The judge in Donald Trump’s Manhattan criminal hush-money case has postponed deciding on whether to throw out the president-elect’s conviction on presidential immunity grounds.

Judge Juan Merchan told Trump’s lawyers on Tuesday that he’d delay the ruling until 19 November after defense and prosecutors submitted a joint letter asking for a postponement.

The postponement followed numerous successful attempts to delay Trump’s case. Earlier this year, he was convicted on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in a scheme to influence the 2016 election.

The verdict came on 31 May – following fewer than 12 hours of jury deliberations in the unprecedented first criminal trial of a US president, former or sitting. The outcome marked a potentially stunning blow to Trump, then the presumptive Republican presidential nominee.

The campaign for Joe Biden, who ultimately withdrew his re-election bid, said “no one is above the law” in an email blast shortly after the verdict.

“In New York today, we saw that no one is above the law. Donald Trump has always mistakenly believed he would never face consequences for breaking the law for his own personal gain,” Michael Tyler, Biden’s communications director, said.

Trump’s criminal case portrayed a man who did not seem befitting of the presidency. Prosecutors said that Trump falsely recorded reimbursements he made to then lawyer Michael Cohen for a $130,000 payoff to adult film star Stormy Daniels, to silence her about an alleged affair with Trump, as “legal expenses”.

Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg’s office said that these falsifications were made to hide Trump’s violation of New York state election law, which criminalizes promoting the election of any person to office through illegal means.

Prosecutors said those unlawful means were the $130,000 payout to Daniels. The payout was, in essence, an illicit campaign contribution, as it was carried out for the benefit of Trump’s 2016 bid – exceeding the $2,700 individual contribution cap.

But Trump, whose poll numbers remained steady throughout the trial, did not lose support. He ultimately became the Republican nominee and, on 5 November, bested Kamala Harris.

Trump was originally scheduled to be sentenced on 10 July. Then came the 1 July US supreme court ruling that granted sitting presidents broad immunity for official acts taken during their time in office.

Trump urged Merchan to delay his sentencing in light of this ruling. His legal team pushed to challenge Trump’s conviction, citing the supreme court decision.

Merchan agreed to mull over the legalities and pushed back the proceeding until 18 September “if such is still necessary” given the supreme court decision. Trump’s attorneys in August asked for still more time, saying that they would need it to possibly appeal Merchan’s decision.

Merchan on 6 September delayed Trump’s sentencing yet again until 26 November – after the election – saying the situation was “fraught with complexities”. He said this decision was meant “to avoid any appearance – however unwarranted – that the proceeding has been affected by or seeks to affect the approaching presidential election in which the defendant is a candidate”.

Trump’s lawyers argued over the weekend that there are “strong reasons for the requested stay, and eventually dismissal of the case in the interests of justice”, according to the aforementioned letter.

Trump’s election victory has derailed his other criminal cases. Special prosecutor Jack Smith is winding down the federal election interference and classified documents cases against Trump.

The state-level election case in Fulton county, Georgia, is on hold pending appeal, following revelations that district attorney Fani Willis had hired as a prosecutor a man with whom she had an affair. Even if the proceeding survived appeal, proceedings are all but guaranteed to languish until 2029.

More details soon …

A driver killed 35 people and severely injured another 43 when he rammed his car into people exercising at a sports centre in the southern Chinese city of Zhuhai, police said on Tuesday.

Police had detained a 62-year-old man at the sports centre in Zhuhai after the ramming late on Monday, on the eve of an airshow by the People’s Liberation Army that is hosted annually in the city.

Police identified the man only by his family name of Fan, as is usual with the Chinese authorities. Fan was discovered in the car with a knife, with wounds to his neck thought to be self-inflicted, according to the statement. Police said he was unconscious and receiving medical care. They added that their preliminary investigation suggested he had been dissatisfied with the split of financial assets in his divorce.

On Tuesday, Xi Jinping, China’s president, urged local officials to ensure social stability and called for “all-out efforts” to treat the injured, according to state media. It was reported that Xi had dispatched a team from Beijing oversee the handling of the incident.

For almost 24 hours after the crime took place, it was unclear what the death or injury toll was. One of the four hospitals that took in people for treatment said it had more than 20 injured, state media reported on Monday. Calls made to the hospitals in the city by AP reporters went unanswered, or were directed towards other hospitals.

On Tuesday morning, searches for the incident were heavily censored on Chinese social media platforms. A search on Weibo for the sports centre turned up only a few posts, with a couple referring to the fact something had happened, without pictures or details. Articles by Chinese media about the incident from Monday night were taken down.

However, outside China’s Great Firewall, on X, videos were able to circulate. They were shared by the news blogger and dissident Li Ying, who is better known on X as Teacher Li. His account posts daily news based on user submissions. In the videos, dozens of people were lying prone on the running track in the sports centre. In one, a woman says “my foot is broken”, and a firefighter can be seen performing CPR on someone, as people are told to leave the scene. Similar images were posted on Weibo but were censored.

Chinese internet censors take extra care to scrub social media before and during big events, such as the meeting of the National People’s Congress, where the government announces its major policy initiatives for the coming year.

The incident happened on the day before China’s biggest airshow, which opened in Zhuhai on Tuesday. The new aircraft debuted at the show included the PLA Air Force’s J-35A fighter jets, which appeared in public for the first time.

The sports centre, which serves the city district of Xiangzhou, regularly attracts hundreds of people, who run on its track, play football and dance. After the incident, the centre announced it would be closed until further notice.

There have been a number of recent attacks in China in which suspects appeared to target random people, including schoolchildren. In October, a 50-year-old man was detained after he allegedly used a knife to attack children at a school in Beijing. Five people were injured. In September, three people were killed in a knife attack in a Shanghai supermarket.

The archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, has announced that he will step down after facing mounting pressure to quit over his handling of an abuse scandal.

Pressure on Welby has been intensifying since the publication last week of a damning report on the church’s cover-up of John Smyth’s abuse in the UK in the late 1970s and early 80s, and later in Zimbabwe and South Africa. About 130 boys are believed to have been victims.

The independent Makin review into the abuse concluded that he might have been brought to justice had the archbishop formally reported it to police a decade ago.

In a statement posted on social media, Welby said: “Having sought the gracious permission of His Majesty The King, I have decided to resign as Archbishop of Canterbury.

“The Makin Review has exposed the long-maintained conspiracy of silence about the heinous abuses of John Smyth. When I was informed in 2013 and told that police had been notified, I believed wrongly that an appropriate resolution would follow.

“It is very clear that I must take personal and institutional responsibility for the long and retraumatising period between 2013 and 2024.”

He said the exact timings would be confirmed, adding: “I hope this decision makes clear how seriously the Church of England understands the need for change and our profound commitment to creating a safer church. As I step down I do so in sorrow with all victims and survivors of abuse.

“The last few days have renewed my long felt and profound sense of shame at the historic safeguarding failures of the Church of England. For nearly twelve years I have struggled to introduce improvements. It is for others to judge what has been done.”

Welby said last week he had considered resigning over his “shameful” decision not to act to deal with reports of abuse by Smyth, a powerful and charismatic barrister who died in 2018, when he was informed of them in 2013.

Lambeth Palace had said in a statement on Monday that Welby had “apologised profoundly both for his own failures and omissions, and for the wickedness, concealment and abuse by the church more widely”, but did not intend to resign.

But Andrew Morse, a victim of Smyth’s whom he first met while a pupil at Winchester college, Hampshire, said Welby should resign in solidarity with abuse victims.

He told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme on Tuesday that Welby’s admission that he had not done enough since 2013 “is enough in my mind to confirm that Justin Welby along with countless other Anglican church members were part of a cover-up about the abuse”. He described Smyth as a predator.

On Monday, a Church of England bishop added her voice to growing calls for Welby to resign. Helen-Ann Hartley, the bishop of Newcastle, said his position was untenable and he should quit. A line needed to be drawn, she added.

“I think that it’s very hard for the church, as the national, established church, to continue to have a moral voice in any way, shape or form in our nation, when we cannot get our own house in order with regard to something as critically important [as abuse],” Hartley told the BBC.

Smyth sadistically abused private schoolboys who attended evangelical Christian holiday camps in the late 1970s and early 80s. Across five decades, he is said to have subjected as many as 130 boys and young men in the UK and Africa to traumatic physical, sexual, psychological and spiritual attacks, permanently marking their lives.

When the abuse was discovered, Smyth was allowed to move abroad with the full knowledge of church officials, where he continued to act with impunity.

He died aged 75 in Cape Town in 2018 while under investigation by Hampshire constabulary, and was “never brought to justice for the abuse”, the Makin review published last week said.

Welby volunteered at the holiday camps in the 1970s but has denied any knowledge of concerns about Smyth. However, the report said this was “unlikely”.

It added: “[Welby] may not have known of the extreme seriousness of the abuse, but it is most probable that he would have had at least a level of knowledge that John Smyth was of some concern … It is not possible to establish whether Welby knew of the severity of the abuses in the UK prior to 2013.”

The archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, has announced he will step down after facing pressure to quit over his handling of an abuse scandal.

A damning report was published last week on the Church of England’s cover-up of John Smyth’s abuse in the UK in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and later in Zimbabwe and South Africa. About 130 boys are believed to have been victims.

The independent review into the abuse concluded he might have been brought to justice had the archbishop formally reported it to police a decade ago.

Lambeth Palace had said in a statement on Monday that Welby had “apologised profoundly both for his own failures and omissions, and for the wickedness, concealment and abuse by the church more widely” but did “not intend to resign”.

His resignation was announced on Tuesday afternoon.

Germany is expected to hold a snap election on 23 February after an agreement reached on Tuesday morning by parliamentary factions from the leading Social Democrats and the main conservative opposition CDU/CSU.

The date must be officially confirmed by the president, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, but this is considered to be a formality.

The date should bring clarity after days of infighting and speculation prompted by the collapse of Germany’s three-way coalition government last week.

The government fell after the chancellor, Olaf Scholz, of the Social Democrats, fired his finance minister, Christian Lindner, of the pro-business FDP, in a months-long row over how to fill a multibillion euro hole in the national budget. The FDP in turn withdrew from the coalition, depriving it of a parliamentary majority.

The election date is considered a compromise between the opposition conservatives, who had pushed for a January vote, arguing that Germany could not be left without leadership at a time of economic and diplomatic turmoil, and Scholz, who said a date in mid-March was necessary to give the election authorities time to organise the poll, in which more than 60 million people are eligible to vote.

Scholz is due to address parliament at Wednesday lunchtime. He is expected to imminently announce the date of a vote of confidence in the government, which his coalition is expected to lose, paving the way for elections. The vote could take place on 16 December.

Since the FDP’s withdrawal last week, Scholz’s centre-left Social Democrats (SPD) and the Greens – its other coalition partner – have carried on in a minority government.

Scholz, who wants to run again and has the backing of party leaders to do so despite dismal poll numbers, initially suggested an election in late March but came under pressure from the CDU as well as the Greens to speed up the process. The CDU is riding high in opinion polls and its leader, Friedrich Merz, has been pushing for an election as early as possible.

The political turmoil has hit as Europe’s biggest economy is expected to shrink for a second year in a row and amid heightened geopolitical volatility, with wars raging in Ukraine and the Middle East. The agreed poll date would mean Germany will be in the middle of its election campaign when Donald Trump is inaugurated as US president on 20 January.

The SPD, FDP and Greens had been governing together since 2021 – the first time that a tripartite coalition had been tried at a federal level in Germany.

On Tuesday, t he first polls since the collapse of the so-called traffic light coalition, showed that all parties, in particular the far-right populist AfD, had profited from the drama, except for the Social Democrats. The CDU/CSU conservative alliance under Merz is on 32.5%, the Greens are on 11.5% and the FDP is hanging on to the threshold needed for it to re-enter parliament, with 5%, while the SPD is polling at 15.5%.

The AfD, which has long called for new elections, has had the biggest gain, of 1.5%, which gives it 19.5% of the vote, second only to the CDU/CSU.

Election analysts put the AfD’s rise down not only to the fallout from the coalition collapse, but also to what is being referred to as the “Trump effec”. Its leader, Alice Weidel, has seen her position in the popularity ratings of Germany’s top 20 politicians rise from 17 to 14. Scholz is is placed 19th out of 20.

The most popular German politician is the defence minister, Boris Pistorius, of the SPD, who is 20 percentage points ahead of Scholz in the polls. He has often been touted as a potential candidate for chancellor but is said to be reluctant to contemplate the role, publicly denying any ambition to do so. However, internally the SPD is said to be discussing how it might switch Scholz for Pistorius, even as the majority of the government is said to desire a period in opposition.

Merz, a 69-year-old lawyer and investment banker who is favourite to become the next chancellor, on Tuesday promised a swathe of tax reforms, including a reduction in VAT on all foodstuffs and restaurant meals.

The new government will be forced to confront the crises Germany find itself facing, including inflation, Russia’s war on Ukraine and the threat of tariffs from both China and Trump. Its economy suffered a heavy blow after supplies of cheap Russian gas and oil were cut after Moscow launched its full-blown invasion of Ukraine and by the failure so far to agree on the sustainable management of debt at a time of crisis.

Germany is expected to hold a snap election on 23 February after an agreement reached on Tuesday morning by parliamentary factions from the leading Social Democrats and the main conservative opposition CDU/CSU.

The date must be officially confirmed by the president, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, but this is considered to be a formality.

The date should bring clarity after days of infighting and speculation prompted by the collapse of Germany’s three-way coalition government last week.

The government fell after the chancellor, Olaf Scholz, of the Social Democrats, fired his finance minister, Christian Lindner, of the pro-business FDP, in a months-long row over how to fill a multibillion euro hole in the national budget. The FDP in turn withdrew from the coalition, depriving it of a parliamentary majority.

The election date is considered a compromise between the opposition conservatives, who had pushed for a January vote, arguing that Germany could not be left without leadership at a time of economic and diplomatic turmoil, and Scholz, who said a date in mid-March was necessary to give the election authorities time to organise the poll, in which more than 60 million people are eligible to vote.

Scholz is due to address parliament at Wednesday lunchtime. He is expected to imminently announce the date of a vote of confidence in the government, which his coalition is expected to lose, paving the way for elections. The vote could take place on 16 December.

Since the FDP’s withdrawal last week, Scholz’s centre-left Social Democrats (SPD) and the Greens – its other coalition partner – have carried on in a minority government.

Scholz, who wants to run again and has the backing of party leaders to do so despite dismal poll numbers, initially suggested an election in late March but came under pressure from the CDU as well as the Greens to speed up the process. The CDU is riding high in opinion polls and its leader, Friedrich Merz, has been pushing for an election as early as possible.

The political turmoil has hit as Europe’s biggest economy is expected to shrink for a second year in a row and amid heightened geopolitical volatility, with wars raging in Ukraine and the Middle East. The agreed poll date would mean Germany will be in the middle of its election campaign when Donald Trump is inaugurated as US president on 20 January.

The SPD, FDP and Greens had been governing together since 2021 – the first time that a tripartite coalition had been tried at a federal level in Germany.

On Tuesday, t he first polls since the collapse of the so-called traffic light coalition, showed that all parties, in particular the far-right populist AfD, had profited from the drama, except for the Social Democrats. The CDU/CSU conservative alliance under Merz is on 32.5%, the Greens are on 11.5% and the FDP is hanging on to the threshold needed for it to re-enter parliament, with 5%, while the SPD is polling at 15.5%.

The AfD, which has long called for new elections, has had the biggest gain, of 1.5%, which gives it 19.5% of the vote, second only to the CDU/CSU.

Election analysts put the AfD’s rise down not only to the fallout from the coalition collapse, but also to what is being referred to as the “Trump effec”. Its leader, Alice Weidel, has seen her position in the popularity ratings of Germany’s top 20 politicians rise from 17 to 14. Scholz is is placed 19th out of 20.

The most popular German politician is the defence minister, Boris Pistorius, of the SPD, who is 20 percentage points ahead of Scholz in the polls. He has often been touted as a potential candidate for chancellor but is said to be reluctant to contemplate the role, publicly denying any ambition to do so. However, internally the SPD is said to be discussing how it might switch Scholz for Pistorius, even as the majority of the government is said to desire a period in opposition.

Merz, a 69-year-old lawyer and investment banker who is favourite to become the next chancellor, on Tuesday promised a swathe of tax reforms, including a reduction in VAT on all foodstuffs and restaurant meals.

The new government will be forced to confront the crises Germany find itself facing, including inflation, Russia’s war on Ukraine and the threat of tariffs from both China and Trump. Its economy suffered a heavy blow after supplies of cheap Russian gas and oil were cut after Moscow launched its full-blown invasion of Ukraine and by the failure so far to agree on the sustainable management of debt at a time of crisis.

China should face “a higher cost” for supporting Russia in the war against Ukraine, the EU’s incoming foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, has said.

The former Estonian prime minister was speaking to MEPs during a three-hour hearing before she takes office, when she listed Ukraine’s victory as a priority – stronger words than vaguer formulas of support voiced by some EU politicians.

“Victory of Ukraine is a priority for us all; the situation on the battlefield is very difficult,” Kallas told MEPs in her opening remarks. “That is why we must keep on working every day, today, tomorrow and for as long as it takes, and with as much military, financial and humanitarian aid as needed.”

In a carefully worded overture to the incoming Donald Trump administration, she said support for Ukraine was in the US’s interest. “If the US is worried about China, or other actors, then they should also be worried about how we respond … [to] Russia’s war against Ukraine, because we see how Iran, North Korea, China – more covertly – and Russia are working together.”

Later asked about Trump’s intentions, she said: “I don’t think anybody really knows what the new president-elect is doing” and said the EU needed “first and foremost” to get information from the US on its plans, adding: “Isolation has never worked for America.”

On defence, the EU needed “a drastic change of mindset”, she said, adding that the west “cannot accept” that Russia, Iran and North Korea produce more ammunition than the whole Euro-Atlantic community.

As Estonia’s prime minister, Kallas was one of the originators of an EU plan to provide Ukraine with 1m rounds of shells, but progress has been slow.

She also said the EU would “strengthen our mutual security by working more closely with the United Kingdom”, the sole reference to the UK in the three-hour session.

Asked about how Europe should respond to authoritarian states supporting Russia, she said the EU needed to signal to China that its aid to Moscow had “consequences” and “a higher cost” but did not offer specifics.

She wanted to discuss Iran with EU foreign ministers, she said, but twice failed to answer a question about whether she supported designating Iran’s Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) a terrorist organisation, a subject that has long divided member states.

Along with the war in Ukraine, she described the situation in the Middle East as an “urgent” priority. She expressed support for a two-state solution and described attacks on civilians and civilian infrastructure as “heartbreaking”, while side-stepping attempts by MEPs to get her to condemn Israel’s government.

Kallas, a lawyer and MEP before she became Estonia’s first female prime minister in 2021, is one of six European Commission candidates appearing before the parliament on what has been called “super Tuesday”. Unlike the 25 other nominees to join Ursula von der Leyen’s second commission, which is expected to take office on 1 December, Kallas has already been confirmed as the EU’s high representative for foreign policy, a position appointed by EU governments.

But in order to also become a vice-president of the commission, she needs approval from MEPs.

These two roles – her position is known as double-hatted in EU jargon – point to the challenges of the job: touring the globe as the EU’s chief diplomat, while coordinating foreign policy between 27 national capitals that have frequently diverging views, and leading the EU’s cash-strapped foreign service from Brussels.

In her opening remarks to MEPs, Kallas referred briefly to her childhood growing up behind the iron curtain in what was the Soviet Union.

During the Soviet deportation of 1941, Kallas’s mother was deported to Siberia as a six-month-old baby with her mother and grandmother. They were not allowed to return to Estonia until a decade later. Her mother went on to marry Siim Kallas, a central bank chief, who played a critical role in Estonia’s post-Soviet transition, serving as Estonia’s prime minister from 2002-03 and 10 years as a European commissioner until 2014.

Kallas, 47, suggested her experience as an Estonian could help her turn a fresh page with African governments, which have seen previous EU high representatives from former colonial powers, including Spain, Italy and the UK.

Discussing the EU’s future cooperation with Africa, Kallas said she was in “a very good position” coming from a country that experienced “what it means to fight for its freedom”. She promised “a partnership of equals” with African states, as well as cooperation to manage migration. But she faced no specific questions about the EU’s controversial migration deals with Tunisia or Egypt, or the €5bn trust fund for Africa, which aims to deter migration and was recently given an excoriating review by the EU’s auditors.

She said the EU had to strengthen Europe’s defence industry, but warned against duplicating Nato’s military role, saying: “If we have two parallel structures the ball might fall between those chairs and we don’t need that.”

Kallas faced several questions on Ukraine from far-right MEPs, who were elected in greater numbers than ever before in June’s elections. Responding to a question about whether Trump would “put an end to the fantasies” that Ukraine would win, she said that agreements that brought only a short-term peace would bring only more wars, citing the 2015 Minsk agreement after Russia’s annexation of Crimea and aid to pro-Kremlin separatists in the Donbas. Kallas cited the Yale historian Timothy Snyder, who argues that Russia must lose decisively to become “a ‘normal’ European country”.

Kallas continued: “Russia has never lost its last colonial war. We have to do everything that they will lose it now.”

A Russian court has sentenced an elderly Moscow paediatrician to five and a half years in prison after the mother of one of her patients publicly denounced her for comments she allegedly made about Russian soldiers in Ukraine during a private consultation.

Nadezhda Buyanova, 68, was accused in January by the ex-wife of a soldier killed in Ukraine of referring to her child’s father as a “legitimate target of Ukraine” and saying Russia was “guilty” in the ongoing war.

Buyanova was imprisoned on charges of “disseminating false information” about Russia’s military campaign in Ukraine. Since the start of Vladimir Putin’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Moscow has used a hastily adopted law against spreading “fake” information widely to silence dissent.

The high-profile case against Buyanova, born in Lviv, Ukraine, but a longtime resident of Russia, highlights the intensifying repression in Russia as its troops continue the war in Ukraine.

In her final statement, a tearful Buyanova insisted on her innocence, asserting that she had not discussed the war with the boy or his mother. Buyanova’s defence argued she had been targeted because of her Ukrainian heritage, noting that prosecutors had no solid evidence to prove she had spoken against the war.

There is no audio recording from the consultation room, and prosecutors relied on the testimony of the seven-year-old boy and his mother, Anastasia Akinshina.

Akinshina first made the denunciations against Buyanova in a video that was quickly picked up by pro-Kremlin media. “I won’t let them sweep it up under the carpet!” Akinshina is heard saying in the clip.

The case quickly gained prominence, after which Alexander Bastrykin, the hardline head of Russia’s Investigative Committee, vowed to take it under his personal control.

Observers say state ­pressure has created an atmosphere of fear and denunciation – with neighbours, friends and even family members reporting on each other, often ­anonymously – reminiscent of the darkest repressions under Joseph Stalin. One recent poll showed that up to 30% of Russians were scared to voice their opinions about the war, even to friends and family.

The case has drawn widespread condemnation from human rights groups, with Memorial, the prominent Russian human rights organisation, listing Buyanova as a political prisoner. A group of Russian doctors wrote an open letter in Buyanova’s defence calling the denunciation a disgrace.

In recent months, the Russian authorities have further cracked down on any expression of anti-war sentiment, resulting in a string of draconian prison sentences. Last Friday a Russian court sentenced a man to 13 years in prison on treason charges after he was reported to have donated the equivalent of about £42 to a German charity supporting Ukraine.

His case was similar to that of Ksenia Karelina, a US-Russian citizen who was sentenced to 12 years in prison on treason charges for donating £40 to a pro-Ukraine charity.

Memorial, now banned in Russia, lists nearly 800 political prisoners, many of whom have criticised Russia’s invasion. The organisation believes the actual number is much higher as the count excludes those facing secret trials.

The investigative news outlet Proekt has estimated that the Russian authorities have prosecuted more than 116,000 activists in the last six years, surpassing levels of political repression seen during the rule of the Soviet leaders Nikita Khrushchev and Leonid Brezhnev.

The UK can strike a US trade deal with Donald Trump while also rebuilding EU relations after Brexit to cement its status as a “beacon of stability” in an increasingly volatile world, a leading economist has said.

Andy Haldane, the former Bank of England chief economist, said Keir Starmer’s government could show the UK was “open for business at a time when so much else of the world is looking inward – whether to the EU, or the US, it could really pay dividends”.

After Trump’s election victory the prime minister has faced competing demands urging him to pick a side in trade talks with Washington and Brussels, just as he had begun a push to mend fences with Europe.

However, Haldane suggested the UK government could have both with a trade policy straddling the Atlantic. “I hope the government is in a position to really pat its head and rub its tummy at the moment,” he told the Guardian.

“Of course we should pursue energetically an improved deal with the EU, although that won’t be straightforward. The new government committed to that and should keep on committing to that.

“That should not, though, preclude – and does not preclude, as difficult as it will be – seeking out a free trade arrangement with the US under a new Trump presidency.”

The UK could only pursue a US deal and closer EU ties simultaneously after Brexit, he said. “It would have been impossible to have that conversation before. At least now we can commence that conversation. I’d really love if we could do something on both sides,” he added.

However, other experts have argued an incoming Trump administration gives Britain new impetus to move closer to the EU, and warned that the UK would face tough demands for a US trade deal that would be harder to bargain for alone.

On Monday, Starmer joined Emmanuel Macron in Paris for the French Armistice Day service, in a pointed show of European solidarity, amid growing alarm across global capitals over Trump reigniting trade conflicts worldwide.

Trump threatened during his election campaign to impose tariffs of up to 20% on all US goods imports, and up to 60% and 100% for China and Mexico, in a ramping-up of the protectionist policies of his first administration.

Haldane, who is now the chief executive of the Royal Society of Arts thinktank, warned this could reignite global inflationary pressures, generating a “downdraft” for Britain’s economy and driving up borrowing costs for UK households.

However, he said he was more broadly “very optimistic about the UK in general” because Britain appeared to be a relative safe haven on the world stage with a stable government that was committed to driving up investment in the economy.

“We could be a beneficiary of some of these uncertainties and fractures appearing elsewhere around the world,” he said.

The economist said Rachel Reeves’s budget had been “pro business” despite a “fixation on the extra taxes” from some bosses and the media because it stood as a downpayment on repairing battered public services and supporting growth-enhancing investment in infrastructure.

“Look, what were they [higher taxes] for? They were to pay for our creaking health services, our creaking transport system and our creaking education systems; they’re all things that businesses themselves as well as individuals need to work.

“You can’t have it both ways. If you want to build the right business environment you require investment in those things and that requires us to pay for those things,” he said.

Haldane was speaking to mark the launch of an “inclusive growth commission” he will chair on behalf of the directly elected Labour mayor of the East Midlands, Claire Ward. The commission, which also includes business and political leaders, will develop a local growth strategy and make recommendations for a £4bn funding pot across Derby and Derbyshire, Nottingham and Nottinghamshire.

Saying that the region had been “a bit in the shadows” in recent years, he argued the commission was an opportunity to “put the East Midlands on the map” to help secure investment from Westminster and international businesses.

“There is huge potential here to do something quite big and bold, to tell a different story,” he said.

Maps drawn up more than 130 years ago on the instruction of the Marquess of Salisbury, the then British foreign secretary, have been cited by Iran in its deepening dispute with the Gulf states over the ownership of three strategic islands at the entrance to the critical strait of Hormuz waterway.

The dispute is threatening to damage Iran’s current efforts to form closer relations with its Gulf partners, and has also turned into an additional roadblock to improving Iran’s relations with the European Union.

The issue is hugely sensitive inside Iran and became more urgent when the EU issued a joint statement at the end of its first summit with the Gulf Cooperation Council last month that included a denunciation of the Iranian “occupation of the islands”, which it said was in breach of the UN charter and a violation of the sovereignty of the United Arab Emirates.

Faced with the new EU support for the UAE position, Iranian diplomats are citing maps drawn up by the War Office in 1888 that show the islands were perceived by Britain as part of Iran while what is now the UAE was simply termed the Pirate Coast.

The 50-year long ownership dispute between the UAE and Iran concerns three vital, thinly populated and neglected islands Abu Musa, Greater Tunb and Lesser Tunb that sit at the entrance to the strait of Hormuz, the route for oil tankers leading from the Gulf to the Gulf of Oman.

The emirate of Sharjah claims ownership of Abu Musa and the emirate of Ras al-Khaimah has a claim to the other two islands. Both emirates have since 1971 formed part of the independent UAE.

Britain occupied the islands in 1908 and ended the islands’ protectorate status in 1971 as part of its withdrawal east of Suez. The British failed to broker a deal over the Tunbs, but at the 11th hour negotiated a complex formula for Abu Musa’s future ownership, where it would be divided and jointly administered by Sharjah and Iran, then a monarchy under the control of the Shah.

Iran seized the Tunbs by force on Britain’s departure, claiming they had been part of the Persian empire since the 6th century BC. Lesser Tunb is only 1 sq mile and, according to the CIA, only populated by poisonous snakes.

In 1992 Iran expelled the Emiratis still living on Abu Musa and took full control of the island. The 5 sq mile island is now seen as Iran’s first line of defence in the strait of Hormuz and Iranian military forces have remained on the only island of the three inhabited by a civilian population, which numbers fewer than 2,000. The Iranian roads department has recently vowed to build further houses on the islands

Efforts by the UAE to take its claim to the islands to arbitration either through the international court of justice or UN itself have so far failed since Tehran has rejected third-party intervention. But the UAE has won diplomatic support from all five members of the UN security council, a rare moment in which Iran is pitted against China and Russia.

Iranian diplomats, not always the first to cite the UK as an authoritative source, are also pointing to maps in its possession given to Iran’s Shah Naser al-Din Shah Qajar by the UK ambassador Henry Drummond Wolff. The map is dated 27 July 1888, a time when the UK was well disposed to Iran since it was seeking Persian concessions and resisting Russian expansion.

In his 1892 book Persia and the Persian Question, George Curzon, the viceroy and governor-general of India, using maps prepared by the Royal Geographical Society also wrote that the islands belonged to Iran.

The UAE says the British position wavered and historically the islands belonged to the Qasimi dynasty that ruled in Sharjah.

The fact that the EU endorsed the UAE claim in a 57-paragraph broader statement has caused deep consternation within the Iran regime. A giant poster of the islands has just been unveiled in Valiasr Square in the centre of Tehran.

Abbas Araghchi, Iran’s foreign minister, took to social media, condemning the EU-GCC statement. “The three islands have always belonged to Iran and will forever remain as such. Era of European malign ‘divide & rule’ interference in our region is long over,” he posted.

His condemnation of Europe rather than the Arab states reveals how eager the Iranian foreign ministry is to avoid a row with the Arab states at a time when Iran is trying to construct a new alliance against Israel. He has already visited Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, as well as non-Gulf states Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Turkey. Araghchi’s visit to Bahrain on Monday was the first by an Iranian minister since the two sides cut ties in 2016.

However, the speaker of the Iranian parliament, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, took a less diplomatic stance, saying to the Gulf states: “Instead of spending its energy on stopping the Zionist war machine, the GCC continues to make baseless claims about the territorial integrity of the Islamic Republic of Iran.”