: a central infrastructure that acts as a “bridge” and guarantees that a user in Oslo can pay a user in Lisbon without any American intervening. Between the lines. The choice of Madrid has not been automatic. It has been, according to the protagonists themselves, “the first compromise solution” reached between the partners, which says a lot about the difficulty of what is to come. Choosing a venue is the easy part. The shareholder agreement that will determine the governance and distribution of power, the selection of the CEO and the negotiation of a legal process that the parties describe as “long and complex.” There is an obvious risk: that national interests will strain the alliance. Coordinating 13 countries with different banking cultures and different market sizes is something we have not yet seen in Europe. Main winner? Bizum. With difference. Their 31 million users They are almost 20% of the total clients of all the allied systems, and that weight has been enough to convert Madrid into its headquarters and place Spain at the center of an initiative that no one would have imagined led from here ten years ago. We did not see the leap from national payment application to European sovereignty lever. The big question. Whether this consortium will be able to challenge Visa and Mastercard for real ground depends on whether it manages to go beyond payments between individuals. Electronic commerce and point-of-sale payments, planned for 2027-2028 and what has been achieved so far we have only seen the tip of the icebergoften with walk-around approaches; They are the litmus test of truth: that is where the American networks have their most profitable business and where Europe has been down for decades. Go deeper. The president of the Spanish Banking Association, Alejandra Kindelán, also has been clear about this: Europe needs to gain autonomy at a time of rising geopolitical upheaval. Payments, in this context, have ceased to be the usual infrastructure and have become a matter of sovereignty. And dependence on American networks is increasingly seen in Europe as a problem to be solved. Featured image | Xataka with Mockuuups Studio In Xataka | Europe seeks its sovereignty in rare earths and knows how to achieve it the fast way: with a supermine in Sweden

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.