A quiet rebellion is spreading through European capitals against one of Silicon Valley’s most powerful data firms. Officials in France, Germany, Spain and beyond are moving to reduce their reliance on Palantir Technologies, the U.S. data-analytics company that has burrowed deep into the continent’s policing, defense, health and intelligence systems — and they are discovering just how difficult it is to walk away.

A “Sovereign Digital Backbone”

The push gained momentum last month when French and German security officials floated plans for a homegrown alternative to American data infrastructure, according to reporting from POLITICO. Insiders on both sides of the Atlantic reportedly understood the message as a direct signal that Europe wants out of its Palantir dependency.

The moves are already visible on the ground. Spain’s government, under Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, has directed state-linked firms to exclude Palantir from future public contracts. France’s domestic intelligence service chose the French company ChapsVision over Palantir for a major contract. And in the United Kingdom, a bigger reckoning may be coming in February 2027, when the Labour government led by Andy Burnham will have to decide the fate of Palantir’s roughly £330 million data-platform contract with the National Health Service.

Hard to Quit

Even so, few dispute that Palantir’s technology is unusually effective. French digital-sovereignty advocate Philippe Latombe compared the company’s grip to that of an addictive product, arguing its long experience across many clients has made its data-processing tools difficult to match.

Palantir’s leadership has shown little concern about the European backlash. CEO Alex Karp dismissed the idea that European rivals pose a serious threat during a recent television appearance, while ChapsVision chief executive Olivier Dellenbach told POLITICO his firm has benefited from a strong wave of anti-Palantir sentiment — though he cautioned that real digital sovereignty will require sustained public investment, not just opposition to one company.

Several European nations, including Belgium, Germany, Luxembourg, Romania and the Netherlands, alongside Canada, have reportedly expressed interest in a rival system built by French defense firm Thales. Yet NATO’s own supreme allied commander for transformation, Admiral Pierre Vandier, has acknowledged that the alliance currently has nothing that matches Palantir’s battlefield AI capabilities — from processing satellite imagery to recommending strikes and automatically triggering munitions resupply.

From Crisis Response to Permanent Fixture

Palantir’s foothold in Europe was built gradually, often in the aftermath of emergencies. The company entered France following the 2015 Paris terrorist attacks, signing a contract with domestic intelligence in 2016. In Germany, police in Hesse adopted Palantir’s Gotham platform in 2017 under the name “hessenDATA.” In Britain, Palantir’s relationship with the NHS reportedly began with a token £1 fee to help manage data during the Covid-19 pandemic.

That pattern has left the company’s software embedded not just in government but also in European industry — Airbus, BMW, BP and media group Axel Springer are all customers of Palantir’s Foundry platform.

Ideology and Sovereignty

The debate over Palantir in Europe is not purely technical. Co-founded by CEO Alex Karp and billionaire investor Peter Thiel — a prominent backer of U.S. President Donald Trump — the company has faced criticism over its work with U.S. immigration enforcement and the Israeli military. French lawmaker Aurélien Saintoul has gone so far as to accuse the company’s founders of pursuing a political project he labeled “technofascist,” arguing that Thiel’s worldview separates the defense of freedom from democracy itself.

A Palantir spokesperson rejected such characterizations as absurd, pointing out that similar criticism has also come from Russian state officials, and emphasized the company’s support for Ukraine’s military as evidence of where its loyalties lie.

An Uphill Battle

Even as governments talk sovereignty, European banks and asset managers have reportedly been increasing their investment in Palantir over the past year, according to the investigative outlet Follow the Money — a sign of the tension between political rhetoric and market reality.

Meanwhile, Palantir’s ambitions in Europe are growing rather than shrinking. On July 1, its Maven Smart System — originally developed for the Pentagon — became fully operational within NATO’s classified network, linking command-and-control systems across the alliance. And American rivals are following Palantir’s playbook: Amazon Web Services recently pledged $1 billion to embed engineering teams directly inside client organizations, while Microsoft announced a $2.5 billion effort to deploy thousands of specialists into customer operations.

German Green MEP Hannah Neumann summed up the stakes for critics: allowing public institutions to depend on software controlled by a small number of U.S. tech billionaires risks handing part of the democratic state over to a private actor accountable to neither voters nor parliament.

For now, though, Europe’s alternatives remain fragmented, and few dispute that no domestic competitor yet matches Palantir’s scale or track record — meaning any real move toward digital sovereignty is likely to be slow, expensive, and contested every step of the way.

The decision was confirmed by King Mohammed VI and is related to the US recognition of Moroccan claims to Western Sahara in 2020.

Morocco has named a key highway in the country after US President Donald Trump, the BBC reported.

Trump himself announced the news on social networks a few days ago. The information was also confirmed by a letter from Morocco’s King Mohammed VI, in which the ruler indicated that the renaming of the highway was an expression of deep respect.

The Tiznit-Dakhla highway enters the territory of Western Sahara – a region most of which is occupied by Morocco, with the country claiming sovereignty over it. However, part of the territory is controlled by the Polisario Front – an armed group fighting for the independence of the local Sahrawi population.

Western Sahara, a former Spanish colony, has been the subject of a dispute for five decades in one of the longest-running conflicts in Africa. The UN has consistently called for a resolution to the dispute, including through a referendum, but the region’s indigenous people have never been given a chance to vote on their future.

The African Union recognizes the independence of Western Sahara.

In 2020, during the first term of the Donald Trump administration, the US recognized Morocco’s claims to the disputed region as part of an agreement in which Morocco agreed to normalize relations with Israel.

However, few people know that the oldest continuous peace treaty of the US is the Treaty of Amity between the United States and Morocco of 1787.

During the War of Independence (1775–1783), the Sultan of Morocco, Sidi Muhammad ben Abdallah, played a key role for the US:

In 1777, he declared that American merchant ships were welcome in Moroccan ports.

In doing so, Morocco became the first country in the world to officially recognize the independence of the US.

The Sultan also offered to send resources and provisions to George Washington’s army. However, he did not send physical troops or regiments to American soil.

The Moroccan-American Treaty of Amity of 1787 is a highly significant document that remains in history as the longest continuous peace treaty between the United States and a foreign country. Signed at a time when the new American nation was vulnerable and lacked a strong navy, this alliance provided vital protection for American trade in the Atlantic and Mediterranean.

Historical context and negotiations

The Sultan’s Initiative: In December 1777, the Sultan of Morocco, Sidi Muhammad ben Abdallah, issued a proclamation opening his ports to American ships, making Morocco the first country to recognize the independence of the United States.

The American Envoys: The negotiations were led by two of the most famous Founding Fathers of the United States, Thomas Jefferson (in Paris) and John Adams (in London).

The Mediator: Since Jefferson and Adams could not travel to Marrakesh in person, they sent American diplomat Thomas Barclay, who negotiated the details with the Sultan.

Signing and Ratification: The treaty was signed by the Sultan in June 1786, and in January 1787 by Jefferson and Adams. The Continental Congress ratified it on July 18, 1787.

Key provisions of the treaty

Protection from pirates: At this time, Barbary pirates from North Africa were regularly capturing American ships and taking their crews hostage. The treaty guaranteed that Moroccan ships would not attack Americans.

Assistance at sea: Morocco pledged to protect American ships in its waters, provide them with provisions, and assist in the release of Americans captured by other Barbary states.

Trade status: The United States was granted “most-favored-nation” status, allowing free trade in Moroccan ports with minimal tariffs.

Religious tolerance: The treaty guaranteed complete safety and freedom for Christian American citizens living in or traveling to Morocco.

Legacy and Significance

The George Washington Letter: In December 1789, the first President of the United States, George Washington, sent an official letter to the Sultan, thanking him for his friendship and expressing his hope that the treaty would preserve peace between the two countries forever.

Renewal: The treaty was concluded for a period of 50 years, and in 1836 it was renewed under exactly the same terms and remains in force to this day.

Tangier: As a symbol of this friendship, in 1821 the Sultan gifted the United States a building in the city of Tangier. It served as the American diplomatic mission for 140 years and is today the only National Historic Landmark of the United States located on foreign soil.

In his famous letter of December 1, 1789, President George Washington expressed his deep gratitude to the Sultan of Morocco, Sidi Muhammad ben Abdallah, for his friendship and protection of the new American nation. The letter was written shortly after the US Constitution came into force and Washington took office as the first American president.

This letter is extremely diplomatic, full of respect and pursues three main purposes:

1. Apology for the delay and explanation of the political changes

Washington begins the letter with a sincere apology for the delay in the United States’ official response to the Sultan. He explains this by the large-scale political reorganization in America:

Up until this point, the United States had been governed by a weak central authority (the Continental Congress).

Washington informs the Sultan that the Americans have finally created a new, strong and unified government with the adoption of the new Constitution.

He announces that he has been elected the first president and now personally takes over the management of state affairs.

2. Gratitude for the Treaty of Friendship

Washington explicitly emphasizes how highly the American people appreciate the Sultan’s noble actions:

He thanks Morocco for being one of the first nations to recognize the independence of the United States.

He expressed appreciation for the Treaty of 1787 and for the Sultan’s protection of American merchant ships from the Barbary pirates.

Washington called the Sultan’s actions an example of “justice and benevolence” that had won the respect and affection of the United States.

3. Honesty about the lack of money and resources

In a very frank and important part of the letter, Washington admitted that the United States was economically exhausted after the long War of Independence against Britain:

He explained that his country did not yet have the wealth or a strong navy to send valuable gifts or make grand gestures in return for Moroccan friendship.

The President assured the Sultan that although the United States was poor at this time, it was rich in “gratitude and honesty” and would strictly honor the commitments it had made.

Conclusion and Prayer for Peace

At the end of the letter, Washington gave the Sultan a blessing that was consistent with his faith. He prayed to “God Almighty” (Al Nasser) to grant the Sultan health, long life, a glorious reign, and peace for his empire. He concluded with the words:

“…that the New Empire of America may be added to the number of your most faithful friends.”

This letter solidified the foundations of Moroccan-American relations.

At the end of the 19th century, relations between the United States and Morocco entered a new, much more complex stage. This was the period of the so-called “New Imperialism,” in which the European colonial powers (especially France, Spain, and Great Britain) began to aggressively challenge each other for influence over Morocco, and the weakened Sultanate sought a counterweight.

The United States, which at that time was rapidly becoming a global economic power, changed its approach from a purely diplomatic alliance to economic penetration and participation in international colonial distribution.

Here are the key moments from this period:

1. The Madrid Conference of 1880

This event marked the official entry of the United States into the great European diplomatic game for Morocco.

The Madrid Conference was convened to settle the issue of the so-called “protection system” in Morocco (in which European countries granted immunity to local Moroccan citizens, removing them from the jurisdiction of the sultan and the tax system).

The United States sent an official representative and signed the Madrid Convention. Thus, for the first time, America acted together with the European colonial powers regarding North Africa, securing the same privileges and economic rights in Morocco as France and Britain had.

2. The Sultan seeks American support against Europe

Seeing how France and Spain were tightening the noose around his country, the Sultan of Morocco (especially Hassan I, who ruled until 1894) tried to use the United States as a diplomatic shield.

The Moroccan government considered the United States a “neutral” power, since, unlike the Europeans, the Americans had no direct territorial (colonial) appetites in Africa at that time.

The Sultan made attempts to attract American capital, buy modern weapons from the United States, and even invited American engineers to modernize the country, hoping that the American presence would deter a French or Spanish invasion.

3. Commercial expansion and economic interests

At the end of the 19th century, American interest in Morocco became primarily commercial. The United States began to export huge quantities of oil (gas for lighting), cotton goods, sugar, and iron to the Moroccan market. American consuls in Tangier, Mogador (now Essaouira), and Casablanca actively defended the interests of American merchants and insisted on an “Open Door” policy – i.e. equal access to trade in Morocco without a European monopoly.

The United States officially recognized the restoration of Moroccan independence on March 7, 1956. This occurred through an official statement from the U.S. Department of State, followed by a congratulatory letter from President Dwight Eisenhower to Sultan Mohammed V, sent just five days after France and Morocco signed the joint declaration ending the protectorate (March 2, 1956), followed by:

Upgrading diplomatic status: On October 6, 1956, the historic American Legation in Tangier was officially elevated to the rank of U.S. Embassy, ​​and the first Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary Cavendish Cannon presented his credentials to the Sultan.

The King’s First Visit: In November 1957, the Sultan (now taking the title of King Mohammed V) made his first official state visit to the United States at the invitation of President Eisenhower, which finally cemented the renewed alliance.

Illustrative photo: pexels-abduljaleel-tijjani-muhammad-2152905037-35786088

S&Ds send letter to Von der Leyen asking her to verify the legality of calls by certain governments to suspend Schengen following the Ceuta crisis

The Socialists and Democrats Group in the European Parliament sent a letter to President von der Leyen, on August 1st, urging her to intervene immediately to clarify the rules governing the suspension of the Schengen area by member states following the events in Ceuta.

The S&D Group has expressed concern over the deliberate misrepresentation by certain governments of what happened in Ceuta yesterday and of the consequences that might follow, exploiting the situation for political ends. The S&D Group has made it clear that no member state can “expel” another member state from Schengen. The European Union is founded on respect for common rules, which must be applied in accordance with the rule of law, not for political expediency.

Defending Schengen means safeguarding the free movement of people, one of the greatest achievements of European integration.

The S&D Group has pointed out that, on this occasion, instead of responding with solidarity and support for Spain, the right and the far right have reacted by calling for the closure of borders. This represents a serious precedent, stemming from Italy’s decision, which opens the door to potential manipulation of European law to serve the political agendas and interests of individual governments.

Today, instead of cooperating with Spain, many governments have chosen confrontation over solidarity, calling into question not only Spain but also the very principle of shared European responsibility.

Ana Catarina Mendes, S&D Vice-President, said:

“Migration is a historical phenomenon that should not be demonised but managed through regular entry channels, integration, rights, responsibilities, and a relentless fight against traffickers and exploiters. Schengen cannot be defended by erecting new borders within Europe; rather, it must be defended through a unified immigration policy and solidarity among member states. Von der Leyen herself has publicly stated that ‘no one has reached mainland Spain or the rest of the European Union.’ If these are the facts, on what objective grounds was the reintroduction of internal border controls justified? We call on the Commission to clarify whether these legal conditions have in fact been met and, if not, to fully exercise its role as guardian of the Treaties.”

Sandro Ruotolo, Member of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, said:

“What has become of the Europe we once knew? Schengen is one of the European Union’s most important achievements. It cannot become a tool for exerting political pressure against another member state, nor can it be called into question on the basis of propaganda and fear. Musk’s videos, which portray people crossing the sea as ‘zombies’, confirm that the dehumanisation of language always precedes the dehumanisation of people. Politics must address challenges, not fuel fear and hatred.

“We have to promote a vision of Europe that is ambitious and does not yield to hatred, and respecting the Treaties is essential to reaffirming European values. What we are witnessing is simply propaganda: right-wing and far-right governments are manipulating free movement to fit their political agendas. President Von der Leyen must take responsibility for this. She cannot allow the clouding of facts to prevail or the principles of Schengen to be disregarded.”

The final discussions on the controversial possible new Additional protocol to the Oviedo Convention is continuing hot and heavy within the executive body, the Committee of Ministers, of the Council of Europe. The UN CRPD Committee issued an Open letter to the Committee of Minister prior to its last meeting before the summer break. The CRPD Committee urge the Member States of the Council to oppose and withdraw the draft Additional Protocol and to uphold their human rights obligations under the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

The Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UN CRPD Committee) pointed to its longstanding concern regarding the possible new Additional Protocol to the Oviedo Convention. That draft Additional protocol, the UN CRPD Committee noted “retains coercive psychiatric measures that are incompatible with the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities adopted on 13 December 2006.”

The Committee pointed out that the UN CRPD “prohibits involuntary placement and involuntary treatment of persons with disabilities on the basis of disability, without exceptions. Involuntary placement and involuntary treatment, whether as measures of last resort or subject to certain safeguards are still incompatible with the human rights model of disability set out in the UN CRPD, which prohibits coercion in mental health services.”

Adopting the Additional Protocol render states in breach of their obligations under the UN CRPD

The draft Additional Protocol, the UN CRPD Committee noted, is “inconsistent with the UN CRPD, and its adoption and implementation will render States parties to the UN CRPD, which are Member States to the Council of Europe in breach of their obligations under the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.”

“States parties to the UNCRPD are under the general obligation to refrain from engaging in any act or practice that is inconsistent with the Convention (article 4 (1) (f)),” the UN CRPD Committee specified. And it added “States parties cannot derogate from their obligations under the Convention, and even worse in 2026 – 20 years after the adoption of the Convention – by creating exceptions, through a Protocol to a regional treaty, alleging that coercion is compatible with human rights, or pretending that the current text of the draft Additional Protocol is aligned with the UN CRPD.”

The international community unified in demands that services be free from coercion

The World Health Organization’s Comprehensive Mental Health Action Plan 2013–2030, emphasizes that mental health services, including for persons with disabilities, must be provided in the community and be free from coercion. The 2023 joint WHO-OHCHR guidance Mental health, human rights and legislation: guidance and practice also call for legislative reform to end coercion in mental health services, replace psychiatric institutions with inclusive community support systems, and enshrine free and informed consent as the basis of all mental health-related interventions.

Likewise, governing bodies of the international community have reaffirmed the need to move away from coercion in mental health, such as the United Nations General Assembly in its Resolution A/RES/77/300 (2023) and the Human Rights Council, in its 2026 Resolution 61/18 on mental health and human rights.

Harm and death caused by involuntary measures

Evidence-based reports, the UN CRPD Committee notes “have concluded widespread violence experienced by persons with disabilities in institutions, along with harm and death caused by involuntary commitment and involuntary treatment. There are no therapeutic benefits and a lack of clinical evidence supporting use of coercion and involuntary institutionalization.”

The UN CRPD Committee further indicated that “the appropriate response to individual crisis should respect the will and preferences of the person, including supported decision-making, peer support, community-based services, individualized crisis planning, access to legal and social support, and non-medical approaches that preserve autonomy and dignity.”

The UN CRPD Committee finally reiterated that “involuntary placement, involuntary treatment, seclusion, restraint and similar practices are not legitimate rights-based responses to distress or crisis, but discriminatory measures that deny legal capacity, undermine liberty, and may amount to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.”

KINGNEWSWIRE // PRESS RELEASE

Programme at the Church of Scientology & Community Centre of Dublin will connect international humanitarian principles with everyday community service

DUBLIN, Ireland, 3 August 2026 — A World Humanitarian Day programme focused on community service and practical methods of helping others will be held at the Church of Scientology & Community Centre of Dublin on Saturday, 29 August 2026.

The three-hour programme, scheduled from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m. at the centre on Firhouse Road, Dublin 24, will celebrate humanitarian service and introduce techniques that people can use when assisting relatives, neighbours, colleagues and members of their communities.

The event will place the international observance within a local context, examining how humanitarian values can be expressed not only during major disasters but also through organised community work and individual acts of practical assistance.

Humanitarian service is often associated with emergency teams operating in areas affected by natural disasters, displacement or severe hardship. At community level, however, the same principles can be seen when volunteers help an isolated resident, support a family facing difficulties, organise essential supplies or provide additional hands to a civic or charitable project.

The Dublin programme will examine skills intended to help individuals respond constructively when someone around them is experiencing stress, confusion or practical difficulty. The subjects include communication, organisation, conflict resolution and methods of providing calm and responsible support.

These areas form part of the training used by Scientology Volunteer Ministers, a religious social-service programme established in the mid-1970s by Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard.

The programme is based on the principle that individuals can become more effective in helping others when they are equipped with practical knowledge and are prepared to apply it responsibly.

“Humanitarian responsibility is not confined to institutions, governments or international organisations,” said Ivan Arjona, representative of the Church of Scientology to the European Union, the OSCE, the Council of Europe and the United Nations.

“It is also expressed through citizens who notice when help is needed and who possess the skills, discipline and willingness to respond. European values of human dignity, solidarity and civic participation become meaningful when they are reflected in practical service within our neighbourhoods and communities.”

Arjona added that humanitarian education can help strengthen local resilience by enabling people to cooperate more effectively during both ordinary difficulties and larger emergencies.

From an international observance to local responsibility

The United Nations observes World Humanitarian Day each year on 19 August to recognise humanitarian personnel and the people who provide assistance to communities affected by crises.

The annual observance draws attention to humanitarian needs around the world and to the importance of protecting those who deliver assistance. It also provides an opportunity to consider the contribution of volunteers and community organisations that work outside the international humanitarian system but share the objective of reducing hardship and preserving human dignity.

The Dublin event will take place ten days after the official United Nations observance, extending its themes into a programme centred on practical community service.

Ireland has a long tradition of voluntary involvement in social care, education, sport, cultural life, neighbourhood development and support for vulnerable people. Much of that work takes place through local associations, charities, faith communities and informal networks whose members contribute their time and experience.

Such activity can become particularly important when public services or specialist organisations require additional community support. Volunteers may assist with logistics, communications, distribution, administration or direct care, depending on their training and the needs of the situation.

Practical tools for everyday situations

The methods introduced through the Volunteer Ministers programme are drawn from The Scientology Handbook, compiled from the works of L. Ron Hubbard.

Its 19 areas of study cover subjects including communication, study and learning, marriage and family relationships, children, workplace difficulties, personal integrity, organisation, setting goals and resolving conflicts.

The Volunteer Ministers training programme presents these subjects through individual courses designed to provide step-by-step methods that can be applied in everyday situations.

A person attempting to help may have good intentions but still lack the communication or organisational skills needed to improve the situation. Training can provide a clearer structure: establishing what has occurred, listening to those involved, identifying immediate priorities and coordinating useful action.

Communication is particularly important when people are distressed or when several groups are attempting to work together. Misunderstandings can delay assistance, create unnecessary tension or lead to duplicated efforts. Clear communication and defined responsibilities can make community responses more orderly and effective.

Conflict resolution is another area with direct relevance to humanitarian and civic work. Volunteers frequently encounter people with different backgrounds, beliefs and expectations. The ability to reduce hostility and restore cooperation can be essential when assistance depends on several individuals or organisations working together.

The programme also includes organisational principles that may be used when coordinating activities, distributing materials, managing volunteers or establishing a sequence of priorities.

Volunteer Ministers and humanitarian service

The Scientology Volunteer Ministers programme in Dublin forms part of an international network whose members participate in community projects and provide assistance following emergencies and disasters.

Volunteer Ministers have worked with public authorities, emergency responders, religious communities, charities and other voluntary groups. Their activities have included organising and distributing supplies, assisting at shelters and collection centres, cleaning damaged premises and supporting logistical operations.

The programme’s motto, “Something can be done about it,” reflects Mr. Hubbard’s view that people should not regard social and personal difficulties as inevitably beyond their ability to influence.

In everyday settings, this approach may involve helping a community organisation prepare an event, assisting someone who is struggling to communicate a problem, supporting a neighbourhood initiative or contributing practical work to a charitable activity.

Participation in the training is not restricted by religious affiliation. The methods are available to people of different backgrounds who are interested in developing their ability to help others.

A home for community activity in Dublin

Opened in October 2017, the Church of Scientology & Community Centre of Dublin was established as a venue for religious, cultural, educational, charitable and community activity.

The multi-acre Firhouse Road property includes an auditorium, meeting and seminar rooms, audiovisual facilities, a café and sports areas. The centre has hosted programmes organised by local associations, cultural groups, charities and organisations working in education and social betterment.

The World Humanitarian Day programme continues the centre’s emphasis on providing space for civic engagement and cooperation among people from varied cultural, national and religious backgrounds.

By focusing on skills that can be used in everyday life, the event will connect a global humanitarian observance with the practical question of how individuals can become better prepared to assist those around them.

About the Church of Scientology in Europe

The Church of Scientology, its churches, missions, groups and members are present throughout the European continent. Inspired by the religious and humanitarian work of founder L. Ron Hubbard, Scientologists support initiatives in education, drug prevention, human-rights awareness, moral education, disaster response and community betterment. Recognition of Scientology as a charitable and bona fide religion continues to grow across Europe, alongside its commitment to education, prevention, volunteer service and constructive participation in civil society.