The former head of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) has said that the UK should side with the European Union over trade and economic policies rather than a Donald Trump-led US, as fears grow over a possible global trade war.

Pascal Lamy, who was head of the WTO from 2005 to 2013, said it was clear that the UK’s interests lay in staying close to the EU on trade, rather than allying with Trump, not least because it does three times more trade with Europe than the US.

His comments came after a key Trump supporter, Stephen Moore, said on Friday that the UK should reject the EU’s “socialist model” if it wanted to have any realistic chance of doing a free trade deal with the US under Trump and, as a result, avoid the 20% tariffs on exports that the president-elect has promised.

In an interview with the Observer, Lamy said: “It’s an old question with a new relevance given Brexit and given Trump. In my view the UK is a European country. Its socio- economic model is much closer to the EU social model and not the very hard, brutal version of capitalism of Trump and [Elon] Musk.

“We can expect that Trump plus Musk will go even more in this direction. If Trump departs from supporting Ukraine, I have absolutely no doubt that the UK will remain on the European side.

“In trade matters, you have to look at the numbers. The trade relationship between the UK and Europe is three times larger than between the UK and US.

“This is a very structural inter-dependence which will hardly change unless – which I don’t think is a realistic assumption – the UK will decide to leave the EU norms of standards, to move to the US one. I don’t believe that will happen.

“My answer is that the option to unite politically, economically and socially with the US and not with Europe makes absolutely no sense. I believe that, for the UK’s interests and values, the European option remains the dominant one.”

Ivan Rogers, the former British ambassador to the EU, said it was clear that after Trump’s re-election the UK would have to choose between the US and EU. “Any free trade agreement that Trump and his team could ever propose to the UK would have to contain major proposals on US access to the UK agricultural market and on veterinary standards. It would not pass Congress without them. If the UK signed on the dotted line, that’s the end of the Starmer proposed veterinary deal with the EU. You can’t have both: you have to choose.”

Their remarks come as Keir Starmer heads to Brazil on Sunday for a meeting of the G20 where issues of global security and economic growth are set to dominate. The prime minister is expected to hold talks with President Xi of China, on whose country Trump is proposing slap huge 60% import tariffs. Trade experts expect that the US will demand that the EU and UK follow suit, which both will strongly resist for their own trade reasons.

The UK is seeking to increase trade with Beijing while also stepping up efforts to find greater ways to access the EU single market. Last week, the governor of the Bank of England, Andrew Bailey, made clear that leaving the EU had “weighed” on the domestic economy.

A government source said that developing a trade strategy in the new world order was now the top priority. “It has gone from being very important to being number one in the one tray [following Trump’s re-election].”

However, João Vale de Almeida, the former EU ambassador to London, said he believed there was common “territory for agreement” which would involve minimal pragmatic deals between the EU and the UK, and the US and the UK.

“We know that Trump will try to divide European member states and divide the UK and EU. This is already what [Nigel] Farage is trying to do. But I think we can walk and chew gum at the same.

“Given that a fully fledged trade deal with the US is not possible because agricultural issues will get in the way, and an EU deal is limited by UK red lines, any deals will have to be limited. So there may be a way through.”

A top adviser to the US president-elect, Donald Trump, has said the UK should align itself with the American “free enterprise” economic model instead of the “more socialist” European system, as speculation mounts over the terms of a potential transatlantic trade deal.

Stephen Moore, a senior economic adviser to Trump, said if the UK moved towards the US model of “economic freedom” there would be more “willingness” by the incoming administration to agree to a trade deal between the two countries.

His comments come as Keir Starmer faces competing demands over future trade deals with Washington and Brussels. Some have told the prime minister to pick a side in trade talks between the US and EU while others have suggested he could strike deals with both major players.

Speaking to BBC’s Today programme, Moore said: “The UK really has to choose between the Europe economic model of more socialism and the US model, which is more based on a free enterprise system. I think the UK is kind of caught in the middle of these two forms of an economic model. I believe that Britain would be better off moving towards more of the American model of economic freedom.

“If that were the case, I think it would spur the Trump administration’s willingness to the free trade agreement with the UK. I think it would make sense for both Britain and the United States.”

Previous efforts to agree a UK-US trade deal have been scuppered by rows over agricultural standards, particularly fears over allowing chlorinated chicken or hormone-fed beef on to British supermarket shelves.

Moore said: “I think we have the best agriculture centres in the world. So I wouldn’t see that as a problem from this side of the ocean, but I do understand that in Britain. I know the last time I was in London, that was a big issue with many of the British folks I talked to.”

Trump has proposed a blanket tariff of at least 10% on all imports, as well as further retaliatory tariffs against countries that place tariffs on US imports. Moore said the blanket tariff was a “fairly popular position with many American voters” but suggested some countries might be exempt.

The prospect of tariffs has already hampered the UK government, which has staked its success on economic growth. Earlier this month, Goldman Sachs cut its UK economic growth forecast for 2025 to 1.4% from 1.6%, citing potential higher US tariffs.

“I do think we have a special relationship with Britain and I think most Americans, I think Donald Trump, views Britain in a very different way, certainly from China or other countries that we view in a more adversarial way,” he said.

Referencing the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, which was passed under Trump to replace the North American Free Trade Agreement, Moore said: “We have a US, Mexico and Canada trade deal. So, it’s certainly possible that with this uniform tariff that he’s talked about, that because of our special relationship with our North American neighbours, that we might exempt them. So your question is, might we exempt Britain? Maybe, I don’t know the answer to that.”

On Tuesday, Peter Mandelson, who is tipped to become the new British ambassador in Washington, told the Times that the UK “must have our cake and eat it” and forge trade ties with the EU and US.

“We cannot come out of the largest export market, difficult enough as it is to trade freely there, having left the European Union. But we still trade. It’s our biggest export market still. We can’t leave that.

“And we have to mitigate the sort of barriers and risks that we’ve taken on as a result of Brexit in the European market. And transatlantic trade and investment is huge for us.”

Andy Haldane, the former Bank of England chief economist, echoed a similar message, saying on Tuesday that the 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”.

Four years ago, when Donald Trump last occupied the White House, Liz Truss was sent on a ­mission. Carrying a ­bottle of British gin on her flight to Washing­ton, the trade secretary had a gift for her US counterpart to show what Americans were missing out on.

Back then, while still formally a member of the EU, Britain was hit with 25% US import tariffs on distilled spirits as Trump’s administration waged trade battles on multiple fronts, slapping border taxes across a range of goods sold by America’s allies and enemies alike.

After his re-election to a second term, government officials and company bosses are scrambling to dust down their Trump playbooks. On the campaign trail he threatened levies of up to 20% on all US goods imports, and up to 60% and 100% for China and Mexico. And this weekend, Trump’s new trade adviser, Stephen Moore, told the Times: “I’ve always said that Britain has to decide – do you want to go towards the European socialist model or do you want to go towards the US free market? Lately it seems like they are shifting more in a European model, and so if that’s the case I think we’d be less interested in having [a free trade deal].”

For Britain there are hundreds of billions of pounds wrapped up in the transatlantic “special relationship” spanning trade, defence, diplomacy and common culture. Here we explore the possible implications.

What’s at stake?

Tariffs are a form of tax applied on imports from other countries. Paid by the importer, the costs are largely passed on to consumers. The idea is to make imports more expensive relative to domestic goods, protecting local producers.

The US is Britain’s single largest trade partner, in a relationship worth more than £300bn a year in goods and services as well as a stock of more than £1tn in foreign direct investment straddling the Atlantic.

Services make up the bulk of the relationship. Business services, management consultancy, finance and travel are the biggest exports, totalling £129.2bn in the year to June 2023. Services worth £61.7bn were sold the other way.

Goods make up less than a third of exports to the US – mainly high-value products such as medicines, cars and aircraft.

In a strange quirk, America and Britain report trade surpluses with each other. US figures show a £10bn surplus last year, while the UK reckons it has a £71bn advantage. This is due to differences in data collection, but could help Britain: Trump is largely targeting countries where the US has a trade deficit.

What happened last time?

In his last presidency, Trump used the threat of tariffs as a bargaining chip, before scaling back his rhetoric to reach a deal. Still, he slapped levies on the EU, with some fallout in Britain. This included taxes on cashmere, machinery and single-malt Scotch whisky. China bore the brunt, with charges on about $450bn of bilateral trade. While American consumers paid the price, Joe Biden, for the most part, kept a tough stance towards Beijing.

However, the overall fallout was not as large as feared. UK exports to America recorded the strongest growth since the 2008 financial crisis between 2017 and 2021 in Trump’s first term – a period affected by the Covid pandemic.

“The bark and the bite were materially at odds with each other,” said Simon French, chief economist at Panmure Liberum.

Research by the International Monetary Fund shows that non-US-China trade was little affected, as exporters reallocated elsewhere – including to countries close to the main belligerents. Mexico and Vietnam benefited in particular because producers – including Apple, Nike and Adidas – sought to bypass tariffs by shipping to nearby markets.

What could happen this time?

This time around the impact could be bigger. Economists warn that a “full-blown Trump” scenario – taking his campaign rhetoric at face value – would drive up average US tariffs back to 1930s levels, fuelling inflation and hitting world trade and economic growth.

Peter Holmes, a fellow of the UK Trade Policy Observatory and professor at the University of Sussex, said there was every sign Trump was preparing for a “no holds barred” approach. Highlighting some of the president-elect’s appointments, he said: “The last time, the US trade representative had people who were hangovers from past administrations. Now it could be completely taken over by Trumpism.”

Britain, as an open economy, could be in a delicate position. The National Institute of Economic and Social Research has said Trump’s measures could halve UK growth and drive up prices for British consumers. Exporters could face a £22bn hit to global sales, the Centre for Inclusive Trade Policy warned.

However, others say the impact should not be overstated. French said there was a case of “Trump derangement syndrome in full swing” across Europe, including the UK, in the belief that Trump 2.0 would be catastrophic. “There is another take, and it is one we put more weight on. The UK economy stands to benefit from lower energy prices and could take advantage of competitive trade diversion,” he said, referring to Trump’s “drill, baby, drill” pledge to drive up oil and gas supplies, which could lower global energy prices – despite significant environmental costs.

Trump imposing tariffs on China could also lead to a glut of exports destined for the US being diverted to other markets – which could force decisions in the EU and UK about how to respond. On one hand, it could lower prices for consumers, but there would be consequences for domestic producers. With Britain typically exporting higher-value finished goods that would be less sensitive to import tariffs, and services – which would not be hit – the UK could also escape more lightly.

It’s also unclear how far Trump would go. The consultancy Oxford Economics said it expected a targeted approach from Trump, focused on China, that would take months to be introduced.

William Bain, head of trade policy at the British Chambers of Commerce, said: “Businesses recognise it could have an economic impact, but they want to wait and see what the details of the policy are. We are hopeful a solution can be found.”

However, the uncertainty could chill business investment. Emma Rowland, policy adviser on international trade at the Institute of Directors, said: “The danger with a Trump presidency is that it’s not 100% clear what will come down the line, and whether what he says is what he does. There will be concerns around that, and investment decisions put on hold.”

Will the UK move closer to the EU?

Keir Starmer has not only come under pressure from the US to pick a side, at a time when he had begun pushing to mend fences with Europe.

The Bank of England governor, Andrew Bailey, urged ministers to “rebuild relations” with the EU at last week’s Mansion House dinner, warning that Brexit had undermined the UK’s economy. Andy Haldane, the former Bank of England chief economist, told the Guardian that Britain could have the best of both worlds. However, other experts said the UK would face tough demands in US trade negotiations that would be harder to bargain over alone.

“In 2019, Trump’s demands of the UK were so extreme they weren’t even looked at seriously by the Conservatives. If a similar set of demands came up there would be no reason to suggest the US wouldn’t be as extreme now,” said Holmes. Back then, Washington wanted London to drop “unwarranted barriers” blocking US food and agricultural products, leading to warnings of chlorinated chicken and hormone-fed beef on UK supermarket shelves.

However, Starmer has pledged to “reset” EU relations, and is pushing for a UK-EU veterinary agreement to remove Brexit barriers to agri-food trade. That would require closer alignment with EU rules, which are tougher than US requirements.

Any deal with the US could also further complicate the UK’s post-Brexit trading arrangements for Northern Ireland, where a hard border is avoided with the Republic of Ireland by applying relevant EU single market and customs rules.

John Glen, a trade expert at Cranfield School of Management, doubted if Trump would prioritise a UK trade deal. “He isn’t interested. We believe we have a special relationship, but it only exists when they want something from us,” he said. “There’s a massive imbalance. When we had balance was when we were part of the EU, as we had a better negotiating position, as opposed to being a little rock on the edge of Europe.

“We shouldn’t underplay our significance but, together with Germany and France, it’s a much bigger negotiation.”

After the November elections ushered in a new era of unified Republican governance in Washington, Democratic leaders across the country are once again preparing to lead the resistance to Donald Trump’s second-term agenda.

California’s governor, Gavin Newsom, said he would convene a special legislative session next month to “safeguard California values and fundamental rights”.

Washington state’s governor-elect, Bob Ferguson, who is currently the state’s attorney general, said his legal team has been preparing for months for the possibility of a second Trump term – an endeavor that included a “line-by-line” review of Project 2025, the 900+ page policy blueprint drafted by the president-elect’s conservative allies.

And the governors of Illinois and Colorado this week unveiled a new coalition designed to protect state-level institutions against the threat of authoritarianism, as the nation prepares for a president who has vowed to seek retribution against his political enemies and to only govern as a dictator on “day one”.

“We know that simple hope alone won’t save our democracy,” the Colorado governor, Jared Polis, said on a conference call announcing the group, called Governors Safeguarding Democracy. “We need to work together, especially at the state level, to protect and strengthen it.”

With Democrats locked out of control in Washington, many in the party will turn to blue state leaders – governors, attorneys general and mayors – as a bulwark against a second Trump administration. For these ambitious Democrats, it is also an opportunity to step into the leadership void left by Kamala Harris’s defeat.

Progressives such as Newsom and the Illinois governor, JB Pritzker, are viewed as potential presidential contenders in 2028, while Democratic governors in states that voted for Trump such as Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania, Andy Beshear of Kentucky and Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan are seen as models for how the party can begin to rebuild their coalition. And Tim Walz, Harris’s vice-presidential running mate, returned home to Minnesota with a national profile and two years left of his gubernatorial term.

Leaders of the nascent blue state resistance are pre-emptively “Trump-proofing” against a conservative governing agenda, which they have cast as a threat to the values and safety of their constituents. As a candidate, Trump promised to carry out the “largest deportation operation in American history”. In statements and public remarks, several Democrats say they fear the Trump administration will seek to limit access to medication abortion or seek to undermine efforts to provide reproductive care to women from states with abortion bans. They also anticipate actions by the Trump administration to roll back environmental regulations and expand gun rights.

“To anyone who intends to come take away the freedom, opportunity and dignity of Illinoisans, I would remind you that a happy warrior is still a warrior. You come for my people – you come through me,” Pritzker said last week.

Unlike in 2016, when Trump’s victory shocked the nation, blue state leaders say they have a tested – and updated – playbook to draw upon. But they also acknowledge that Trump 2.0 may present new and more difficult challenges.

Ferguson said Trump’s first-term executive actions were “often sloppy”, which created an opening for states to successfully challenge them in court. Eight years later, and after studying Project 2025 and Trump’s Agenda 47, he anticipates the next Trump White House will be “better prepared” this time around.

Pritzker said Trump was surrounding himself with “absolute loyalists to his cult of personality and not necessarily to the law”. “Last time, he didn’t really know where the levers of government were,” the governor said on a call with reporters this week. “I think he probably does now.”

The courts have also become more conservative than they were when Trump took office eight years ago, a direct result of his first-term appointments to the federal bench, which included many powerful federal appeals court judges and three supreme court justices.

The political landscape has also changed. In 2016, Trump won the electoral college but lost the popular vote. Despite Republican control of Congress, there were a number of Trump skeptics willing – at least initially – to buck the president during his first two years in office.

This time around, Trump is all but certain to win the popular vote, and he made surprising gains in some of the bluest corners of the country.

Though the former president came nowhere close to winning his home state of New York, he made significant inroads, especially on Long Island. At a post-election conference last week, New York’s Democratic governor, Kathy Hochul, struck a more neutral tone. Hochul, who faces a potentially tough re-election in 2026, vowed to protect constituents against federal overreach, while declaring that she was prepared to work with “him or anybody regardless of party”.

In New Jersey, where Trump narrowed his loss from 16 percentage points in 2020 to five percentage points in 2024, the Democratic governor, Phil Murphy, acknowledged the result was a “sobering moment” for the party and country. Outlining his approach to the incoming administration, Murphy said: “If it’s contrary to our values, we will fight to the death. If there’s an opportunity for common ground, we will seize that as fast as anybody.”

Progressives and activists say they are looking to Democratic leaders to lead the charge against Trump’s most extreme proposals, particularly on immigration.

“Trump may be re-elected but he does not have a mandate to come into and rip apart our communities,” said Greisa Martínez Rosas, the executive director of United We Dream Action, a network of groups that advocate for young people brought to the US as children, known as Dreamers.

She called on state and local officials, as well as university heads and business leaders, to “use every tool at their disposal” to resist Trump’s mass deportation campaign, stressing: “There is a lot we can do to ensure Trump and his cabinet are not successful in their plans.”

State attorneys general are again poised to play a pivotal role in curbing the next administration’s policy ambitions.

“The quantity of litigation since the first Trump administration has been really off the charts – it’s at a new level,” said Paul Nolette, a political scientist at Marquette University in Wisconsin. “I fully expect that to continue in Trump 2.0.”

There were 160 multi-state filings against the Trump administration during his four years in office, twice as many as were filed against Barack Obama during his entire eight-year presidency, according to a database maintained by Nolette.

Many of the Democratic lawsuits succeeded – at least initially – in delaying or striking down Trump administration policies or regulations, Nolette said. Attorneys general can also leverage their state’s influence and economic power by entering legal settlements with companies. States have used this approach in the past to “advance their own regulatory goals”, Nolette said, for example, forcing the auto industry to adopt stricter environmental regulations.

In a proclamation calling for a special session next month, Newsom asked the legislature to bolster the state’s legal funding to challenge – and defend California against – the Trump administration. Among his concerns, the California Democrat identified civil rights, climate action, LGBTQ+ rights, reproductive rights, as well as Trump’s threats to withhold disaster funding from the state and the potential for his administration to repeal protections shielding undocumented immigrants brought to the country as children from deportation.

Trump responded on Truth Social, using a derisive nickname for the Democratic governor: “Governor Gavin Newscum is trying to KILL our Nation’s beautiful California. He is using the term ‘Trump-Proof’ as a way of stopping all of the GREAT things that can be done to ‘Make California Great Again,’ but I just overwhelmingly won the Election.”

Democratic leaders in battleground states that Trump won are also calibrating their responses – and not all are eager to join the resistance.

“I don’t think that’s the most productive way to govern Arizona,” the state’s Democratic governor, Katie Hobbs, told reporters this week, according to the Arizona Capitol Times. Hobbs, who faces a potentially difficult re-election fight in 2026, said she would “stand up against actions that hurt our communities” but declined to say how she would respond if Trump sought to deport Dreamers or to nationalize the Arizona national guard as part of his mass deportation campaign.

The state’s Democratic attorney general, Kris Mayes, who also faces re-election in two years, drew a harder line against Trump, vowing to fight “unconstitutional behavior” and protect abortion access, according to Axios. In an interview on MSNBC, Mayes said she had “no intention” of dropping the criminal case against allies of the former president who attempted to help Trump overturn Biden’s victory in the state.

Yet she insisted there would be areas of common ground. She urged Trump to revive a bipartisan border deal that he had previously tanked and called on the next administration to send more federal resources and agents to help combat the flow of fentanyl into the US.

With Democrats locked out of power in Washington, the new Indivisible Guide, a manual developed by former Democratic congressional staffers after Trump’s election in 2016 and recently updated to confront a new era of Maga politics, envisions a major role for blue states.

“Over the next two years, your Democratic elected officials will make choices every single day about whether to stand up to Maga or whether to go along with it,” the Indivisible guide states. “Your spirited, determined advocacy will ensure that the good ones know they’ve got a movement behind them as they fight back – and the bad ones know they’re on notice.”

Among the examples of actions blue state activists can demand their leaders consider, it suggests establishing protections for out-of-state residents seeking abortion access or gender-affirming care; refusing to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement and forging regional compacts to safeguard environmental initiatives, data privacy and healthcare.

Democratic leaders at every level and across the country – even those in purple or red states – can serve as “backstops for protecting the democratic space”, said Mary Small, chief strategy officer at Indivisible.

“The important things are to be proactive and bold, to be innovative and to work with each other,” she said. “I don’t think everybody has to have all of the answers right now, but to have that intention and that commitment and to not shrink down in anticipation of a more oppressive federal government.”

Donald Trump said on Saturday that Chris Wright, an oil and gas industry executive and a staunch defender of fossil fuel use, would be his pick to lead the US Department of Energy.

Wright is the founder and CEO of Liberty Energy, an oilfield services firm based in Denver, Colorado. He is expected to support Trump’s plan to maximize production of oil and gas and to seek ways to boost generation of electricity, demand for which is rising for the first time in decades.

He is also likely to share Trump’s opposition to global cooperation on fighting climate change. Wright has called climate change activists alarmist and has likened efforts by Democrats to combat global warming to Soviet-style communism.

“There is no climate crisis, and we’re not in the midst of an energy transition, either,” Wright said in a video posted to his LinkedIn profile last year.

Wright, who does not have any political experience, has written extensively on the need for more fossil fuel production to lift people out of poverty.

He has stood out among oil and gas executives for his freewheeling style, and describes himself as a tech nerd.

Wright made a media splash in 2019 when he drank fracking fluid on camera to demonstrate it was not dangerous.

US oil output hit the highest level any country has ever produced under Biden, and it is uncertain how much Wright and the incoming administration could boost that.

Most drilling decisions are driven by private companies working on land not owned by the federal government.

The Department of Energy handles US energy diplomacy, administers the Strategic Petroleum Reserve – which Trump has said he wants to replenish – and runs grant and loan programs to advance energy technologies, such as the Loan Programs Office.

The secretary also oversees the aging US nuclear weapons complex, nuclear energy waste disposal and 17 national labs.

If confirmed by the Senate, Wright will replace Jennifer Granholm, a supporter of electric vehicles and emerging energy sources like geothermal power, and a backer of carbon-free wind, solar and nuclear energy.

Wright will also likely be involved in the permitting of electricity transmission and the expansion of nuclear power, an energy source that is popular with both Republicans and Democrats but which is expensive and complicated to permit.

Power demand in the United States is surging for the first time in two decades amid growth in artificial intelligence, electric vehicles and cryptocurrencies.

Trump also announced on Saturday that he had picked one of his personal attorneys, Will Scharf, to serve as his White House staff secretary. Scharf is a former federal prosecutor who was a member of Trump’s legal team in his successful attempt to get broad immunity from prosecution from the supreme court.

Writing on Twitter the day after Trump’s election, Scharf greeted the news that Jack Smith, the special counsel who indicted the former president for his attempt to subvert the 2020 election, was winding down the Trump case and planned to resign with the words, “Bye Jack.”

British MPs and peers from all parties have called on the government to back Ukraine’s demands for a “just peace” with diplomatic pressure and military aid, as President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said his country aimed to reach a negotiated end to the war next year.

Donald Trump’s election victory has accelerated preparations for talks between Ukraine and Russia after nearly three years of war. He has repeatedly said he could end the war “in a day”, without detailing how.

Zelenskyy endorsed a rapid push to broker a deal on Saturday. “From our side, we must do everything so that this war ends next year, ends through diplomatic means,” he told Ukrainian radio. On Friday, he played to Trump’s “deal maker” reputation, saying his election victory means the conflict will “end sooner”.

In a signal that Ukraine’s backers are preparing for talks, German chancellor Olaf Scholz spoke to Vladimir Putin on Friday, in the Russian president’s first call with a major western leader since late 2022. He urged Putin to withdraw his forces and come to the negotiating table.

Zelenskyy has assiduously courted Trump to push for a different vision, meeting him in New York in September. After Trump’s victory, the Ukrainian leader was quick to congratulate him, quoting with approval Trump’s own promise of “strength through peace”.

He has pitched to Trump his “victory plan”, which calls for better defence capabilities and a strategic non-nuclear deterrent, including an unconditional invitation to join Nato.

Keir Starmer’s government must back Ukraine strongly in the coming months, as both sides seek to shore up their position ahead of negotiations, the all-party parliamentary group on Ukraine said in a statement marking 1,000 days since Russia’s full-scale invasion. That grim anniversary falls on 19 November.

“International support is crucial for achieving a just peace,” the statement says. “The victory plan is aimed at ensuring that the war does not last indefinitely and that it ends on fair terms, with Ukraine’s sovereignty ensured and Putin’s plans failed.”

Trump’s vice-president, JD Vance, outlined during the campaign a plan that critics describe as tantamount to a Russian victory, with Moscow keeping de facto control over Ukrainian territory it occupies now and Ukraine left outside Nato.

Downing Street insists its support for Ukraine remains “iron clad” even as the recent appointment of Jonathan Powell as the government’s national security adviser suggested it is also preparing for attempts to negotiate an end to the war.

Powell, who served as Tony Blair’s chief of staff throughout his premiership, led successful negotiations for peace in Northern Ireland. In recent years he has been running his own charity Inter Mediate, which works to broker peace deals in many of the world’s conflict zones.

Last year Powell, said in Prospect magazine that world leaders should prepare for a negotiated settlement between Russia and Ukraine.

Ukraine’s government, which once insisted it would fight until all its territory had been liberated, now accepts the war is likely to end in talks and that any deal would mean the loss of some areas held by Russian forces, which currently occupy around 20% of the country.

Britain must back Kyiv’s position on possible concessions, rather than pushing Zelenskyy to agree to Russian demands, said the parliamentary group’s chair, Alex Sobel, a Labour MP. “No other country has the authority to negotiate away the territory of Ukraine,” Sobel told the Observer. “This statement demonstrates renewed support from parliamentarians in the UK given the evolving international situation.”

The Wall Street Journal claims one idea being considered in Trump circles is for an 800-mile demilitarised zone between the Russian and Ukrainian armies, with the current front line frozen. Ukrainian ambitions to join Nato would be shelved for at least two decades, but the US would provide weapons to deter future Russian aggression.

The nature of any security guarantee is key for Ukrainians, who fear Moscow would exploit a weak deal to prepare for another attack. In 2022, Putin declared that the Minsk Accords, negotiated after Russia seized Crimea and its proxies took parts of eastern Ukraine, “do not exist”, and launched an invasion.

The UK must offer Ukraine “steadfast and unwavering commitment” as it prepares for a difficult year, said Sarah Green, the Liberal Democrat MP for Chesham and Amersham, co-chair of the parliamentary group.

Japan’s foreign minister arrived in Kyiv on Saturday to discuss North Korea’s deepening military alliance with Russia, including the deployment of thousands of troops to support Moscow’s war in Ukraine.

Takeshi Iwaya will meet his Ukrainian counterpart, Andrii Sybiha, to reaffirm Japan’s “strong support” for Ukraine against Russia’s invasion and to discuss further sanctions against Moscow, Japan’s foreign ministry said.

High on the agenda was Tokyo’s “grave concern” over growing military cooperation between North Korea and Russia, the ministry said.

According to US, South Korean and Ukrainian intelligence assessments, up to 12,000 North Korean troops have been sent to Russia as part of a major defence treaty between the countries. Last week, Ukrainian officials said Ukraine and North Korean troops engaged in small-scale fighting while Ukraine’s army fired artillery at North Korean soldiers in Russia’s Kursk border region, where Ukraine launched a surprise push on 6 August.

Sybiha said Saturday that Ukraine’s intelligence services believe Pyongyang is aiding Moscow’s invasion in return for access to Russian missile, nuclear, and other military programmes.

“The deepening military-technical cooperation between Russia, North Korea and Iran poses a direct threat not only to Europe but also to Southeast Asia and the Middle East,” he said at a joint press conference alongside Iwaya.

“Only strong and systematic support for Ukraine can stop Russia and bring a comprehensive, just and sustainable peace.”

Sybiha also said the pair had discussed Japan’s involvement in implementing a “victory plan and peace formula” for Ukraine.

It coincides with a new interview with Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who told journalists at Ukrainian Radio that he would do everything “to end this war next year through diplomatic means”.

New focus has been placed on potential future negotiations after Donald Trump’s victory in the US presidential election on 5 November.

Russian president, Vladimir Putin, and German chancellor, Olaf Scholz, also held their first phone call in nearly two years Friday.

But Zelenskyy warned that increased Russian willingness to engage in talks did not mean Moscow truly wants to end the war, and urged the US to maintain its position that the Kremlin had violated both Ukraine’s territorial integrity and international law.

“I don’t think Putin wants peace at all. But that does not mean that he doesn’t want to sit down with world leaders,” Zelenskyy said Saturday.

“For him, it destroys the political isolation that’s been built since the beginning of the war. And it benefits him to sit down, talk, and not reach an agreement.”

The Ukrainian capital was attacked overnight by Russian drones, damaging residential buildings and infrastructure in Kyiv’s Obolon district. No casualties were reported.

Ukrainian air defences neutralised up to a dozen drones, said the head of Kyiv’s military administration, Serhii Popko.

Russia attacked Ukraine with 83 Shahed drones in the early hours of Saturday morning, the Ukrainian air force reported. Of those, 55 were shot down, while another 30 veered off course or were lost after electronic jamming, it said.

Meanwhile, Russia’s ministry of defence said it had destroyed 35 Ukrainian drones, including 20 over the western Kursk region and 11 over the Bryansk region.

Joe Biden met with Xi Jinping on Saturday afternoon, coming to the agreement that human beings and not artificial intelligence should make decisions over the use of nuclear weapons, according to the White House.

In what is believed to be the last meeting between the two leaders before Donald Trump assumes the US presidency, the two met at a hotel on the sidelines of the annual Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Peru, where they shook hands before each delivering opening remarks on the China-US relationship.

“The two leaders affirmed the need to maintain human control over the decision to use nuclear weapons,” the White House said in a statement. “The two leaders also stressed the need to consider carefully the potential risks and develop AI technology in the military field in a prudent and responsible manner.”

The Chinese foreign ministry did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

It was not clear whether the statement would lead to further talks or action on the issue. But it nonetheless marks a first-of-its-kind step between the two countries in the discussion of two issues on which progress has been elusive: nuclear arms and artificial intelligence.

Washington has been pushing Beijing for months to break a longstanding resistance to nuclear arms talks.

The two countries briefly resumed official-level talks over nuclear arms in November but those negotiations have since stalled, with a top US official publicly expressing frustration regarding China’s responsiveness.

Formal nuclear arms control negotiations have not been expected any time soon, despite US concerns about China’s rapid nuclear weapons buildup, even though semi-official exchanges have resumed.

Biden met on Friday with Yoon Suk Yeol, the South Korean president, and Shigeru Ishiba, the Japanese prime minister, and affirmed the alliance among the three countries. The three leaders agreed that “it should not be in Beijing’s interest to have this kind of destabilizing cooperation take place in the region”, a senior administration official said in a briefing on background.

Trump’s imminent return to the White House casts a dark shadow over the conversation as it remains unclear what his second term will mean for the relationship between the US and China.

On the campaign trail, Trump touted a hawkish approach to China, promising to increase tariffs to 60% on Chinese imports, which could be as much as $500bn worth of goods. Trump has also promised to end Russia’s war in Ukraine “in 24 hours”, which some fear means decreasing the flow of military aid to Ukraine or pushing the country to lose territory to Russia. A general backing away from the conflict could give room for China to step up as an intermediary, increasing its presence on the global stage.

Among Trump’s blitz of cabinet nominee announcements was the appointments of Florida senator Marco Rubio as secretary of state and Republican representative Mike Waltz as national security adviser, both of whom have have voiced hawkish views on China.

Xi congratulated Trump on his election win earlier this month, saying that their two countries must “get along with each other in the new era”, in a statement.

“A stable, healthy and sustainable China-US relationship is in the common interest of both countries and is in line with the expectations of the international community,” Xi said.

But in prepared remarks at Apec earlier in the week, Xi took on a more foreboding tone, saying that the world has “entered a new period of turbulence and transformation” and proffered vague warnings of “spreading unilateralism and protectionism”.

Adding more uncertainty to the relationship between the two countries, US officials have been on edge in recent weeks about an FBI investigation showing that the Chinese government tried to hack into US telecommunications networks to try to steal the information of American government workers and politicians. Officials said last month that operations linked to China targeted the phone of Trump and running mate JD Vance, along with staff of Kamala Harris.

• US president Joe Biden has urged China’s leader Xi Jinping to dissuade North Korea from deepening its support for Russia’s war on Ukraine, after Pyongyang’s deployment of troops in Moscow’s war with Ukraine have raised concerns in Washington, Beijing and European capitals. In their final meeting before the Trump administration takes over, the two leaders met Saturday on the sidelines of the annual Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit. Biden pointed out that China’s “publicly stated position with respect to the war in Ukraine is there should be no escalation, no broadening the conflict, and the introduction of (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea) troops runs foursquare against that,” national security adviser Jake Sullivan said, adding that the president also pointed out China “does have influence and capacity, and should use it to try to prevent a further escalation or further expansion of the conflict with the introduction of even more DPRK forces.”

• Japan’s foreign minister arrived in Kyiv on Saturday to discuss North Korea’s deepening military alliance with Russia, including the deployment of thousands of troops. Takeshi Iwaya will meet his Ukrainian counterpart, Andrii Sybiha, to reaffirm Japan’s “strong support” for Ukraine against Russia’s invasion and to discuss further sanctions against Moscow. He warned Saturday that North Korean troops entering the Ukraine conflict would have an “extremely significant” effect on east Asian security.

• British MPs and peers from all parties have called on the government to back Ukraine’s demands for a “just peace” with diplomatic pressure and military aid. Volodymyr Zelenskyy endorsed a rapid push to broker a deal on Saturday. “From our side, we must do everything so that this war ends next year, ends through diplomatic means,” he told Ukrainian radio. February 2025 would mark the third anniversary of Moscow’s invasion, with Russia’s troops gaining ground in recent months against Kyiv’s outmanned and outgunned soldiers.

• On Saturday, the G7 – which includes many of Kyiv’s key backers – said Russia remained the sole obstacle to a just peace in Ukraine, pledging sanctions targeting Moscow. “We will remain united by Ukraine’s side,” the Group of Seven industrialised nations said in a statement marking 1,000 days of the invasion. “The G7 confirms its commitment to imposing severe costs on Russia through sanctions, export controls and other effective measures,” the statement added.

• Russia’s defence ministry said on Saturday its forces had captured two more villages in eastern Donetsk region – Makarivka, southwest of the key town of Kurakhove, and Hryhorivka, north of Kurakhove. Ukraine’s general staff of the armed forces made no mention of either village. Moscow’s forces are bearing down on Kurakhove, which has a thermal power plant and is 7 km from Pokrovsk, a large town which for much of the war has been one of Ukraine’s logistical linchpins. Zelenskyy said on Saturday that Russian forces were suffering heavy losses and that the advance had “slowed down” in some areas.

• A group of four Russian and Belarusian nationals, detained in the central African state of Chad for more than a month, flew back to Moscow on Saturday, Russian media reported. State news agency RIA said the group included Maxim Shugalei, identified as a sociologist but described by western institutions as an official linked to Russia’s Wagner group, a private army. Shugalei is subject to EU sanctions on grounds of overseeing disinformation campaigns to promote Wagner in Africa.

Kemi Badenoch’s personal approval ratings at the start of her Tory leadership are worse than those recorded by Rishi Sunak and Boris Johnson at the start of their reigns, according to the latest Opinium poll for the Observer.

The new Tory leader’s net approval rating – the difference between those who approve or disapprove of the job she is doing – sits at -5%. The only former party leader of the past five years that she beats in terms of her starting popularity is Liz Truss, whose first approval rating was -9% after she won the leadership.

Badenoch’s net approvals show that she has divided voters, with 20% approving of her and 25% disapproving. About 46% of voters who backed the Tories at the last election say they approve of her, though a third (36%) say they feel neutral. Her approval rating is still far better than the -22% score endured by Sunak at the end of his leadership.

Meanwhile, Keir Starmer’s approval rating is low at -24 points, but unchanged from the last poll a fortnight ago. However, he leads Badenoch by 12 percentage points when voters are asked who they regard as the best prime minister. Two weeks ago, when Sunak was still Conservative leader, the gap was seven points.

Voters do seem to be aware of Badenoch’s reputation as someone with strong convictions – a quality that recommended her to many Tory MPs, but worried others. Early in her time as leader, voters perceive her as sticking to her principles, being brave and being decisive. The largest gap between Badenoch and Starmer is on bravery, with her net score of +8 contrasting with Starmer’s net score of -19%.

It is also the first Opinium poll since president-elect Donald Trump’s US election victory. His return appears to have polarised the UK electorate. Almost a third (30%) feel that Trump’s election is positive for the US, compared with 44% who see it as a bad development. Almost three-quarters (72%) still believe the UK and US have a lot in common, but only 56% consider the country an ally.

More than two in five (43%) think the UK should stand up for what we think is right, even if that means breaking with the US on key issues. Just over a third think the level of UK spending on defence and the armed forces is too low. Almost half of UK adults believe Trump’s re-election is a bad thing for Ukraine.

James Crouch, head of policy and public affairs research at Opinium, said: “Day-to-day British politics has been overshadowed by the re-election of Donald Trump, which Brits see as good news for rivals like Russia and bad news for Ukraine. However, there’s no sign yet that the public will be pressuring the Labour government to increase defence spending, with two in five opposed to any further tax rises to fund it.”

Opinium polled 2,050 voters online from 11-13 November.

Kemi Badenoch’s personal approval ratings at the start of her Tory leadership are worse than those recorded by Rishi Sunak and Boris Johnson at the start of their reigns, according to the latest Opinium poll for the Observer.

The new Tory leader’s net approval rating – the difference between those who approve or disapprove of the job she is doing – sits at -5%. The only former party leader of the past five years that she beats in terms of her starting popularity is Liz Truss, whose first approval rating was -9% after she won the leadership.

Badenoch’s net approvals show that she has divided voters, with 20% approving of her and 25% disapproving. About 46% of voters who backed the Tories at the last election say they approve of her, though a third (36%) say they feel neutral. Her approval rating is still far better than the -22% score endured by Sunak at the end of his leadership.

Meanwhile, Keir Starmer’s approval rating is low at -24 points, but unchanged from the last poll a fortnight ago. However, he leads Badenoch by 12 percentage points when voters are asked who they regard as the best prime minister. Two weeks ago, when Sunak was still Conservative leader, the gap was seven points.

Voters do seem to be aware of Badenoch’s reputation as someone with strong convictions – a quality that recommended her to many Tory MPs, but worried others. Early in her time as leader, voters perceive her as sticking to her principles, being brave and being decisive. The largest gap between Badenoch and Starmer is on bravery, with her net score of +8 contrasting with Starmer’s net score of -19%.

It is also the first Opinium poll since president-elect Donald Trump’s US election victory. His return appears to have polarised the UK electorate. Almost a third (30%) feel that Trump’s election is positive for the US, compared with 44% who see it as a bad development. Almost three-quarters (72%) still believe the UK and US have a lot in common, but only 56% consider the country an ally.

More than two in five (43%) think the UK should stand up for what we think is right, even if that means breaking with the US on key issues. Just over a third think the level of UK spending on defence and the armed forces is too low. Almost half of UK adults believe Trump’s re-election is a bad thing for Ukraine.

James Crouch, head of policy and public affairs research at Opinium, said: “Day-to-day British politics has been overshadowed by the re-election of Donald Trump, which Brits see as good news for rivals like Russia and bad news for Ukraine. However, there’s no sign yet that the public will be pressuring the Labour government to increase defence spending, with two in five opposed to any further tax rises to fund it.”

Opinium polled 2,050 voters online from 11-13 November.

He has trained would-be assassins and marshalled invading hordes, Napoleonic forces and Roman regiments, but movie military adviser Paul Biddiss found himself in the midst of his biggest Hollywood skirmish last month when the actor Saoirse Ronan made a powerful intervention about women’s personal safety.

Ronan, a guest on Graham Norton’s BBC chatshow sofa, sparked a nationwide debate about women’s security fears when she interrupted fellow actors as they discussed techniques that Biddiss had taught the casts of both Gladiator II and the new drama series The Day of the Jackal.

Paul Mescal, who opens in cinemas this weekend in the lead role in Ridley Scott’s epic Gladiator sequel, swapped details of his new combat skills with Eddie Redmayne, star of the Sky Atlantic show based on Frederick Forsyth’s thriller, when Ronan unexpectedly made her intervention.

Mescal asked: “Who’s actually going to think about that?” when discussing using his phone as a weapon, then Ronan pointed out that women do – they think about how to physically protect themselves daily.

“That’s what girls have to think about all the time,” she said. “Am I right, ladies?”

Within 24 hours, Ronan’s words had been repeated across the airwaves and social media thousands of times.

“Saoirse was absolutely right,” said Biddiss, a Parachute Regiment veteran, this weekend, in his first interview since the viral incident. “It was a bit of a shock to suddenly be at the centre of such an important moment. Paul and Eddie were just enjoying a bit of banter about whether anyone would ever think to use their mobile phone as a weapon, as I’d suggested.

“But, as Saoirse then said, phones, along with everything else inside a handbag, are always on the mind of a woman who is walking alone. All these items can be used, and particularly a mobile phone, which is carried in the hand a lot.”

Redmayne, Mescal and his Gladiator co-star Denzel Washington, also a guest that night, accepted her intervention with good grace. Speaking this weekend on RTE’s The Late Late Show, Mescal backed Ronan’s view, saying: “Saoirse was spot on, hit the nail on the head, and it’s also good that … messages like that are gaining traction, like that’s a conversation that we should absolutely be having on a daily basis.” The actor added that Ronan is “quite often the most intelligent person in the room”.

Biddiss was picked to work with Scott on the long-awaited second Gladiator film after working with him on Napoleon. He was hired because of his experience at handling large numbers of supporting artists, and training film “extras” to behave like military forces from different historic eras.

He spent eight months on the project. Sometimes it was necessary to work while a desert sand storm raged around ranks of new recruits who had been provided with masks and goggles to cover their faces. But Biddiss said the most difficult challenge on Gladiator II, filmed in Malta, Britain and Morocco, was reproducing a particular battle scene with the Praetorian Guard.

“It was very hard to choreograph this drill because Ridley wanted the men to move together in a coordinated way that was very hard to achieve,” he said.

While the adviser has often worked on location, reproducing large military encounters, his expertise also covers creating the illusion of proficient gun handling and espionage practice. “I find, as do the secret services, that females are much more surveillance aware and much more situationally aware. They need to be,” Biddiss said.

“Men are generally not like that. Their initial instincts, when you train them, are more predatory, and so they miss things. As a result, women are much harder for professionals to follow.”

Playing the role of a hired assassin for The Day of the Jackal, Redmayne needed to learn covert techniques and, in training, was told to follow a fictional agent called Zara, a role taken by Biddiss’s wife, Debbie. “He found it hard. It is proof that women are so much more aware and harder to track on the street,” Bidiss said.

“Even with my knowledge of the techniques,” he added, “I would find it more difficult to follow a female agent.”

Biddiss also trained the British actor Lashana Lynch, who starred in the latest James Bond film and plays Bianca in The Day of the Jackal. She was instructed in surveillance, lock picking, close-quarters weapons training and the kind of “dirty fighting” that was once practised by Special Operations Executive agents during the second world war.

“During world war two, the women working for SOE were among the very top performing agents. There are many stories that are not widely known yet, and I would like them to come out so these women could get the credit they deserve,” Biddiss said.

“And today it’s true that using a mobile phone as a weapon, which is what Eddie was talking about with Graham Norton, is a real thing. You can gain enough time to get away from an assailant like that. You can also use the screen as a mirror to watch someone who’s following you.”

Eight people were killed and 17 others injured when a 21-year-old former student went on a stabbing spree at a vocational college in China’s eastern city of Wuxi on Saturday evening, police said.

The knife attack took place at the Wuxi Vocational College of Arts and Technology, in eastern Jiangsu province. The 21-year-old suspect, surnamed Xu, was apprehended at the scene and confessed to the attack, police added.

Local police said Xu had failed his examinations and could not graduate, and that he was dissatisfied with his pay at an internship. According to preliminary investigations, he decided to vent his frustrations by attacking others, police said in a statement.

Videos circulating on western social media platforms including X showed injured people lying on the street after the attack while others rushed to help. A keyword search on Chinese social media platform Weibo turned up no related videos or images of the attack.

The incident comes days after a driver rammed his car into groups of people outside a sports centre in the southern city of Zhuhai, killing 35 people and injuring 43 others.

With Reuters and Associated Press

A Russian spy ship has been escorted out of the Irish Sea after it entered Irish-controlled waters and patrolled an area containing critical energy and internet submarine pipelines and cables.

It was spotted on Thursday east of Dublin and south-west of the Isle of Man but Norwegian, US, French and British navy and air defence services initially observed it accompanying a Russian warship, the Admiral Golovko, through the English channel last weekend.

The Irish navy ship the LÉ James Joyce escorted it out of the Irish exclusive economic zone (EEZ) at about 3am on Friday with the air corps continuing to monitor its movements as it headed south.

Its presence has raised fresh concerns about the security of the interconnector cables that run between Ireland and the UK carrying global internet traffic from huge datacentres operated by tech companies including Google and Microsoft, which have their EU headquarters sited in Ireland.

The sighting of the Russian intelligence ship came as British defence forces monitored other Russian vessels near its eastern coastal waters. On Thursday, British jets were also scrambled to monitor a Russian reconnaissance aircraft flying close to UK airspace, the Ministry of Defence said.

The ship was also spotted on Monday and Tuesday west of Cork, where there are another set of connectors between Ireland and France, some offering transatlantic interconnection.

At one point it was positioned just inside the Irish EEZ, 5-7km (3.1 to 4.3 miles) north of the cables connecting Ireland and the UK.

Edward Burke, an assistant professor in the history of war at University College Dublin, told the Examiner the situation was alarming.

“Once again we see the Russian navy probing the defences of western Europe. It’s yet another wake-up call – one that we shouldn’t need – that Ireland needs to bolster its naval capabilities and deepen its maritime security partnerships in Europe,” he said.

It is understood defence forces in Ireland observed the ship operating three drones over Irish waters, raising fears it was conducting surveillance.

Concerns over critical infrastructure around Europe have been raised on multiple occasions this year after the alleged sabotage of the Baltic gas pipeline and undersea internet cables between Finland and Estonia. In August, China admitted that a Hong Kong-flagged ship damaged the pipeline but said it was accidental.

The Yantar is officially classed as an auxiliary general oceanographic research vessel with underwater rescue capabilities. It is tasked by an arm of the Russian defence ministry and is separate from its navy.

It can deploy deep-diving submersibles and has been seen operating close to seabed infrastructure on a number of occasions by open source intelligence analysts, according to Navy Lookout intelligence analysts. The analysts said the ship’s mission was “probably more about strategic signalling and intelligence gathering” than sabotage.

Irish and British defence forces have worked together since the vessels entered waters off the coast of the UK with a significant multinational operation put in place.

The Yantar was travelling with Golovko and a tanker, Vyazma, and both vessels were monitored throughout their journey in the English channel by RFA Tideforce and HMS Iron Duke.

They then handed over surveillance to the French as it headed out of the English channel with the British navy also shadowing another Russian vessel heading north towards the Baltics.

When the Yantar broke away from the Golovko and headed north into the Irish sea, it was shadowed by HMS Cattistock, with the operation becoming public when the ship activated its automatic identification for about four minutes on Thursday when it was south of the Isle of Man.

According to reports, it switched off its transponders transmitting its position after entering the Irish EEZ but the Irish vessel continued to shadow it.

They tried to make contact with the ship but Russian personnel did not respond and at about 3am on Friday it left the waters and headed south.

Sean “Diddy” Combs has tried to reach out to prospective witnesses and influence public opinion from jail in a bid to affect potential jurors for his upcoming sex-trafficking trial, prosecutors claimed in a court filing urging a judge to reject his latest bail request.

The government accusations were made late Friday in a Manhattan federal court filing that opposes the music mogul’s latest $50m bail proposal. A bail hearing is scheduled for next week.

Prosecutors wrote that a review of recorded jail calls made by Combs shows he has asked family members to reach out to potential victims and witnesses and has urged them to create “narratives” to influence the jury pool. They say he also has encouraged marketing strategies to sway public opinion.

“The defendant has shown repeatedly – even while in custody – that he will flagrantly and repeatedly flout rules in order to improperly impact the outcome of his case. The defendant has shown, in other words, that he cannot be trusted to abide by rules or conditions,” prosecutors wrote in a submission that contained redactions.

Prosecutors wrote that it could be inferred from his behavior that Combs wants to blackmail victims and witnesses into silence or into providing testimony helpful to his defense.

Lawyers for Combs did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Prosecutors said Combs, 55, began breaking rules almost as soon as he was detained at the Metropolitan detention center in Brooklyn after his September arrest.

He has pleaded not guilty to charges that he coerced and abused women for years with the aid of a network of associates and employees, while silencing victims through blackmail and violence, including kidnapping, arson and physical beatings.

Two judges have concluded he is a danger to the community and a risk to flee.

His lawyers recently made a third request for bail after the rejection of two previous attempts, including a $50m bail proposal.

In the request, they cited changed circumstances, including new evidence, which they said made it sensible to release Combs so he can better prepare for his 5 May trial.

But prosecutors said defense lawyers created their latest bail proposal using evidence prosecutors had turned over to them and that the material had already been known to defense lawyers when they made previous bail applications.

In their submission, prosecutors said Combs’ behavior in jail shows he must remain locked up.

For instance, they said, Combs has enlisted family members to plan and carry out a social media campaign around his birthday “with the intention of influencing the potential jury in this criminal proceeding”.

Combs encouraged his children to post a video to their social media accounts showing them gathered to celebrate his birthday, they said.

Afterward, he monitored the analytics, including audience engagement, from the jail and “explicitly discussed with his family how to ensure that the video had his desired effect on potential jury members in this case”, they said.

The government also alleged Combs during other calls made clear his intention to anonymously publish information that he thought would help his defense against the charges.

“The defendant’s efforts to obstruct the integrity of this proceeding also includes relentless efforts to contact potential witnesses, including victims of his abuse who could provide powerful testimony against him,” prosecutors wrote.

Bela Karolyi, the charismatic if polarizing gymnastics coach who turned young women into champions and the US into an international power, has died. He was 82.

USA Gymnastics said Karolyi died Friday. No cause of death was given.

Karolyi and wife Martha trained multiple Olympic gold medalists and world champions in the US and Romania, including Nadia Comaneci and Mary Lou Retton.

“A big impact and influence on my life,” Comaneci, who was just 14 when Karolyi coached her to gold for Romania at the 1976 Montreal Olympics, posted on Instagram along with a black-and-white image of them together.

The Karolyis defected to the US in 1981 and over the next 30-plus years became a guiding force in American gymnastics, though not without controversy. Bela helped guide Retton – all of 16 – to the Olympic all-around title at the 1984 Games in Los Angeles and memorably helped an injured Kerri Strug off the floor at the 1996 Games in Atlanta after Strug’s vault secured the team gold for the Americans.

Karolyi briefly became the national team coordinator for USA Gymnastics women’s elite program in 1999 and incorporated a semi-centralized system that eventually turned the Americans into the sport’s gold standard. It did not come without a cost. He was pushed out after the 2000 Olympics after several athletes spoke out about his tactics.

It would not be the last time Karolyi was accused of grandstanding and pushing his athletes too far physically and mentally.

During the height of the Larry Nassar scandal in the late 2010s – when the disgraced former USA Gymnastics team doctor was effectively given a life sentence after pleading guilty to sexually assaulting gymnasts and other athletes with his hands under the guise of medical treatment – over a dozen former gymnasts came forward saying the Karolyis were part of a system that created an oppressive culture that allowed Nassar’s behavior to run unchecked for years.

Still, some of Karolyi’s most famous students were always among his staunchest defenders. When Strug got married, she and Karolyi took a photo recreating their famous scene from the 1996 Olympics, when he carried her on to the medals podium after she vaulted on a badly sprained ankle.