Your contact for new licenses
On Wednesday evening, the coordinators nominated the six Executive Vice-Presidents of the second Von der Leyen Commission and Health Commissioner Olivér Várhelyi by a two-thirds majority. The agreement almost fell apart over the evaluation of Teresa Ribera. The EPP wanted to state in the evaluation letter that the Executive Vice President must resign if she is charged or convicted by the judiciary in Spain. The Spanish Environment Minister, who remains in office until today, is accused of having violated her official duties during the flood disaster in Valencia. Initially, S&D was not willing to agree and, in return, blocked the nomination of the Italian Raffaele Fitto from the conservative ECR party family, as well as Henna Virkkunen from the Christian Democratic EPP party family.
There have been minor changes to the Health Commissioner’s portfolio. Várhelyi is no longer responsible for sexual-reproductive health and mental health. However, these changes mean that no new round of hearings is due. This means that all 26 commissioners have been nominated by Parliament and the hearings have been concluded. On Wednesday, the plenary session in Strasbourg will vote on the entire new Commission. It needs an absolute majority of votes there.
The S&D coordinators were not ready to raise their hands for Raffaele Fitto, the Meloni confidant and candidate from Italy for the post of executive Vice-President, until 5 pm. In turn, the EPP coordinators threatened to block Teresa Ribera, who is a confidante of Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez. It took a two-page declaration from the EPP, S&D and Renew group leaders to achieve a breakthrough.
In the paper, which was obtained by Table.Briefings, the three pro-European political groups reaffirm their intention to work together during the parliamentary term and drive forward reforms in nine policy areas. The declaration on migration, the economy, the welfare state, environmental protection, the rule of law, geopolitics, the multiannual financial framework and EU reforms is quite general. It cannot be compared with a coalition agreement of a member state. The ECR and the Greens are not part of the agreement. According to reports, EPP group leader Weber was not prepared to include the Greens in the talks.
One point of contention in the Von der Leyen coalition has not yet been resolved: The S&D Group does not want to cooperate with the ECR Group, but wants to treat the group like the far-right factions of the “Patriots for Europe” around the delegation of the French Rassemblement National and the “European Sovereignists” (ESN) around the German AfD.
However, EPP group leader Manfred Weber opposed this. He wants to keep open the possibility of working with changing majorities as before. “The Christian Democrats must understand that narrow majorities with the right-wing populists and fascists in this House are not the right way forward,” said René Repasi, chairman of the SPD delegation.
Weber had previously agreed on the deal in principle with his S&D colleague Iratxe García Pérez and Renew boss Valérie Hayer: The seven outstanding Commission staff positions were to be agreed by the coordinators, with only minor changes to the portfolio of the Commissioner-designate for Health. The EPP Group supported the agreement with a large majority, with only the Spanish MEPs from the Partido Popular expressing criticism.
The deal was also acceptable to the Liberals. However, S&D leader Iratxe García Pérez was initially unable to get her parliamentary group to unite behind her. The Social Democrats debated for more than three hours and, according to a participant, very controversially. The German SPD delegates rejected the agreement as negotiated, as did the French Socialists. Other delegations had also expressed criticism, according to the parliamentary group.
Ribera faced a hearing in the Spanish parliament on Wednesday. It was about her possible co-responsibility for the catastrophic consequences of the floods in Valencia. The EPP Group subsequently increased the pressure once again. The candidate for the post of Executive Vice-President had not answered questions about her resignation – if she is still officially accused of serious failings in this context: “The EPP Group emphasizes that she should prepare for her resignation if the Spanish judiciary officially accuses her.”
Donald Trump’s new term as US President starts in two months. According to media reports, trade hardliner Robert Lighthizer will also play an important role in the new Trump cabinet. Moreover, Trump’s team has appointed Howard Lutnick as Secretary of Commerce in charge of the trade dossier. During the election campaign, Lutnick had spoken out in favor of funding tax relief by raising tariffs, among other things.
The EU must be prepared for Trump to make good on his threats, says Elvire Fabry, trade expert at the Jacques Delors Institute. “We don’t know how he will do it, but he will do it quickly,” she told Table.Briefings. During the election campaign, Trump had promised tariffs of 10 to 20 percent on all imports and a tariff of 60 percent on Chinese imports.
Tariffs of up to 20 percent would severely affect EU exports to the US, especially German exports: Ten percent of German goods exports go to the US, mainly in the pharmaceutical, automotive and machinery sectors. The ifo Institute estimates that German exports to the USA would decline by 15 percent.
German exports to China could also suffer, as China would export less to the USA. This is because many German products, such as machinery, are used in China to manufacture Chinese export products. If the country exports less, the demand for German machinery is correspondingly lower. There is also the risk that Chinese companies will redirect products that they can no longer sell on the US market to Europe, displacing local producers in the process.
The EU has a range of instruments at its disposal to defend itself against these tariffs: Its own tariffs against the US, trade defense instruments, the anti-coercion instrument and temporary, WTO-compliant safeguard measures.
The fastest way for the EU to react is to adjust its own tariffs. To do this, the Commission would have to present a proposal to change the customs tariffs for US imports, which would then have to be confirmed by a qualified majority in the EU Council. The Directorate-General for Trade has prepared a so-called “smart list” with which it can target sectors that are important to the Trump administration. The tariff increase can be calibrated in such a way that it corresponds to the overall damage of Trump’s tariffs for the EU.
However, David Kleimann, trade law expert at the think tank ODI Europe, warns that this reaction by the EU would violate WTO regulations. He argues that tariffs specifically targeting the USA ignore the WTO’s “Most-Favored-Nation” principle.
But there are other means: Since the last Trump administration, the EU has acquired a range of trade protection instruments that it could use to put pressure on the US. These include:
The EU Commission could initiate proceedings under these instruments, which would then put US companies at a disadvantage in EU procurement markets. However, these proceedings would not be a direct response to the tariffs.
The EU also has the anti-coercion instrument at its disposal. It would only be used against Trump’s tariffs if the US were to use them as a threat to force the EU or individual member states to make political concessions – for example, preferential treatment of US tech companies in the EU.
Should tariffs against China suddenly divert a large quantity of Chinese products to the European market, the EU could impose temporary tariffs or import quotas for the affected products. This is set out in the “WTO Agreement on Safeguards.” The EU had used this instrument in the first Trump legislature in response to the US tariffs on steel and aluminum.
“The EU has the tools to spite the United States,” says Elvire Fabry. However, she is worried that Trump could try and divide Europe. For example, he could target economic sectors that are only important for certain member states. “The most important thing is that the EU stands united against Trump,” she said, adding that there is currently less cohesion between Germany and France than during the last Trump administration.
A strong European position is also hampered by the fact that Chinese interests are also involved. In the past, individual countries have repeatedly backed out when the EU should have stood united against Beijing. This was most recently the case when the EU Commission decided to impose tariffs on Chinese EVs, and the member states appeared as a divided community.
MEP Daniel Caspary (CDU) takes a more optimistic view of the situation. “Whenever we are in difficult times, the EU moves closer together,” he told Table.Briefings. Even if the US tariffs would “massively damage” the EU, Europe would have to take a very close look at whether it should also impose tariffs against the US. This makes him sound as cautious as Friedrich Merz, leader of the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), who recently warned at an event organized by the Jacques Delors Centre in Berlin against reacting to Trump with isolationism.
French Renew MEP Marie-Pierre Vedrenne sounds a different note. She believes that Europe should “prepare for the worst.” She told Table.Briefings that the EU must prepare itself mentally for the confrontation and introduce tariffs as soon as Trump makes good on his threats. “We must not be afraid to use our instruments. If we never use them, they will lose their deterrent effect.”
Coordinating a response between the EU member states to Trump’s possible tariffs is still in its infancy. EU diplomats have yet to agree on a uniform approach. The first steps towards a common approach could be taken in today’s meeting of the Council of Trade Ministers in Brussels. However, no concrete progress is currently expected.
New York, Madison Square Garden, a few days before the election. The greats of the MAGA universe have gathered on the stage of the world’s most famous arena to give Donald Trump’s campaign the final push. The Republican’s sons are speaking, vice presidential candidate JD Vance, billionaire Elon Musk. But shortly before Trump himself gives his speech, a man with a beard streaked with gray and a very high forehead steps up to the podium: Howard Lutnick, CEO of investment bank Cantor Fitzgerald.
Lutnick is not a star. Very few of the 20,000 or so spectators are likely to recognize his name. But he is important in Trump’s orbit – as evidenced not only by his prominent speaking slot. As one of the co-chairs of the Republican campaign’s transition team, he has been preparing the new administration’s most important personnel decisions for months.
Now he has secured an important position for himself: On Tuesday, the former and future president nominated the 63-year-old as the next Secretary of Commerce and announced that Lutnick would simultaneously assume “direct responsibility” for the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative.
The Wall Street man is therefore likely to become one of the central figures for one of the most important concerns of the next Trump administration: the imposition of tariffs with the aim of enforcing the president’s will.
It is not the role that Lutnick was aiming for. In recent weeks, he has hardly faltered in his bid for the post of Treasury Secretary, securing the support of influential Trump whisperers such as Elon Musk. But even if the banker missed out on the more prestigious job in the Treasury Department, located right next to the White House on Pennsylvania Avenue, his new role is likely to come with an enormous amount of power.
The Department of Commerce (DoC) oversees a whole range of government agencies and institutions that are crucial to US economic policy. In his role as the United States Trade Representative (USTR), Lutnick will also steer the trade policy of the world’s largest economy. The Trump team has not announced whether he will formally take on the role. The jobs of Secretary of Commerce and Trade Representative are usually separate.
In Howard Lutnick, Trump is appointing a long-time friend to his cabinet – and an ideological ally. The investment banker supports the president-elect’s vision of using tariffs to bring industrial jobs back to the USA. He also sees the import surcharges in a positive light. “Don’t tax our people. Make money instead,” Lutnick recently said in a podcast. “Impose tariffs on China and make $400 billion.”
These statements coincide with Trump’s plan to impose a special 60 percent levy on all imports from the People’s Republic. It would be a massive escalation of the trade war between Washington and Beijing, which Trump started during his first term in office and the effects of which are still being felt today. Numerous tariffs imposed by the Republican at the time remained in force during the Biden years.
China is likely to remain the focus of Trump’s trade policy. However, Europe could also face difficult years with Lutnick in office. After all, the president-elect announced during the election campaign that he would impose a 10 or 20 percent tariff on all imports. This would cost the European Union dearly. According to analysts, exports from the eurozone to the USA could slump by around a third if Trump were to impose a tariff of ten percent. Most recently, the volume of exports to the United States amounted to around €460 billion per year. And Germany in particular could be severely affected by such a slump.
This is because the United States is the most important export market for German companies. In 2023, they sent goods worth around €168 billion across the Atlantic. A slump here could send the German economy into recession, Bundesbank President Joachim Nagel recently warned in Die Zeit. But this could be just the beginning.
Even during his first term in office, Trump had one German sector in particular in his sights: the automotive industry. Under the then Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, the USTR prepared a report that would have enabled the Trump administration to impose punitive tariffs of 25 percent on imports of German cars and car parts. In the end, Trump was dissuaded from these plans and the report ended up in the archives. But under Lutnick, it could end up back on the agenda.
The EU received an inglorious prize at COP29. It is the Fossil of the Day. The “Fossil of the Day” award is traditionally presented on each COP day by the civil society organizations of the Climate Action Network (CAN) to the biggest polluters, users of fossil fuels and blockers of ambitious climate policy.
After the G7, Italy and Russia, the EU was “crowned” on Wednesday. This is because it still has not presented a figure on how much it intends to provide for international climate financing in the future – the most important topic to be negotiated at COP29.
EU Climate Action Commissioner Wopke Hoekstra made it clear on Wednesday that he was not only concerned with the number, but also with what would ultimately flow into the total: only public funds? Private contributions as well? Loans or just grants? The EU negotiators remain silent on all of this and are not revealing their position publicly. For CAN, this is the reason to award the EU the “Fossil of the Day”, accompanied by the Jurassic Park anthem.
However, the price for the EU is also somewhat cynical. After all, the EU is the largest contributor to climate financing to date – the only one paying its fair share in terms of emissions. With the Green Deal, the EU has the most ambitious climate policy of all industrialized nations. Other industrialized nations, above all the USA, emit significantly more but pay less and present climate targets that are far less ambitious. In Baku, they have not yet been crowned “Fossil of the Day”, although this award would be more than deserved. Lukas Knigge
On Wednesday evening, the coordinators nominated the six Executive Vice-Presidents of the second Von der Leyen Commission and Health Commissioner Olivér Várhelyi by a two-thirds majority. The agreement almost fell apart over the evaluation of Teresa Ribera. The EPP wanted to state in the evaluation letter that the Executive Vice President must resign if she is charged or convicted by the judiciary in Spain. The Spanish Environment Minister, who remains in office until today, is accused of having violated her official duties during the flood disaster in Valencia. Initially, S&D was not willing to agree and, in return, blocked the nomination of the Italian Raffaele Fitto from the conservative ECR party family, as well as Henna Virkkunen from the Christian Democratic EPP party family.
There have been minor changes to the Health Commissioner’s portfolio. Várhelyi is no longer responsible for sexual-reproductive health and mental health. However, these changes mean that no new round of hearings is due. This means that all 26 commissioners have been nominated by Parliament and the hearings have been concluded. On Wednesday, the plenary session in Strasbourg will vote on the entire new Commission. It needs an absolute majority of votes there.
The S&D coordinators were not ready to raise their hands for Raffaele Fitto, the Meloni confidant and candidate from Italy for the post of executive Vice-President, until 5 pm. In turn, the EPP coordinators threatened to block Teresa Ribera, who is a confidante of Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez. It took a two-page declaration from the EPP, S&D and Renew group leaders to achieve a breakthrough.
In the paper, which was obtained by Table.Briefings, the three pro-European political groups reaffirm their intention to work together during the parliamentary term and drive forward reforms in nine policy areas. The declaration on migration, the economy, the welfare state, environmental protection, the rule of law, geopolitics, the multiannual financial framework and EU reforms is quite general. It cannot be compared with a coalition agreement of a member state. The ECR and the Greens are not part of the agreement. According to reports, EPP group leader Weber was not prepared to include the Greens in the talks.
One point of contention in the Von der Leyen coalition has not yet been resolved: The S&D Group does not want to cooperate with the ECR Group, but wants to treat the group like the far-right factions of the “Patriots for Europe” around the delegation of the French Rassemblement National and the “European Sovereignists” (ESN) around the German AfD.
However, EPP group leader Manfred Weber opposed this. He wants to keep open the possibility of working with changing majorities as before. “The Christian Democrats must understand that narrow majorities with the right-wing populists and fascists in this House are not the right way forward,” said René Repasi, chairman of the SPD delegation.
Weber had previously agreed on the deal in principle with his S&D colleague Iratxe García Pérez and Renew boss Valérie Hayer: The seven outstanding Commission staff positions were to be agreed by the coordinators, with only minor changes to the portfolio of the Commissioner-designate for Health. The EPP Group supported the agreement with a large majority, with only the Spanish MEPs from the Partido Popular expressing criticism.
The deal was also acceptable to the Liberals. However, S&D leader Iratxe García Pérez was initially unable to get her parliamentary group to unite behind her. The Social Democrats debated for more than three hours and, according to a participant, very controversially. The German SPD delegates rejected the agreement as negotiated, as did the French Socialists. Other delegations had also expressed criticism, according to the parliamentary group.
Ribera faced a hearing in the Spanish parliament on Wednesday. It was about her possible co-responsibility for the catastrophic consequences of the floods in Valencia. The EPP Group subsequently increased the pressure once again. The candidate for the post of Executive Vice-President had not answered questions about her resignation – if she is still officially accused of serious failings in this context: “The EPP Group emphasizes that she should prepare for her resignation if the Spanish judiciary officially accuses her.”
Donald Trump’s new term as US President starts in two months. According to media reports, trade hardliner Robert Lighthizer will also play an important role in the new Trump cabinet. Moreover, Trump’s team has appointed Howard Lutnick as Secretary of Commerce in charge of the trade dossier. During the election campaign, Lutnick had spoken out in favor of funding tax relief by raising tariffs, among other things.
The EU must be prepared for Trump to make good on his threats, says Elvire Fabry, trade expert at the Jacques Delors Institute. “We don’t know how he will do it, but he will do it quickly,” she told Table.Briefings. During the election campaign, Trump had promised tariffs of 10 to 20 percent on all imports and a tariff of 60 percent on Chinese imports.
Tariffs of up to 20 percent would severely affect EU exports to the US, especially German exports: Ten percent of German goods exports go to the US, mainly in the pharmaceutical, automotive and machinery sectors. The ifo Institute estimates that German exports to the USA would decline by 15 percent.
German exports to China could also suffer, as China would export less to the USA. This is because many German products, such as machinery, are used in China to manufacture Chinese export products. If the country exports less, the demand for German machinery is correspondingly lower. There is also the risk that Chinese companies will redirect products that they can no longer sell on the US market to Europe, displacing local producers in the process.
The EU has a range of instruments at its disposal to defend itself against these tariffs: Its own tariffs against the US, trade defense instruments, the anti-coercion instrument and temporary, WTO-compliant safeguard measures.
The fastest way for the EU to react is to adjust its own tariffs. To do this, the Commission would have to present a proposal to change the customs tariffs for US imports, which would then have to be confirmed by a qualified majority in the EU Council. The Directorate-General for Trade has prepared a so-called “smart list” with which it can target sectors that are important to the Trump administration. The tariff increase can be calibrated in such a way that it corresponds to the overall damage of Trump’s tariffs for the EU.
However, David Kleimann, trade law expert at the think tank ODI Europe, warns that this reaction by the EU would violate WTO regulations. He argues that tariffs specifically targeting the USA ignore the WTO’s “Most-Favored-Nation” principle.
But there are other means: Since the last Trump administration, the EU has acquired a range of trade protection instruments that it could use to put pressure on the US. These include:
The EU Commission could initiate proceedings under these instruments, which would then put US companies at a disadvantage in EU procurement markets. However, these proceedings would not be a direct response to the tariffs.
The EU also has the anti-coercion instrument at its disposal. It would only be used against Trump’s tariffs if the US were to use them as a threat to force the EU or individual member states to make political concessions – for example, preferential treatment of US tech companies in the EU.
Should tariffs against China suddenly divert a large quantity of Chinese products to the European market, the EU could impose temporary tariffs or import quotas for the affected products. This is set out in the “WTO Agreement on Safeguards.” The EU had used this instrument in the first Trump legislature in response to the US tariffs on steel and aluminum.
“The EU has the tools to spite the United States,” says Elvire Fabry. However, she is worried that Trump could try and divide Europe. For example, he could target economic sectors that are only important for certain member states. “The most important thing is that the EU stands united against Trump,” she said, adding that there is currently less cohesion between Germany and France than during the last Trump administration.
A strong European position is also hampered by the fact that Chinese interests are also involved. In the past, individual countries have repeatedly backed out when the EU should have stood united against Beijing. This was most recently the case when the EU Commission decided to impose tariffs on Chinese EVs, and the member states appeared as a divided community.
MEP Daniel Caspary (CDU) takes a more optimistic view of the situation. “Whenever we are in difficult times, the EU moves closer together,” he told Table.Briefings. Even if the US tariffs would “massively damage” the EU, Europe would have to take a very close look at whether it should also impose tariffs against the US. This makes him sound as cautious as Friedrich Merz, leader of the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), who recently warned at an event organized by the Jacques Delors Centre in Berlin against reacting to Trump with isolationism.
French Renew MEP Marie-Pierre Vedrenne sounds a different note. She believes that Europe should “prepare for the worst.” She told Table.Briefings that the EU must prepare itself mentally for the confrontation and introduce tariffs as soon as Trump makes good on his threats. “We must not be afraid to use our instruments. If we never use them, they will lose their deterrent effect.”
Coordinating a response between the EU member states to Trump’s possible tariffs is still in its infancy. EU diplomats have yet to agree on a uniform approach. The first steps towards a common approach could be taken in today’s meeting of the Council of Trade Ministers in Brussels. However, no concrete progress is currently expected.
New York, Madison Square Garden, a few days before the election. The greats of the MAGA universe have gathered on the stage of the world’s most famous arena to give Donald Trump’s campaign the final push. The Republican’s sons are speaking, vice presidential candidate JD Vance, billionaire Elon Musk. But shortly before Trump himself gives his speech, a man with a beard streaked with gray and a very high forehead steps up to the podium: Howard Lutnick, CEO of investment bank Cantor Fitzgerald.
Lutnick is not a star. Very few of the 20,000 or so spectators are likely to recognize his name. But he is important in Trump’s orbit – as evidenced not only by his prominent speaking slot. As one of the co-chairs of the Republican campaign’s transition team, he has been preparing the new administration’s most important personnel decisions for months.
Now he has secured an important position for himself: On Tuesday, the former and future president nominated the 63-year-old as the next Secretary of Commerce and announced that Lutnick would simultaneously assume “direct responsibility” for the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative.
The Wall Street man is therefore likely to become one of the central figures for one of the most important concerns of the next Trump administration: the imposition of tariffs with the aim of enforcing the president’s will.
It is not the role that Lutnick was aiming for. In recent weeks, he has hardly faltered in his bid for the post of Treasury Secretary, securing the support of influential Trump whisperers such as Elon Musk. But even if the banker missed out on the more prestigious job in the Treasury Department, located right next to the White House on Pennsylvania Avenue, his new role is likely to come with an enormous amount of power.
The Department of Commerce (DoC) oversees a whole range of government agencies and institutions that are crucial to US economic policy. In his role as the United States Trade Representative (USTR), Lutnick will also steer the trade policy of the world’s largest economy. The Trump team has not announced whether he will formally take on the role. The jobs of Secretary of Commerce and Trade Representative are usually separate.
In Howard Lutnick, Trump is appointing a long-time friend to his cabinet – and an ideological ally. The investment banker supports the president-elect’s vision of using tariffs to bring industrial jobs back to the USA. He also sees the import surcharges in a positive light. “Don’t tax our people. Make money instead,” Lutnick recently said in a podcast. “Impose tariffs on China and make $400 billion.”
These statements coincide with Trump’s plan to impose a special 60 percent levy on all imports from the People’s Republic. It would be a massive escalation of the trade war between Washington and Beijing, which Trump started during his first term in office and the effects of which are still being felt today. Numerous tariffs imposed by the Republican at the time remained in force during the Biden years.
China is likely to remain the focus of Trump’s trade policy. However, Europe could also face difficult years with Lutnick in office. After all, the president-elect announced during the election campaign that he would impose a 10 or 20 percent tariff on all imports. This would cost the European Union dearly. According to analysts, exports from the eurozone to the USA could slump by around a third if Trump were to impose a tariff of ten percent. Most recently, the volume of exports to the United States amounted to around €460 billion per year. And Germany in particular could be severely affected by such a slump.
This is because the United States is the most important export market for German companies. In 2023, they sent goods worth around €168 billion across the Atlantic. A slump here could send the German economy into recession, Bundesbank President Joachim Nagel recently warned in Die Zeit. But this could be just the beginning.
Even during his first term in office, Trump had one German sector in particular in his sights: the automotive industry. Under the then Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, the USTR prepared a report that would have enabled the Trump administration to impose punitive tariffs of 25 percent on imports of German cars and car parts. In the end, Trump was dissuaded from these plans and the report ended up in the archives. But under Lutnick, it could end up back on the agenda.
The EU received an inglorious prize at COP29. It is the Fossil of the Day. The “Fossil of the Day” award is traditionally presented on each COP day by the civil society organizations of the Climate Action Network (CAN) to the biggest polluters, users of fossil fuels and blockers of ambitious climate policy.
After the G7, Italy and Russia, the EU was “crowned” on Wednesday. This is because it still has not presented a figure on how much it intends to provide for international climate financing in the future – the most important topic to be negotiated at COP29.
EU Climate Action Commissioner Wopke Hoekstra made it clear on Wednesday that he was not only concerned with the number, but also with what would ultimately flow into the total: only public funds? Private contributions as well? Loans or just grants? The EU negotiators remain silent on all of this and are not revealing their position publicly. For CAN, this is the reason to award the EU the “Fossil of the Day”, accompanied by the Jurassic Park anthem.
However, the price for the EU is also somewhat cynical. After all, the EU is the largest contributor to climate financing to date – the only one paying its fair share in terms of emissions. With the Green Deal, the EU has the most ambitious climate policy of all industrialized nations. Other industrialized nations, above all the USA, emit significantly more but pay less and present climate targets that are far less ambitious. In Baku, they have not yet been crowned “Fossil of the Day”, although this award would be more than deserved. Lukas Knigge