The Russian military is accelerating its gains along the front line in Ukraine at a crucial time for the conflict.

Data from the Institute for the Study of War (ISW) shows that Russia has gained almost six times as much territory in 2024 as it did in 2023, and is advancing towards key Ukrainian logistical hubs in the eastern Donbas region.

Meanwhile, Ukraine’s surprise incursion into Russia’s Kursk region is faltering. Russian troops have pushed Kyiv’s offensive backwards. Experts have questioned the success of the offensive, with one calling it a “strategic catastrophe” given manpower shortages faced by Ukraine.

These developments come at a time of heightened uncertainty with a second Donald Trump administration looming. The US president-elect has vowed to bring the war to a close when he takes office in January, with some fearing he could cut future military aid to Ukraine.

In the first few months of the war the front line moved quickly, with Russia gaining ground quickly before being pushed back by a Ukrainian counteroffensive. But in 2023 neither side made any major gains – with the conflict largely sliding into a stalemate.

But new ISW figures suggest the story in 2024 is more favourable for Russia. The ISW bases its analysis on confirmed social media footage and reports of troop movements.

The ISW data shows Moscow’s forces have seized around 2,700 sq km of Ukrainian territory so far this year, compared with just 465 sq km in the whole of 2023, a near six-fold increase.

Dr Marina Miron, a defence researcher at Kings College London, suggested to the BBC that there was a possibility the Ukrainian eastern front “might actually collapse” if Russia continued to advance at pace.

More than 1000 sq km was taken between 1 September and 3 November, suggesting the push accelerated in recent months. Two areas bearing the brunt of these advances are Kupiansk in Kharkiv region, and Kurakhove, a stepping stone to the key logistical hub of Pokrovsk in Donetsk region.

Kupiansk and areas to the east of the Oskil river were liberated in the Kharkiv offensive of 2022, but Russia has progressively retaken the latter area. In a recent intelligence update, the UK’s Ministry of Defence said Russian forces were trying to breach the north-eastern outskirts of the city.

Footage posted on 13 November and verified by the BBC is consistent with this analysis. The video shows a convoy of Russian armour being repelled after making it to within 4km of the key bridge at Kupiansk, the last major road crossing in the area.

While these reports do not necessarily translate to control of an area, it is indicative of how stretched Ukraine’s defensive line has become.

Elsewhere, since retaking the city of Vuhledar in October – an elevated position which sits above key supply lines and which Moscow spent two years fighting for – Russia has thrown resources at Kurakhove.

Ukraine’s forces defending the city have so far repelled attacks to the south and east. But the front line creeps ever closer, with Russia also threatening to encircle defenders from the north and west.

Col Yevgeny Sasyko, a former head of strategic communications with Ukraine’s general staff, said Russia places “powerful jaws” around the flanks of a city that slowly “grind though” defences until they collapse.

Footage from the city verified by the BBC showed massive destruction, with residential buildings heavily damaged.

The ISW concludes Moscow now holds a total of 110,649 sq km in Ukraine. For comparison, Ukrainian forces seized just over 1,171 sq km in the first month of its incursion into Kursk – though Russian forces have now retaken nearly half of that territory.

Despite its territorial gains, Russia’s advance has come at a huge cost.

An analysis carried out by BBC Russian confirmed that at least 78,329 troops have been killed since Russia launched its full-scale invasion in February 2022, with Moscow’s losses from September to November this year more than one-and-a-half times greater than the same period in 2023.

The losses are compounded by the “meat grinder” approach said to be favoured by Russian commanders – describing the waves of recruits thrown towards Ukrainian positions in a bid to exhaust troops.

Despite the Russian advances, some experts have noted that the actual speed of the offensive is still slow. David Handelman, a military analyst, suggested Ukrainian troops in the east were slowly withdrawing to preserve manpower and resources, rather than suffering from a broader collapse.

Ukraine launched its shock incursion into Russia’s Kursk region in August. It is unclear why Russia took so long to respond to the operation, which saw Kyiv’s troops quickly gain control over a number of border communities.

Dr Miron suggested that while the Kremlin would suffer a domestic political cost for as long as the incursion continued, Russia’s general staff had been keen to keep Ukraine’s forces tied down in Kursk as its forces made gains elsewhere along the front line.

But Moscow is now clearly intent on reclaiming the territory lost on its own soil. Some 50,000 troops have been deployed to the region.

Verified videos from the Kursk region show fierce fighting is taking place – and that Russia is suffering considerable losses in terms of manpower and equipment. But the data clearly shows Ukraine’s control of the region is shrinking.

Since the start of October, Russian counter-attacks have regained some 593 sq km worth of territory in the border region, ISW figures showed.

The Kursk incursion was initially a major boon for Ukraine in terms of morale at a time of serious setbacks, and the audacity of the operation was a reminder of its ability to surprise and harm its enemy.

But Dr Miron said while the Kursk incursion was a moment of “tactical brilliance” it has also been a “strategic catastrophe” for Ukraine.

“The whole idea was to maybe gain some political leverage in potential negotiations, but militarily to draw the Russian forces away from the Donbas in order to liberate Kursk. And what we’re seeing instead is that Ukrainian units are tied down there.”

Some of Kyiv’s most experienced and effective units are known to be fighting in Kursk. Mechanised units equipped with state-of-the-art Western armour are also involved in the offensive.

Ukrainian leaders had hinted that they hoped the incursion would force Moscow to redirect some of its forces from eastern Ukraine, slowing the Russian advance there. Instead, experts say most reinforcements were moved to Kursk from parts in Ukraine where the fighting is not as intense.

“According to Ukrainian soldiers from different parts of the front, the Russian troops reinforcing Kursk were mainly pulled from Kherson and Zaporizhzhia,” Yurri Clavilier, a land analyst with the International Institute for Strategic Studies, told the BBC.

“The fighting there is not as intense as it is in the East. Some Russian units attacking Kharkiv were also redirected to Kursk as Ukraine managed to stall the Russian onslaught there,” he added.

The importance of territory to both sides is the strength it lends to their position in any potential negotiations. Although no peace negotiations have been discussed, US President-elect Trump has claimed he could end the war within 24 hours, without saying exactly how.

​​On Tuesday, Ukraine fired US-supplied long-range missiles into Russia for the first time – a day after Washington gave it permission to do so.​​ It is thought that the decision was made in part to help Ukraine hold on to part of the Kursk region, to use as a bargaining chip in future negotiations.

But Dr Miron told the BBC that Russia’s advance has handed them a stronger negotiating position as Trump’s new foreign policy team prepare to take office.

“What they’re controlling right now, it does give them a certain advantage,” she said. “If it came to negotiations, I’m sure that as the Russian side has been stressing, ‘we will do it based on the battlefield configuration’.

“From a Russian perspective, they have much better cards than the Ukrainians.”

What do you want BBC Verify to investigate?

Donald Trump has picked World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE) co-founder and his transition co-chair, Linda McMahon, as his nominee for education secretary.

A long-time Trump ally, McMahon led the Small Business Administration during Trump’s first presidency and donated millions of dollars to his presidential campaign.

Announcing his pick on Truth Social, Trump said McMahon “will use her decades of Leadership experience, and deep understanding of both Education and Business, to empower the next Generation of American Students and Workers, and make America Number One in Education in the World.”

Her appointment comes after Trump chose Mehmet Oz, a doctor and former television host, to run Medicaid.

The two selections on Tuesday, along with Trump’s choice of Howard Lutnick for commerce secretary, follows a pattern of Trump appointing loyal supporters to top roles in his White House cabinet.

McMahon has a long history with the WEE and Trump, who used to make occasional appearances at wrestling matches. She co-founded the wrestling league with her husband in 1980, resigning as CEO in 2009 in order to undertake a failed bid to run for the Senate.

She has little background in education, but did serve on Connecticut state’s board of education from 2009 until 2010.

She is the board chair of the pro-Trump think tank the America First Policy Institute, meaning her confirmation in the Republican-majority Senate is highly likely.

“For the past four years, as the Chair of the Board at the America First Policy Institute, Linda has been a fierce advocate for Parents’ Rights,” Trump said in his statement.

“As Secretary of Education, Linda will fight tirelessly to expand ‘Choice’ to every State in America, and empower parents to make the best Education decisions for their families.”

Trump has criticised the Department of Education, and has promised to close the agency down – a job McMahon could be tasked with.

In his statement on Truth Social, Trump said McMahon would “spearhead” the effort to “send Education BACK TO THE STATES”, in reference to the pledge.

McMahon was named in a lawsuit filed last month involving the WWE.

It alleges that she, her husband and other company leaders knowingly allowed young boys to be abused by a ringside announcer who died in 2012.

A lawyer for the McMahons told USA Today Sports the allegations are “false claims” that stem from “absurd, defamatory and utterly meritless” media reports.

Trump earlier picked Mehmet Oz to run the powerful agency that oversees the healthcare of millions of Americans.

Oz, who was selected to lead the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Service, trained as a surgeon before finding fame on The Oprah Winfrey Show in the early 2000s, later hosting his own TV programme.

Oz has been criticised by experts for promoting what they called bad health advice about weight loss drugs and “miracle” cures, and suggesting malaria drugs as a cure for Covid-19 in the early days of the pandemic.

“There may be no Physician more qualified and capable than Dr. Oz to Make America Healthy Again,” Trump said in a statement

The Trump transition team said in a statement that Oz “will work closely with [Health Secretary nominee] Robert F Kennedy Jr to take on the illness industrial complex, and all the horrible chronic diseases left in its wake”.

Oz will need to be confirmed by the Senate next year before he officially takes charge of the agency.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services oversee the country’s largest healthcare programs, providing coverage to more than 150 million Americans. The agency regulates health insurance and sets policy that guides the prices that doctors, hospitals and drug companies are paid for medical services.

In 2023, the US government spent more than $1.4 trillion on Medicaid and Medicare combined, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

Trump said in a statement that Oz would “cut waste and fraud within our Country’s most expensive Government Agency”, and the Republican Party platform pledged to increase transparency, choice and competition and expand access to healthcare and prescription drugs.

Oz, 64, trained as a cardiothoracic surgeon – specialising in operations on the heart and lungs – and worked at New York City’s Presbyterian Hospital and Columbia University.

After he appeared in dozens of Oprah segments, he started The Dr Oz Show, where he doled out health advice to viewers.

But the line between promotion and science on the show was not always clear, and Oz has recommended homeopathy, alternative medicine and other treatments that critics have called “pseudoscience”.

He was criticised during Senate hearings in 2014 for endorsing unproven pills that he said would “literally flush fat from your system” and “push fat from your belly”.

During those hearings Oz said he never sold any specific dietary supplements on his show. But he has publicly endorsed products off air and his financial ties to health care companies were revealed in fillings made during his 2022 run for the US Senate in Pennsylvania.

During the Covid-19 pandemic, Oz promoted the anti-malaria drugs hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, which experts say are ineffective against the virus.

India’s forthcoming cricket tour of Australia continues a historic rivalry that has evolved since 1947-48. This fierce competition is now as keenly awaited as the Ashes. But the inaugural tour unfolded against the harrowing backdrop of India’s independence and partition, with cricketers confronting turmoil and communal strife at home, as they prepared to face Australia’s legendary Donald Bradman and his “Invincibles”.

In 1947, as India prepared for its first cricket tour of Australia, the nation was in the midst of unprecedented upheaval.

Independence had come with the painful partition that created Pakistan, sparking one of history’s largest and bloodiest migrations. Amidst this chaos and as millions crossed borders, religious violence spread with Hindus and Sikhs on one side, and Muslims on the other. India’s 16-member cricket squad – selected months earlier – also had to deal with both personal and national turmoil as they readied themselves for a landmark series.

Anthony De Mello, the president of Board of Control for Cricket in India, announced the team with a backdrop of a map of undivided India, proclaiming that the team would represent all of India.

Until then, the Indian cricket team – known as “All India” – had only toured three times for official Test matches to England between 1932 and 1946, losing the series on every occasion.

But in 1946 future Australian captain Lindsay Hassett brought an Australian Services team to India to celebrate the Allies’ victory in World War Two. India won the unofficial series of three matches 1-0 and Hassett reported back to the Australian cricket authorities that the Indians were worthy of an official Test series.

Excitement and anticipation ran high in Indian cricket circles as the team was expected to face the mighty Australians, led by legendary batsman Donald Bradman. His team was later dubbed “Bradman’s Invincibles” after returning undefeated from England in 1948.

De Mello’s India squad was led by ace opening batsman Vijay Merchant, with his reliable partner Mushtaq Ali serving as deputy.

Both had been exceptional on the English tours of 1936 and 1946, cementing their leadership roles. The squad also boasted elegant batter Rusi Modi and promising debutant fast bowler Fazal Mahmood, adding a dynamic mix of experience and fresh talent.

But both Merchant and Modi withdrew from the tour on medical grounds. Ali also withdrew following the death of his elder brother, leaving him with family responsibilities.

As a result, Lala Amarnath was announced as the new captain and Vijay Hazare his deputy.

However, the violence that erupted following partition nearly prevented Amarnath from reaching Australia. According to a 2004 biography by his son Rajender Amarnath, Lala Amarnath narrowly escaped a sectarian mob in Patiala in Indian Punjab. His home in Lahore, now in Pakistan, along with its priceless artefacts, was lost forever.

He also encountered danger during a train journey to Delhi.

At a station in Indian Punjab, a police official recognised Amarnath and gave him a kada – a steel bangle worn by Sikhs and many Hindus as a religious symbol. Later, a mob at the station spared the cricketer because of the kada – it probably led them to believe he shared their faith.

On the other side of the religious divide, pace bowler Mahmood found himself facing a deadly mob on a train.

The team had scheduled two weeks of training in Pune (then Poona) from 15 August – though it was not known then, that was the day India was partitioned.

Despite restrictions, Mahmood reached Poona for the training camp. Afterwards, he travelled to Bombay (now Mumbai) en route to Lahore. He writes in his 2003 autobiography that on the train, two men threatened him, but former Indian captain CK Nayudu intervened, bat in hand, and warned them off.

Once he reached curfew-bound Lahore, Mahmood was horrified by the bloodshed he witnessed there and decided to stay back in Pakistan and not tour Australia. He later became part of the Pakistani cricket team and made his Test debut in 1952-53 against India.

Two other members of India’s squad for the Australia tour – Gul Mohammad and Amir Elahi – also later moved to Pakistan and played against India in the 1952-53 series.

Despite these setbacks, India’s tour went ahead, though a weakened India faced Australia without four of its leading players and lost the series 4-0.

The two countries now play each other almost every two years. The miracle, however, is that the inaugural tour of 1947-48 happened at all, given the tumult at home.

In a sports park next to the red walls and glossy blue tiles which surround Beijing’s Temple of Heaven, a group of pensioners are working out.

“I’m 74 and I hope this helps me live a long time,” one man says after he finishes his pull-ups, just as a cold wind blows leaves from cypress trees across the park, disrupting another man who is mid-headstand. Women reach for gloves and sweaters as they take turns hanging from an overhead assault course.

Chinese emperors once came to this Ming dynasty holy site to pray for a good harvest. Now the park is used by locals to enjoy their retirement after spending decades contributing to China’s spectacular growth.

They’ve watched their country open up to the world and their factories propel its economy, which nips at the heels of the United States as the world’s largest.

But some fear what the promises of US president-elect Donald Trump – who has vowed steep tariffs on goods made in China – means for the country’s export-driven economy.

For many in China, Trump is a figure of fun and memes of him dancing to the YMCA are shared widely on social media. Others worry that he’s too unpredictable.

“I like Trump, but he’s unstable. Who knows what he might do?” says the 74-year-old pensioner, whose name has been withheld.

Some of Trump’s cabinet choices – announced since his election victory – will no doubt make people even more wary.

Marco Rubio, his pick for Secretary of State, has called Beijing “the threat that will define this century”. He is also sanctioned by Beijing. Trump’s choice for National Security Adviser, Mike Waltz, wrote earlier this month that the US should “urgently” bring the conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East to an end so it can “finally focus strategy attention where it should be: countering the greater threat from the Chinese Communist Party”.

But China has been in training for a second Trump presidency, says Yu Jie, a Senior Research Fellow on China at Chatham House, a London-based think tank.

Despite concern on the street, she says his return comes as “no surprise” to Beijing, although she warns that the world should still “expect a roller-coaster type of relationship to unfold” when Trump takes office in January.

The competition between the two nations has been ramping up for some time, long before Trump won the election. It turned especially tense during the Biden administration because of tariffs and geopolitical disagreements ranging from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine to the future of Taiwan.

Yet there was dialogue, with several senior US officials making trips to Beijing.

Chinese President Xi Jinping has vowed to work with the incoming Trump administration, but he also used his last meeting with President Joe Biden to warn Washington that a “new cold war should not be fought and cannot be won”.

He added that “containing China is unwise, unacceptable and bound to fail”.

Beijing has long accused the US and its allies of trying to contain China – they see tariffs targeting Chinese-made imports, laws restricting the country’s access to advanced AI chips and military alliances in the South China Sea and beyond as part of this approach.

And Trump’s decision to pick Rubio and Waltz suggests his administration will “take a much harsher, muscular approach with China,” says Lyle Morris from the Asia Society’s Centre for China Analysis.

“While Trump views his personal relationship with Xi Jinping as an avenue for negotiation, he will likely lean on Waltz and Rubio in fashioning a more aggressive, uncompromising policy towards China.”

They are far from the only voices in Washington that see China as a threat to US security and its economy – a view that surprises the average person in Beijing.

“You’re much better off here than in the US right now,” says the 74-year-old in the park before heading off to stretch.

Just north of the Temple of Heaven is the Forbidden City, where Chinese emperors lived for almost 500 years. It was here, in 2017, that Xi hosted Trump, bestowing on his guest an honour not granted to any US president since the founding of the People’s Republic of China.

Xi shut down the area and took Trump on a tour of the imperial quarters, every moment broadcast live on state TV. He was served kung pao chicken for dinner, and in turn brought a video of his granddaughter, Arabella Kushner, singing a Chinese song which went viral on social media.

It was billed by both as a high point in US-China relations, but that quickly soured after the Covid pandemic broke out in Wuhan in 2019 and spread globally in 2020. Trump repeatedly called it the “Chinese virus” and blamed the outbreak on Beijing. He also kicked off a tit-for-tat trade war, with tariffs still in place on more than $300bn (£238bn) of goods.

When Trump starts his second term, he will be encountering a stronger Xi, who has cemented his position at China’s helm with a historic third term – and the possibility of remaining in power for life.

Given it has the world’s largest army and navy, Washington is now concerned that the country is building a bigger nuclear arsenal.

Even as Trump was unveiling his new cabinet, Chinese state media published videos from the country’s biggest airshow of a new stealth fighter jet – the J35-A – flying vertically and upside-down. China is only the second country to boast two stealth fighters in its inventory. The other is the US. The world’s first two-seat stealth fighter, the J20-S, was also on display.

Last week, researchers at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies in California found satellite images that indicate China is working on nuclear propulsion for a new aircraft carrier.

The studies have “sparked serious concerns over Beijing’s potential adoption of a first-use strategy and increased nuclear threats, fuelling strong support to significantly boost US nuclear capabilities in response,” says Tong Zhao from think tank Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

“Unless Trump personally intervenes, which seems unlikely, it appears the two nations are on the brink of a much more intense nuclear competition with far-reaching implications for international stability.”

Under Xi’s leadership in recent years, China has also become more assertive in its territorial claims over Taiwan and the South China Sea.

One worry is that Beijing is ramping up militarily to invade Taiwan, which it sees as a breakaway province that will eventually be under its control. Under Trump and his cabinet, would the US be willing to defend Taiwan?

It’s a question asked of every US president. Trump has dodged it, saying he wouldn’t have to use military force because Xi knew he was “crazy”, and he would impose paralysing tariffs on Chinese imports if that happened.

Despite Trump’s unwillingness to participate in foreign wars, most experts expect Washington to continue providing military assistance to Taipei. For one, it is bound by law to sell defensive weapons to the island. Two, the Trump administration sold more arms to Taiwan than any other.

“There is strong bipartisan support for continuing military aid to Taiwan. I don’t expect Trump to significantly change course on arms sales to Taiwan,” Mr Morris says.

These glaring differences aside, Trump does seem to admire Xi’s strongman image.

In 2020 he declared that he and Xi Jinping “love each other”, even in the midst of a bitter trade war with China.

“I had a very strong relationship with him,” he confirmed in a recent interview with the Wall Street Journal.

It’s hard to know what Xi thinks – he has said very little about their relationship and barely mentions Trump by name.

In 2018, Chinese state media CGTN took direct aim at the American leader, and released an unflattering video with the sarcastic title: “Thanks Mr Trump, you are great!” It was later taken down by censors.

But what we do know is both leaders project a type of muscular nationalism. Xi’s dream is the “great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation” and Trump believes only he can “make America great again”. Both promise that they are working towards a new golden age for their countries.

Trump’s “golden age” for America includes 60% tariffs on Chinese-made goods.

But Beijing is in no mood for a second trade war. It has troubles of its own.

President Xi’s dream of prosperity is in jeopardy. China’s economy is sluggish, its property sector is sinking, nearly 20% of its young people are struggling to find jobs and it has one of the world’s fastest growing ageing populations.

Some of this economic pain is clear at the Temple of Heaven. We join the throngs of Chinese tour groups walking through white marble gates. It has become fashionable for young people to dress up in Qing dynasty costumes although their long silk robes often fail to hide the other big trend – chunky white trainers.

Dozens of school groups are listening attentively to guides about their city’s colourful history while a queue forms around the altar to make a wish. I watch as a middle-aged woman dressed in black takes her turn. She turns three times, clasps her hands, closes her eyes and looks toward the sky. Later we ask what she hoped for. She says many people come here and ask for their children to get jobs or to get into a good school.

“We wish for better lives and prospects,” she says. While China claims to have eradicated extreme poverty, millions of labourers and factory workers across the country, those who contributed to China’s rise, will worry what about what’s to come.

Her future and the future of China’s economy may partly depend on just how serious Trump is about his tariffs. This time, Beijing is prepared, according to Yu Jie.

“China has already begun to diversify its sources of agricultural imports (notably from Brazil, Argentina and Russia) and increased the volumes of its exports in non-US allied countries. At a domestic level, the recent local government debt recapitalisation is also paving the way to offset the negative impacts on the likely trade war with the Trump Administration.”

Beijing may also have another hope. Billionaire Elon Musk now appears to have Trump’s ear. His company, Tesla, depends on China for production – about half of all its EVs are made in the country. Chinese leaders may ask if Musk can temper Trump’s trade impulses.

But the great power struggle of the 21st century is not just over trade. Xi’s dream also involves making China the world’s dominant power.

Some experts believe this is where another Trump presidency may offer Beijing an opportunity.

“Chinese leaders will reinforce the narrative that the US is the single and most disruptive source of global instability, while portraying China as a responsible and confident world power,” says Yu Jie.

Biden spent four years building up friendships across Asia with the likes of South Korea, Japan, the Philippines and Vietnam – all in an effort to contain China.

In the past, Trump’s “America-first” doctrine isolated and weakened these US alliances. He opted for deals over delicate diplomacy and often put a price tag on America’s friendships. In 2018, for instance, he demanded more money from South Korea to continue keeping US troops in the country.

Beijing has already built up alliances with emerging economies. It is also trying to repair its relationship with the UK and Europe, while mending historical grievances with Asian neighbours, South Korea and Japan.

If Washington’s influence does wane around the world, it could be a win for President Xi.

Back at the park, as we discuss the results of the US election, one man holds up four fingers. “He’s only got four years,” he says. “The US is always changing leaders. In China, we have more time.”

Time is indeed on Beijing’s side. Xi could be president for life – and so can afford to make slow but steady progress towards his goals.

Even if Trump does get in the way, it will not be for long.

Jimmy Lai, the 76-year-old founder of the now-defunct Hong Kong tabloid Apple Daily, is taking the stand on Wednesday in a national security trial that may see him sentenced to life imprisonment.

He is accused of colluding with foreign forces by using his media platform to oppose the government.

This is his first time testifying in court, even though he has undergone multiple trials since 2020 – all widely seen as politically motivated.

Lai is one of the most influential pro-democracy figures in the city, which has come under an increasingly severe crackdown from Beijing.

His hearing on Wednesday comes one day after the sentencing of 45 pro-democracy campaigners – part of a group known as the Hong Kong 47 – in the city’s largest trial under the national security law.

Lai’s ongoing trial concerns allegations that Apple Daily published articles supporting the pro-democracy protests that rocked the city in 2019, which were seen by Beijing as a threat to national stability.

Lai argued on Wednesday that he opposed violence and that advocating for Hong Kong independence was “too crazy to think about”.

He said that “the core values of Apple Daily are actually the core values of the people of Hong Kong”. These values, he said, include the “rule of law, freedom, pursuit of democracy, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of assembly.”

He said that he joined the media industry to “participate in delivering freedom”.

He faces a sentence up to life imprisonment if convicted of collusion.

Winter has come to Delhi and with it, a familiar sense of gloom. The sky here is grey and there is a thick, visible blanket of smog.

If you stay outdoors for more than a few minutes, you can almost taste ash. You will feel breathless within minutes if you try to run or even walk at a brisk pace in the smog.

Newspapers are back to using words like toxic, deadly and poisonous in their main headlines.

Most schools have been shut and people have been advised to stay indoors – though those whose livelihoods depend on working outdoors can’t afford to do so.

Delhi’s air quality score was somewhere between 1,200 and 1,500 on Monday and Tuesday, according to different monitoring agencies. The acceptable limit is less than 100.

These scores measure the levels of particulate matter – called PM 2.5 and PM10 – in the air. These tiny particles can enter the lungs and cause a host of diseases.

On social media, people have been expressing shock, disappointment and anguish that it’s all happening again.

Along with the gloom, there is a strong sense of déjà vu – like we have seen this all many times before in the past 15 years.

I recorded this video of my drive to office in 2017, when smog had reduced visibility to less than 2m.

On Tuesday, my drive to work seemed even worse.

And we have covered every twist and turn of this story in the past two decades.

We have reported on how pollution is making people sick and reducing their life expectancy here, here and here, and how it affects children here, here and here. The crisis affects the poor the most but they mostly don’t have a choice but to go out and work in the smog, as we have covered here, here and here.

Every year, politicians blame each other, as we have reported here, here and here.

We have discussed the root cause of the problem here, here and here, and the solutions – both the ones that marginally worked and the ones that failed miserably – here, here and here.

Covering this story feels like watching (and being in) the same dystopian film every year – following the same characters, plot and script. The outcome is always the same – nothing changes.

The parks are empty again – people, particularly children and the elderly, have been told to stay indoors.

Those who must work – daily-wage labourers, rickshaw pullers, delivery riders – are coughing but still going out.

Hospitals are seeing an increasing number of people coming in with respiratory problems.

And amid all this, we are back to the same question again – why does nothing change?

The simple answer is that solving Delhi’s air problem requires monumental efforts and coordination.

The sources of the problem are many. One of them is the practice of farmers burning crop remains to clear their fields quickly to sow seeds for the next yield.

This mostly happens in the neighbouring states of Punjab, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh. The smoke from the farm fires engulfs Delhi every winter and hangs low in the atmosphere as wind speeds reduce during winter months.

But farmers can’t be entirely blamed for this because this is the cheapest way of clearing fields.

Different governments have talked about providing machines and financial incentives to stop crop burning, but very little has happened on the ground.

Delhi itself produces a huge chunk of the pollution – emission from vehicles, construction and factories.

Every year, in the winter months, people get angry, journalists write and produce reports, politicians blame each other and courts fume – until we do it all over again the next year.

A public health emergency like this would spark mass protests in most democracies. But the anger in Delhi is mostly limited to social media.

Activists say the reason is that pollution doesn’t cause immediate problems for most people. Ingesting high levels of PM2.5 deteriorates health slowly. A Lancet study found that pollution led to more than 2.3 million premature deaths in India in 2019.

And then there is the class divide. People who can afford to temporarily leave the city do that, those who can buy air purifiers do that, and those who can vent on social media do that.

The rest, who don’t have these options, just go about their lives.

The collective angst has so far not resulted in a massive protest and, as the Supreme Court once observed, politicians just “pass the buck” and wait for the season to get over.

Experts say governments at the federal level and in different states need to leave their party politics behind and work together to solve this problem. They need to focus on long-term solutions.

And citizens need to hold politicians accountable and courts have to pass decisive orders months before the pollution worsens.

This year, we are again in the thick of the season and temporary measures have been announced, like banning construction work.

But can these bring Delhi’s elusive blue skies back? The evidence from the past few years doesn’t give much hope.

US media giant Comcast is set to spin off its NBCUniversal cable television arm, as the industry continues to struggle with the emergence of streaming giants like Netflix and Amazon Prime.

The BBC understands that the plan – set to be announced on Wednesday – is to create a new company that will include channels such as MSNBC, CNBC, USA, E!, Syfy and the Golf Channel.

The networks are still profitable and generated a combined revenue of $7bn (£5.5bn) in the year to the end of September.

Comcast will keep NBC broadcast television network, its film and television studios and its theme parks, as well as its Peacock streaming service.

Executives at Comcast believe the plan will be completed in about a year. Their expectation is that Comcast will be better placed for growth after the spinoff.

The new company will have the chairman of NBCUniversal’s media group, Mark Lazarus, as its chief executive.

Comcast took control of NBCUniversal in 2011 before the rise of streaming. At the time, its cable networks were seen as some of its most attractive businesses.

But a growing number of cable TV viewers have been cancelling their subscriptions and moving on to streaming platforms.

Comcast is the first major media company to make such a move.

Earlier this year, Warner Bros and Paramount Global cut billions of dollars from the valuation of their cable TV networks earlier this year.

Walt Disney has also considered spinning off its cable networks but ended up scrapping the plan.

The most senior Hamas leader outside Gaza and other key figures in its negotiating team are no longer in Doha, Qatar’s government and a senior Palestinian official have said.

Qatar’s foreign ministry spokesman said Hamas’s office no longer had a function because Qatar had suspended its mediation efforts on a Gaza ceasefire deal, although he stressed that it was not permanently closed.

The Palestinian official told the BBC that the Hamas negotiators had adjusted their presence in the region and were keeping their locations secret to avoid embarrassment for host countries.

But they said it was likely Hayya was in Turkey as he had travelled there several times over the past two months.

And while the official also denied reports that Qatar had formally asked Hamas to leave, they said the Gulf state seemed to be positioning itself carefully to avoid any tensions between the current administration of President Joe Biden and the incoming administration of President-elect Donald Trump.

Qatar has hosted Hamas’s political bureau since 2012 and played a key role in facilitating indirect negotiations between the group and Israel. But the recent developments suggest a shift in their relationship.

Earlier this month, Qatar announced that it had paused its efforts to broker a Gaza ceasefire and said they would only resume “when the parties show willingness and seriousness to end the brutal war”. But it denied reports that Hamas leaders had been asked to leave.

On Tuesday, foreign ministry spokesman Majed al-Ansari confirmed at a media briefing that “the leaders of Hamas that are within the negotiating team are now not in Doha”.

“As you know, they move between different capitals. I don’t want to get into details of what that means,” he added.

“But what I can tell you very clearly is that the office of Hamas in Doha was created for the sake of the negotiating process. Obviously, when there is no mediation process, the office itself doesn’t have any function.”

He also stressed that “a decision to close down the office permanently is a decision that you will hear about from us directly and shouldn’t be part of media speculation”.

On Monday, Hamas said in a Telegram statement that sources in the group had “denied what some Israeli media outlets had circulated about Hamas leadership leaving Qatar to Turkey”.

It followed a similar denial from the Turkish foreign ministry, with sources telling the Turkish news channel NTV: “Hamas political bureau members visit Turkey from time to time. Allegations that the Hamas political bureau moved to Turkey do not reflect the truth.”

US state department spokesman Matthew Miller meanwhile told a news conference in Washington that he was “not in a position to dispute the reports” about the whereabouts of Hamas’s leadership.

“What I would say on behalf of the United States is that we don’t believe the leaders of a vicious terrorist organisation should be living comfortably anywhere, and that certainly includes in a major city of one of our key allies and partners,” he said.

“A number of these individuals are under US indictment, have been under US indictment for some time, and we believe that they should be turned over to the United States,” he added.

He also declined to speculate on whether there would be any consequences for Turkey as a Nato ally if it did take in the Hamas leaders.

Turkey does not consider Hamas a terrorist organisation – unlike Israel, the US, the UK and many other Western countries – and members of the group often spend time there.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has defended Hamas as a resistance movement and been fiercely critical of Israel’s military campaign in Gaza.

Israel launched a campaign to destroy Hamas in response to the group’s unprecedented attack on southern Israel on 7 October 2023, in which about 1,200 people were killed and 251 others were taken hostage.

More than 43,970 people have been killed in Gaza since then, according to the territory’s Hamas-run health ministry.

During a visit to Gaza on Tuesday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reiterated his determination not to let Hamas have any role in governing Gaza after the war.

He also once again vowed to ensure that all the hostages would be brought home alive and repeated his offer of $5m (£3.95m) for anyone who turned a hostage over to Israel.

Israel says 97 hostages are still being held, 34 of whom are presumed dead. There are another four hostages who were kidnapped before 7 October, two of whom are believed to be dead.

Los Angeles, the second largest US city, is setting itself up for a standoff with President-elect Donald Trump over immigration.

On Tuesday, its city council passed a “sanctuary city” ordinance to bar using local resources to help federal immigration authorities.

LA’s public school system also reaffirmed itself as a “sanctuary” for undocumented immigrants and LGBTQ students in a series of emergency resolutions.

Trump, who will be sworn in in two months, has promised mass deportations once he returns to the White House. His chosen “border czar”, Tim Homan, has urged sanctuary cities to “get the hell out of the way” of federal immigration crackdowns.

The term “sanctuary city” has been popular in the US for more than a decade to describe places that limit their assistance to federal immigration authorities. Since it is not a legal term, cities have taken a variety of approaches to becoming “sanctuaries”, such as setting policies in laws or simply changing local policing practices.

Aimed at making a 2019 executive order into city law, the city council’s sanctuary city ordinance prohibits using city resources for immigration enforcement, including cooperating with federal immigration agents, NBC News Los Angeles reports.

The ordinance will “prevent federal immigration enforcement from being able to access city facilities or to use city resources in the pursuit of immigration enforcement”, council member Nithya Raman told CBS News, the BBC’s US partner, ahead of the vote.

It will also prohibit some data sharing between immigration authorities and city officials and agencies.

The ordinance will go into effect once it has been signed by Mayor Karen Bass.

Officials in a number of other cities, including Boston and New York City, have similarly promised that local resources would not be allocated to helping federal immigration enforcement issues.

Since Trump was elected the first time, dozens of school districts have declared themselves “sanctuaries” or “safe havens” to reassure students they will not be deported.

The Los Angeles school district – roughly 140 miles (225km) from the country’s southern border with Mexico – also voted on a series of emergency resolutions explicitly aimed at combatting what the board’s president, Jackie Goldberg, has described as an anti-immigrant and LGBTQ sentiment from the incoming president.

As well as restating a sanctuary policy for students and families within the school district, the resolution also calls for training for teachers and staff about how they should communicate with immigration authorities.

“We’re not going to be running in fear,” she said in quotes cited by the LA Times ahead of the resolution’s passing. “We’re going to fight you, every inch of the way.”

The move is likely to put the city on a collision course with the incoming Trump administration, which has vowed it will begin a large-scale mass deportation effort from the very beginning of the administration.

Trump’s chosen “border czar”, former acting Immigrations and Customs Enforcement director Tom Homan, has repeatedly said that “sanctuary” city designations would not prevent the administration from carrying out its immigration policy goals.

In an 11 November interview with Fox, Homan said “nothing will stop us from deporting migrant criminals.”

“We’re going to do the job with you, or without you,” he said.

Multiple injuries are feared after a car was driven into a crowd of people outside a primary school in China’s southern Hunan province.

State media said “several students and adults were injured and fell to the ground”, and several people were hospitalised, but a police statement later said there were no life-threatening injuries.

The driver of the vehicle – identified as a white SUV – was caught by parents and school security officers and handed over to police.

This is the third attack on a crowd in China in a week, and it has fuelled concerns about public safety.

“About a dozen people were hit, some of them seriously, but luckily the ambulance came very quickly,” Mr Zhu, a parent of one of the children at the school, told the BBC.

He said he heard the attack just as he was leaving the school premises, after dropping off his eight-year-old.

“Six or seven parents had forced the car of the person who hit others to stop. Even the security guard was knocked down. The guard is quite old, in his 70s or 80s, and couldn’t do much,” he said.

The school has been identified as the Yong’an Primary School in Dingcheng District in Hunan province.

Video from the scene posted on a private WeChat account showed some children lying on the ground, while others, carrying school bags, were fleeing in panic.

Another video filmed soon after the incident showed an angry pedestrian hitting the SUV with a snow shovel while the driver was still inside.

The driver is then seen stepping out of the other side of the vehicle, only to be surrounded by bystanders who started beating him with sticks.

Similar attacks in recent days have sparked discussions online about the social phenomenon of “taking revenge on society“, where individuals act on personal grievances by attacking strangers.

On Saturday eight people were killed and 17 others were wounded in a knife attack at a vocational school in eastern China. Police said the suspect was a 21-year-old former student at the school who was meant to graduate this year but had failed the exam.

Before that, on 12 November, at least 35 people were killed in a car attack in southern China, when a man ran into groups of people exercising on a sports track.

And in October, in Shanghai, a man killed three people and wounded 15 others in stabbing at a supermarket.

According to police records, there have been 19 incidents of indiscriminate violence in China this year in which the perpetrator was not known to the victims. Sixty-three people have been killed and 166 injured in these attacks. This is a sharp increase on previous years – 16 killed and 40 injured in 2023, for instance.

While the incidents are still sporadic and rare, they are high-profile. And the videos that often circulate soon after on social media have prompted concern and fear among people.

“These are symptoms of a society with a lot of pent-up grievances,” Lynette Ong, distinguished professor of Chinese politics at Canada’s University of Toronto, told AFP.

“Some people resort to giving up. Others, if they’re angry, want to take revenge.”

A slowing economy, high youth unemployment and a property crisis that has hurt savings have led to increasing uncertainty about the future among Chinese people.

Ong said, in the circumstacnes, violent attacks were the “negative side of the same coin”.

President Xi Jinping has ordered local officials to ensure the safety and “social stability” of communities and to “strictly prevent extreme cases”.

Officials are keen to show they are acting quickly. They worry that such a high number of casualties in a single year could raise questions about China’s safety record, further alarming people and even discouraging tourism.

The Communist Party has rapidly expanded surveillance in recent years and after the car attack last week in Zhuhai, there have been further orders to deploy local officials and community workers to try to prevent unrest.

Hip-hop mogul Sean “Diddy” Combs is currently in federal custody awaiting trial on charges of racketeering and sex trafficking.

His arrest in New York came amid a series of civil suits alleging sexual assault and physical violence, some going back to the 1990s.

More than two dozen people have filed lawsuits against the rapper, accusing him of using his influence in the entertainment industry to do everything from drugging, assaulting and raping people.

The latest batch of lawsuits include allegations from two men who were underage at the time of the alleged sexual assaults. Both described being hopeful that Mr Combs could help jumpstart their careers in the entertainment industry.

The Harlem-born rapper has denied all the allegations, both those laid out in lawsuits and in his federal indictment.

Mr Combs, 54, was arrested on Monday 16 September in a New York hotel on charges of racketeering conspiracy, sex trafficking by force and transportation for purposes of prostitution.

Federal prosecutors have accused him of “creating a criminal enterprise” in which he “abused, threatened, and coerced women and others around him to fulfil his sexual desires, protect his reputation, and conceal his conduct”.

They said Mr Combs had used drugs, violence and the power of his status to “lure female victims” into extended sex acts called “Freak Offs”.

They also revealed they had uncovered firearms, ammunition and more than 1,000 bottles of lubricant during raids on Mr Combs’ homes in Miami and Los Angeles in March.

Prosecutors have reportedly been in touch with several witnesses who worked under Mr Combs and some of the accusers currently suing him, and have left open the possibility of more charges.

The singer-producer has pleaded not guilty to the three felony counts against him and his attorney told reporters he was a “fighter” who was “not afraid of the charges”.

Mr Combs is currently being held at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, a federal jail notorious for its violence and poor inmate care.

MDC includes an extra-security section with barracks-style housing reserved for special detainees, and US media report that Mr Combs is sharing the space with convicted cryptocurrency fraudster Sam Bankman-Fried.

His legal team sought his release pending trial because of the jail’s “horrific” conditions, but prosecutors argued he posed “a serious flight risk” and Mr Combs has twice been denied bail.

If convicted, he faces a sentence of anywhere from 15 years to life in prison.

Mr Combs’ former on-and-off girlfriend, Casandra “Cassie” Ventura, was first to blow the whistle on the self-proclaimed “bad boy for life”.

In a lawsuit filed last November, the model and musician alleged he had “trapped” her for over a decade in a “cycle of abuse, violence, and sex trafficking”.

Mr Combs “vehemently” denied the claims. A day after the suit landed in court, both parties said they had “amicably” settled the case, though Mr Combs’ attorney said the settlement was “in no way an admission of wrongdoing”.

But in May, CNN obtained surveillance footage that showed the entertainer-turned-entrepreneur assaulting Ms Ventura in a 2016 altercation that is detailed in her suit.

Mr Combs finally acknowledged the incident in an Instagram video two days later, saying he was “disgusted” by what he had done.

“My behaviour on that video is inexcusable. I take full responsibility for my actions,” he said.

At least 27 others – including several men – have since come forward with their own claims. Here are details from some of the cases – many have included plaintiffs who filed anonymously.

Joi Dickerson-Neal, who said Ms Ventura had inspired her to speak out, alleged Mr Combs had “intentionally drugged” and raped her when she was a Syracuse University student in 1991, and had made her a victim of revenge porn by filming the assault and showing it to others.

Representatives for Mr Combs blasted the lawsuit as “purely a money grab” and have asked for it to be dismissed.

Liza Gardner accused Mr Combs and R&B crooner Aaron Hall of plying her with drinks and then forcing her to have sex with them against her will when she was 16 years old. She also claimed that Mr Combs had visited her home the next day and choked her until she passed out. Mr Combs’ attorney slammed the claims as “bogus”.

The three initial lawsuits were brought under New York state’s Adult Survivors Act, which granted adult victims a one-year window to bring claims against their abusers regardless of statutes of limitation.

A woman so far identified only as Jane Doe claimed that Mr Combs, former Bad Boy Records president Harve Pierre and a third person had violently gang-raped her in a New York City studio when she was a 17-year-old high school student.

A few days later, Mr Combs broke his silence on social media against “sickening allegations… by individuals looking for a quick pay day”. His attorneys are seeking to dismiss the “baseless and time-barred” case. Mr Pierre has meanwhile called the suit a “tale of fiction”.

Rodney “Lil Rod” Jones, a producer and videographer who worked on Mr Combs’ most recent album, accused the mogul of running an illegal racketeering enterprise in which he was forced to procure drugs, solicit sex workers and tape sex acts. He also claimed Mr Combs and actor Cuba Gooding Jr had groped him without consent.

Grace O’Marcaigh, who worked on a yacht leased by the Combs family in 2022, accused the rapper and his son, Christian “King” Combs, of sexual assault. She blamed them for creating an “environment of debauchery” with suspected sex workers and top celebrities aboard.

Crystal McKinney claimed she had been drugged and sexually assaulted by Mr Combs following a Men’s Fashion Week event in 2003 when she was 22 years old. She also said he had subsequently “blackballed” her in the modelling world.

April Lampros, who says she met Mr Combs as a student at New York’s Fashion Institute of Technology in 1994, detailed “four terrifying sexual encounters” through the early 2000s.

Adria English, a former adult-film actress who worked with Mr Combs in the 2000s, said he had used her as a “sexual pawn for the pleasure and financial benefit of others” during the “White Parties” he hosted at his homes in New York and Miami.

Dawn Richards, who once sang in two Combs-assembled groups including Danity Kane, said she had personally witnessed his violence against Ms Ventura and that he had threatened her life when she tried to intervene.

Thalia Graves, who is backed by celebrity lawyer Gloria Allred, claimed Mr Combs and his bodyguard Joseph Sherman had sedated, overpowered and tied her up before recording themselves raping her and later distributing the sex tape.

Six anonymous accusers: Six lawsuits were filed on 14 October by four men and two women. One of the women accused Mr Combs of raping her at a hotel and another suit accused the rapper of ordering a 16-year-old boy to undress when the teen was talking to him about breaking into the music industry.

Ashley Parham filed a lawsuit on 15 October claiming that Mr Combs had raped her as “payback” for a comment she made suggesting that he was responsible for the murder of rapper Tupac Shakur. Shakur’s murder has never been solved, but a man currently on trial for his murder has previously claimed that Mr Combs had paid for him to be killed.

Mr Combs’ legal team has dismissed the flurry of lawsuits as “clear attempts to garner publicity.”

“Mr Combs and his legal team have full confidence in the facts, their legal defences, and the integrity of the judicial process,” his attorneys said in a statement, adding: “Mr Combs has never sexually assaulted anyone – adult or minor, man or woman.”

Nine more lawsuits were filed anonymously between 20 October and 28 of October. Many of the lawsuits were filed by adults who said they were underage at the time of the alleged sexual assaults.

Two male accusers said in lawsuits that they were sexually assaulted while meeting with the mogul about their careers in the music industry while they were minors.

Several of the lawsuits included details that the incidents happened at some of Mr Combs’ notorious parties.

Five more anonymous lawsuits were filed against Mr Combs on 19 November from three men and two women. The suits centre on allegations of sexual assault at parties with at least two of them outlining rape accusations against Mr Combs.

Ukraine has fired US-supplied longer-range missiles at Russian territory for the first time, the Russian government said, a day after Washington gave its permission for such attacks.

US officials also confirmed use of the Army Tactical Missile System (Atacms) to CBS news, the BBC’s US partner. Ukraine has not commented.

Russia’s defence ministry said the strike had targeted the Bryansk region bordering Ukraine to the north on Tuesday morning.

It said five missiles had been shot down and one had caused damage – with its fragments starting a fire at a military facility.

But two US officials said initial indications suggested Russia had intercepted just two missiles out of around eight fired by Ukraine.

The BBC has not been able to independently verify the contradicting figures.

Russia’s Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov, accused Washington of trying to escalate the conflict.

“That Atacms was used repeatedly overnight against Bryansk Region is of course a signal that they [the US] want escalation,” he said.

“And without the Americans, use of these high-tech missiles, as [Russian President Vladimir] Putin has said many times, is impossible.”

He said Russia would “proceed from the understanding” that the missiles were operated by “American military experts”.

“We will be taking this as a renewed face of the Western war against Russia and we will react accordingly,” he told a press conference at the G20 in Rio de Janeiro.

Earlier on Tuesday, the Kremlin approved changes to Russia’s nuclear doctrine, setting out new conditions under which the country would consider using its arsenal.

It now says an attack from a non-nuclear state, if backed by a nuclear power, will be treated as a joint assault on Russia.

Commenting on the changes, US state department spokesperson Matthew Miller said: “Since the beginning of its war of aggression against Ukraine, [Russia] has sought to coerce and intimidate both Ukraine and other countries around the world through irresponsible nuclear rhetoric and behaviour.”

He added that the US had not “seen any reason” to change its own nuclear posture, but would “continue to call on Russia to stop bellicose and irresponsible rhetoric”.

UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer also described the move as “irresponsible rhetoric”, adding that was “not going to deter our support for Ukraine”.

Ukraine has already been using Atacms in Russian-occupied areas of its own territory for more than a year.

The missiles can hit targets at a range of up to 300km (186 miles) and are difficult to intercept.

Kyiv is now able to strike deeper into Russia using the missiles, including around the Kursk region, where Ukrainian forces hold more than 1,000 sq km of territory. Ukrainian and US officials reportedly expect a counter-offensive in the region.

• Atacms: What we know about missile system Ukraine is using to strike Russia

In a statement, Russia’s defence ministry said the strike had been launched at 03:25 (00:25 GMT).

A fire caused by fallen debris from one of the missiles was quickly extinguished and there were no casualties, it said.

Ukraine’s military earlier confirmed that it had struck an ammunition warehouse in the Russian region of Bryansk, but it did not specify whether Atacms had been used.

It said the attack, on a depot around 100km from the border near the town of Karachev, had caused 12 secondary explosions.

Ukraine’s President Zelensky urged Europe to “push Russia harder” in a speech marking 1,000 days since Vladimir Putin launched a full-scale invasion of the country.

“The more time he [Putin] has, the worse the conditions become,” he told a special session of the European Parliament on Tuesday.

Zelensky spoke amid speculation that Ukraine had for the first time used the US-supplied Atacams long range missile system to hit a target deep inside Russia, a day after Washington signalled its permission.

An ammunition warehouse was struck with the missiles in the Russian region of Bryansk, about 100 kilometres from the border, an unconfirmed report on the RBC Ukraine news website said.

But Kyiv often uses domestic drones to hit targets inside Russia, and there was no immediate evidence that US missiles were used.

On Monday, US officials said that President Biden had removed US sanctions on the use of the Atacms system outside of Ukraine’s borders.

It is thought that Ukraine was given permission to use the missiles only to defend its forces inside Russia’s Kursk region, where Kyiv launched a surprise incursion in August and where an assault from Russian and North Korean troops was expected within days.

• Putin approves changes to Russia’s nuclear doctrine

Addressing members of the European Parliament on Tuesday morning, 1,000 days since the invasion began on 24 February 2022, Zelensky warned that Putin “[would] not stop on his own” and urged that Russia be pushed towards a “just peace”.

He said the deployment of North Korean troops was a clear sign that Moscow was determined to escalate the conflict.

“While some European leaders think about some elections, or something like this, at Ukraine’s expense, Putin is focused on winning this war,” he warned.

Meanwhile, Ukraine’s military commander in chief wrote on Telegram that the country had faced 1,000 days of “extremely complex, fierce battle for our existence” and “destroying the enemy”.

“In the frozen trenches of Donetsk region and in the burning steppes of Kherson region under shells, hail, and anti-aircraft guns – we are fighting for the right to life.”

He added: “Every dark night, even if there are a thousand of them, always ends with dawn.”

The comments came after 12 people, including a child, were killed in a drone attack on Ukraine’s northeastern region of Sumy overnight, where 11 were also killed in a separate strike on Sunday.

Meanwhile, the Kremlin approved its updated nuclear doctrine – which says that any aggression from a non-nuclear state, if backed by a nuclear power, will be regarded as a joint attack on Russia.

Under the changes, a large attack on Russia with conventional missiles, drones or aircraft could meet the criteria for a nuclear response, as could an attack on Belarus or any critical threat to Russia’s sovereignty.

The EU’s foreign affairs chief Josep Borrell Fontelles also said on Tuesday the EU continued to stand with Ukraine, but that it “need[ed] to do more and quicker”.

“The European Union will continue to advance support to help achieve victory for Ukraine and to bring peace to our continent,” he said in a video shared on X.

“History will judge us based on our actions and reactions,” read the caption.

• Russia vows ‘tangible’ response if US missiles used against its territory

Earlier, UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer reiterated his country’s “ironclad” support for Ukraine amid speculation he could give Kyiv permission to use British-supplied Storm Shadow missiles to hit targets deep inside Russian territory.

Vladimir Putin has approved changes to Russia’s nuclear doctrine, setting out new conditions under which the country would consider using its arsenal.

The doctrine now says an attack from a non-nuclear state, if backed by a nuclear power, will be treated as a joint assault on Russia.

The update was proposed in September and rubber stamped on Tuesday, the 1,000th day of the war with Ukraine.

It also follows Washington’s decision on Monday to allow Ukraine to fire long-range US missiles into Russia.

Under the changes, a large attack on Russia with conventional missiles, drones or aircraft could meet the criteria for a nuclear response, as could an attack on Belarus or any critical threat to Russia’s sovereignty.

Any aggression against Russia by a state which is a member of a coalition would be seen by Moscow as aggression from the whole group.

The updates expand the number of countries and coalitions, and the kinds of military threats, subject to a possible nuclear response, according to state-run news agency Tass.

Putin has threatened the use of nuclear weapons before, and Ukraine has criticised it as “nuclear sabre-rattling” to deter its allies from providing further support.

But Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said “we strongly are in favour of doing everything to not allow nuclear war to happen”.

Speaking at a press conference at the G20 summit in Rio de Janeiro, Mr Lavrov said a declaration signed by the group, which includes Russia “clearly said we want to move towards a world free of nuclear weapons”.

• Missile news welcomed in Ukraine but ‘won’t win war’

Announcing the change, the Kremlin urged other countries to study the changes.

“This is a very important text,” Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said, according to Tass, adding “it should become a subject to a very deep analysis”.

On Monday, Russia warned of “an appropriate and tangible” response to US President Joe Biden’s move to let Ukraine use ATACMS missiles to strike the country.

Such an attack inside Russian territory “would represent the direct involvement of the United States and its satellites in hostilities against Russia”, a foreign ministry statement said.

Mr Peskov said on Tuesday that the new doctrine was published “in a timely manner” and that Putin had requested it be updated earlier this year so that it was “in line with the current situation”, AP reported.

Ariana Grande has told the BBC that she channelled her personal feelings of loss when filming Wicked.

“Losing someone you love is something we’ve all unfortunately had to experience – and sometimes we have the privilege to say goodbye and sometimes we don’t,” she says.

Grande, 31, plays Galinda Upland in the film, which is an adaptation of the hugely successful stage musical exploring the Wizard of Oz universe from the perspective of two witches.

The two-time Grammy award winner has suffered personal tragedy in recent years, after the 2017 Manchester bombing of her concert and the death of her former partner Mac Miller a year later.

She says that appearing in Wicked, which was one of the first Broadway shows she saw as a child, “feels like a homecoming”.

“This music has always brought such comfort and now being able to spend time with it and be trusted with it is the privilege of a lifetime”.

In the weeks running up to the film’s release the close relationship between Grande and her co-star Cynthia Erivo has been in the spotlight.

“From the moment we were cast, Cynthia invited me over and we hung out for five hours and we laughed and we cried and got to know each other.

“We had a real conversation right off the bat about creating a safe space for each other and being honest with each other,” she says.

Grande and Erivo’s characters begin in the Oz universe as university students, before later becoming enemies as Glinda the Good Witch and Elphaba the Wicked Witch of the West.

Erivo, 37, has described her role as “a real honour” and nods to the foundations formed by the original stage actors Kristin Chenoweth and Idina Menzel, who she calls “the architects”.

“We’ve been handed something really special and it’s a dream come true and truly big shoes to fill,” she adds.

Erivo, who received a best actress nomination at the Oscars for her portrayal of Harriet Tubman in the biopic Harriet in 2019, is also a decorated stage performer who received a Tony Award in 2016 for the Broadway adaptation of The Colour Purple.

She says she was able to draw on her own experiences of struggling with acceptance for the role of Elphaba, who is outcast for her green exterior.

“Whether you feel ‘other’, or you feel different from everyone else, I think both of us have experience in those spaces that we have used to infuse our characters,” she says.

Wicked, which first came to Broadway in 2003, has gone on to be the third-highest grossing theatre show in the world, behind Lion King and The Phantom of the Opera.

Many have pinned its enduring success with audiences on the relatability of its content – from Elphaba’s struggle with self-identity to Glinda’s difficulty in making moral choices.

Its reimagining for the big screen also stars James Bond star Michelle Yeoh as Madame Morrible and Game of Thrones’ Peter Dinklage as the voice of Doctor Dillamond – who is an animated goat.

Oscar nominee Jeff Goldblum appears as the Wizard of Oz and British star Jonathan Bailey – who has received international recognition in recent years after starring in Netflix hit Bridgerton – as Fiyero.

Goldblum says the central themes of the film, which include embracing diversity, were important to the cast, who were able to “come together to work and appreciate each other with empathy, compassion and love”.

Bailey also says everyone he worked with had their own “Elphaba story”, adding “we have at points in our lives felt different”.

He says “in this film particularly, it’s the superpower of individuality which becomes a power to harness”.

“I think it’s really important right now as well, this theme that there’s more that unites us than divides us,” he adds.

The musical has been a West End and Broadway institution for more than 20 years, but the film’s director Jon M Chu says the central themes of the plot are more relevant than ever before.

“Elphaba says something has changed within me, something’s not the same – and that’s the line that really got me into this movie, I felt like we all feel uneasy,” he says.

Chu, who directed Crazy Rich Asians in 2018, says he received the script for the film during the pandemic, which made him think about how the film could reflect his real-life experience of looking for truth in a confusing time.

He says the cast also made themselves “emotionally available” during filming and were able to put themselves personally in the shoes of their characters.

“Ariana, Cynthia and Jeff were talking about the real-world stakes of what we were putting into these characters,” he adds.

“It wasn’t just about global politics, it was more personal than that.

“We were all going through stuff in our own lives and I think they were generous to offer that up within the roles of Glinda, Elphaba and the Wizard,” he adds.

As I waited for brain surgery, I instinctively pressed record on my phone camera, thinking I might be documenting the final months of my life.

I have made a career telling other people’s stories but this seemed like a time to tell my own.

It began with a bicycle crash in June 2023 when I broke 10 ribs – but that led to me discovering a much bigger health challenge.

In bed one night, I had a seizure which revealed a cancerous brain tumour.

The most likely scenario seemed to be that I had an aggressive glioblastoma, a tumour which typically ends your life within 12 to 18 months.

In my hospital bed, I turned the camera on myself, not as a self-indulgence, but to spotlight a nasty cancer that’s hard to treat and even harder to beat.

I suppose this was my way of extracting some purpose from a personal tragedy.

The result is My Brain Tumour And Me – a TV and iPlayer film that is far more optimistic than you might think.

After 15 months I’m still going strong because it turns out I have a rare form of the disease, an oligodendroglioma, that tends to respond better to treatment.

The brilliant brain surgeon Paul Brennan saved my life by chopping out most of my tumour and, with radiotherapy and chemotherapy, it seems to be keeping my cancer in check for now.

There are quarterly scans to see if it’s growing again.

There have been a couple of false alarms but the most recent check suggests my tumour is stable. I have no idea how long that will last.

I try not to worry too much between scans because what my brain tumour is up to is not within my control.

What I have been learning to deal with are the difficult legacies of my cancer treatment – persistent fatigue and the risk of further seizures.

A daily nap and careful budgeting of my time and effort help with the fatigue.

Adjustments to anti-seizure medication have minimised the frequency and severity of any fits.

It has taken time, trial and error to get that right.

In December last year I had a very big seizure which put me in intensive care.

A medically-induced coma was the only way doctors could make it stop.

When I came round I felt extremely lucky to be alive – but the euphoria I had experienced after brain surgery was absent.

This time, I felt as if I had only narrowly escaped death.

It had all been a bit too close for comfort. I was very emotional.

This was, and remains, the lowest point in my experience of living with brain cancer.

But I bounced back and further tweaks to my epilepsy drugs gave me enough confidence to return to the hills I love so much.

Rarely do I feel more alive than when I’m on top of one of Scotland’s magnificent mountains.

By March this year, I felt well enough to climb one without any sense of foreboding.

The specialists are clear – they don’t want to stop me doing things. They want to enable me to live as normally as possible.

In preparation for my climb up Meall nan Tarmachan, on the banks of Loch Tay, I had successfully scaled another mountain the weekend before with no problems.

So when my friend Nikolaj and I strode out from the Ben Lawers car park to climb the Perthshire peak we had no concerns.

Within 10 minutes – before we’d really begun our ascent – I suddenly had to lie down.

It wasn’t long before my left hand and arm were twitching and shaking uncontrollably. I was having another seizure.

It is very frustrating to feel perfectly well and then to be immobilised by epilepsy. Fits are also physically exhausting.

If I had thought there was much chance of this happening that day, I would have stayed at home.

This is one of only four big seizures I have ever had. The others happened in bed, at work and in a hospital car park.

Nikolaj and other walkers made me comfortable on the hill and I was given the medication I carry with me.

There was an impressive response from the emergency services and I imagined recovering on the hillside then walking slowly back to the car park.

But that was not to be.

At times, the professionals attending to me on the mountainside were not sure if things were getting better or worse so they decided to have me winched aboard a Coastguard helicopter and taken to hospital.

I would like to thank everyone who was there for me that day. I am extremely grateful.

The seizure had stopped by the time I got to A&E in Glasgow. I was soon calling friends and family to work out the best way home to East Lothian.

While on the hill, I had persuaded my walking companion to film some of the drama on his phone.

At first, he was uncomfortable with this request but when I explained that I wanted to show what having a seizure was like, he agreed.

His camerawork is some of the footage which features in My Brain Tumour and Me – my attempt to give an insight into living with an incurable cancer that is not well understood.

My wife Claire and my mum Jennifer also described the impact that such a devastating diagnosis can have on your family.

I am very lucky. I am defying the typical odds.

Six in 10 people with brain cancer do not live for more than a year beyond their diagnosis.

I may be around for some years yet.

If I have a wobble, I know I can count on the love and support of my family and friends.

I’ve found that more overwhelming and humbling than being confronted with my own mortality.

I also have a wonderful network of fellow brain tumour patients, including my friend Theo Burrell, to help me through.

That’s important because sometimes only someone with a similar condition can really understand.

The medical care I have had from NHS doctors and nurses in Edinburgh has been exceptional.

My recovery is allowing me to make a gradual return to work covering politics for BBC Scotland.

That helps me stay positive, as does the personal effort I put into Brain Power – a fundraising community I set up to help establish a new Brain Tumour Research centre in Scotland.

No-one can tell me how I got my tumour and no-one can fix it.

I think well resourced science can do a lot better. If not for me, for those who come after.

In my case, there has been no need for medical help with seizures since the airlift in March.

After four months off the mountains, my walking boots are back on.

My personal challenge is to climb all 282 Munros – Scottish mountains above 3,000ft – by the end of 2028.

Despite all my health problems since last summer, I have completed my first nine, including Meall nan Tarmachan second time around. That is a start.

There’s been a lot of dog walking and a little bit of running and cycling too.

In June, around the anniversary of my bike crash, I returned to the route I was on when I took a tumble.

I called at the café I had been heading for that day and enjoyed the breakfast I had been denied the year before.

Never before has French toast with bacon and maple syrup tasted so good.

I am now starting to think about how to celebrate my 50th birthday in 2026 – 15 months from now.

It’s not so long since I thought I would not be around to mark that milestone.

Now, the half century seems within reach.

My Brain Tumour And Me – Glenn Campbell faces down his mortality and considers what matters most in life.

You can watch the programme on BBC One Scotland at 19:00 on Wednesday 20 November or on the iPlayer.

A search has been launched for the families of two women killed 90 years ago in the Jigsaw Murders, after their skulls were rediscovered in a university storeroom.

The deaths of Isabella Ruxton and Mary Rogerson, whose bodies were found in Moffat, Dumfries and Galloway, made headlines around the world in 1935.

The case broke new ground in forensic science when Edinburgh University helped build evidence against Dr Buck Ruxton, who was hanged for his wife’s murder.

The university has now discovered that the skulls and other bones are still in its archive. It is trying to trace the women’s relatives to ask if they wish these to be returned.

Professor of anatomy Tom Gillingwater said: “We want to do the right thing by Isabella and Mary and, if appropriate, return them to their families so they can be laid to rest.”

The university decided to issue a public appeal through the BBC instead of approaching the families privately, because it is not known whether Isabella and Buck Ruxton’s three orphaned children were ever told that their father had been hanged for murdering their mother.

The killings – which became known as the Jigsaw Murders – took place in Lancaster in September 1935.

Newspaper reporters flocked to Dumfries and Galloway after dismembered and disfigured human remains were discovered beneath a bridge over a stream near Moffat.

The remains were sent to Edinburgh University, where forensic scientists and colleagues from Glasgow University pieced together the body parts.

As they carried out their gruesome task, another investigation was under way in Lancaster, north west England.

Dr Buck Ruxton had given various explanations for the disappearance of his wife Isabella and their nursemaid Mary Rogerson.

The popular GP had been jealous of his wife’s friendship with other men.

She had accused him of domestic abuse before she vanished but local police had taken no action.

Mary and Isabella were reported missing by Mary’s family, not by Ruxton.

Investigators in Scotland made the link between the two women and the remains which were found near Moffat.

The bodies still had to be identified beyond doubt and their killer, who was known to have experience of surgery, had taken great care to make that as difficult as possible.

Ruxton’s efforts to avoid justice were defeated by groundbreaking forensic techniques which confirmed the remains were those of Isabella and Mary.

The identification was crucial to the prosecution case in what was described as “the trial of the century”.

Ruxton went into the dock at the Assize Court in Manchester five months after the bodies were found.

The jury was shown an image of Isabella that the scientists had superimposed on an X-ray of one of the skulls from the ravine – the first time such evidence had been used in court. They were a chilling match.

The trial was told that a new technique for analysing fingerprints had been used to identify Mary.

The scientists had also studied insects found on the bodies to establish the date of their deaths.

Ruxton was convicted of murdering his wife. He had also been accused of killing Mary but the charge was dropped before the trial.

Two months after he was found guilty, huge crowds gathered outside Manchester’s Strangeways Prison when he was executed by hanging.

Former assistant chief constable Tom Wood has written a book on the case, entitled Ruxton: The First Modern Murder.

“It was one of the most important criminal investigations of the 20th Century, not because of the horror of the case and the dismemberment of the bodies, but because of the forensic science,” he said.

“Put simply, anything before the Ruxton case was ancient history. Anything after the Ruxton case is modern, integrated, forensic science-led investigation.”

In the decades that followed, the women’s bones were held in Edinburgh University’s huge anatomical collection, stored in boxes in a vault alongside evidence from the case.

The assumption is that they were retained for further medical research.

Prof Gillingwater and Tom Wood both argue that this decision should be viewed in the context of the ethical standards of the time.

“If you’re asking me if I would have done the same thing with my 21st Century lens, absolutely not,” said Prof Gillingwater.

“But at the time what those scientists did in this investigation was remarkable and revolutionary.”

Mr Wood believes it is unlikely the women’s families knew they were holding funerals without all of their loved ones’ remains.

“I can understand why they did it. These were men of science,” he said.

“These were men who were determined to improve criminal investigation and they would have used these body parts to do that.

“This was not some cruel disregard. These remains were kept for the advancement of science.”

Prof Gillingwater says the remains were “found or re-found” after a student in the Netherlands asked about the archive.

“The overriding feeling was that OK, these are not perhaps being treated with the full level of care and respect that we would want,” he said.

The university was told by the Scottish government that its possession of the remains was legal – but it decided to establish whether they should be returned to the women’s families.

However, that created another dilemma.

Isabella and Buck Ruxton’s three young children were fostered and it is not known if they were ever told how their parents died.

Mary Rogerson is known to have relatives in the Morecambe area, while Isabella’s sister Jeannie Nelson was living in Edinburgh at the time of the murder.

After consulting experts on ethics, the university decided to issue an appeal through the BBC.

“The guidance was very clear, that we should not be approaching people who may not be aware that they were related to these ladies,” said Prof Gillingwater.

“If there are any relatives of Isabella or Mary who believe that they would like to have the remains returned to them, we would be delighted to talk to them about what the next steps might be.”

The university says any discussions will be held in strictest confidence and the families should not feel under pressure to come forward.

They can make contact through a section on the university’s website.

The group known as the Hong Kong 47 include some of the city’s biggest pro-democracy figures.

They were charged in 2021 under a controversial national security law (NSL) imposed by China. On Tuesday a court in Hong Kong sentenced 45 of them to jail terms ranging from four to 10 years. Two defendants were acquitted earlier in the year.

Officials accused the eight women and 39 men of trying to overthrow the government by running an unofficial primary to pick opposition candidates for local elections. Most of the defendants either pleaded guilty or were convicted of conspiring to commit subversion.

Some are famous figures like Joshua Wong and Benny Tai, icons of the 2014 pro-democracy protests that rocked Hong Kong.

There are also well-known opposition lawmakers Claudia Mo, Helena Wong, Kwok ka-ki and Leung Kwok-hung who is also known as Long Hair.

But many like Owen Chow, Ventus Lau and Tiffany Yuen represented a new generation of vocal activists. Mr Lau and Mr Chow were among hundreds who stormed LegCo and spray-painted Hong Kong’s emblem in what became a pivotal moment in the 2019 protests.

Then there are those who were not involved in politics but were galvanised by the 2019 protests – social workers like Hendrick Lui, entrepreneurs like Mike Lam and a former nurse, Winnie Yu.

Most of the defendants have been in jail since the arrests in early 2021, as pre-trial detentions have become the norm under the NSL.

Laurence Lau, a barrister and former district councillor, and Lee Yue-shun, also a former district councillor, were acquitted in May.

One of the main organisers of the 2020 primary, Tai has been labelled by China as a “hardcore troublemaker” for allegedly advocating Hong Kong independence and describing the Communist Party’s rule as a “dictatorship”.

A scholar and law professor, Tai first rose to prominence in 2014 when he founded the pro-democracy Occupy Central movement along with two others.

It was a historic civil disobedience campaign that called for fair and free elections in Hong Kong, and saw hundreds of thousands take to the streets.

In 2019, Tai was sentenced to prison for his role in the Occupy Central protests.

A year later, after the NSL was imposed, he was fired from his tenured job at the prestigious University of Hong Kong (HKU) over his criminal conviction.

Tai accused the university of bowing to Chinese pressure and called it the “end of academic freedom” in the city.

By then, he was already facing accusations of subversion under the NSL for organising the primary.

He has been sentenced to 10 years in jail.

Arguably Hong Kong’s most famous pro-democracy activist, Wong’s journey into activism started when he was just 14.

By 2014, he had become the face of the Umbrella Movement, a mass student protest with the umbrella as a symbol, which sprang up alongside the Occupy Central sit-in.

He was just 20 when his activism landed him in jail, the first of what would be several convictions.

In 2019, Hong Kong erupted in months-long protests as hundreds of thousands marched against a hugely controversial extradition bill that would allow Hongkongers to be sent to mainland China to face trial.

Wong was among thousands who held a 15-hour siege of police headquarters in the Wan Chai district, pelting the building with eggs and spraying graffiti on its walls, in June that year.

While the demonstrations at that time were widely seen as a spontaneous “leaderless” movement, prosecutors said he led that particular protest, pointing to a video of him calling for the crowd to “completely besiege police headquarters”.

He was jailed for his role in them, and placed in solitary confinement.

But he remained defiant after pleading guilty: “Perhaps the authorities wish me to stay in prison one term after another. But I am persuaded that neither prison bars, nor election ban, nor any other arbitrary powers would stop us from activism.”

He was still serving his sentence when he was charged with subversion under the NSL.

Now, at 28, he has received a sentence of four years and eight months on Tuesday.

Former opposition lawmaker Leung Kwok-hung, better known as Long Hair for his coiffure, once described himself as a “Marxist revolutionary”.

The 68-year-old was known for his political theatrics – one of his signature moves involved hurling bananas as a sign of protest. When he was sworn in again as a lawmaker in 2016, he released a balloon with a political banner and held a yellow umbrella, declaring that the “Umbrella Movement would never end”.

This got him disqualified from the council. He was arrested and had repeated stints in jail for taking part in the 2019 protests.

After the NSL was imposed in 2020, he married his long-time partner, Vanessa Chan, also known as Chan Po-ying, who is a prominent activist. They were among the founding members of a political party, the League of Social Democrats.

They said they decided to marry because should one of them be jailed, they would have greater legal rights such as prison visitation.

Forty days after the wedding, Leung was charged.

He has been jailed for six years and nine months.

Claudia Mo, known affectionately in Cantonese as Auntie Mo, was a prominent opposition lawmaker.

She had been a journalist at the AFP news agency, where she covered the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown in Beijing.

The 67-year-old helped set up the opposition Civic Party in 2006 and by 2012 she had won a seat in LegCo. She gave up British citizenship to hold office in Hong Kong.

She was among 15 lawmakers who resigned en masse from LegCo after four pro-democracy lawmakers were ousted in November 2020. The move left LegCo with no opposition presence.

“We had to,” she said at the time. “We need to protest against what could be the ultimate Beijing crackdown on Hong Kong – to silence the last bit of dissent in the city.”

Police “smashed through into the living room” to arrest her in the early hours of 6 January 2021, the FT reported, citing an unnamed source who described the raid as “sheer thuggery”.

She has been in jail since then. When her husband, British journalist Philip Bowring, was critically ill, Mo was not allowed to visit him from prison.

She was sentenced to four years and two months in jail.

A long-time political and LGBTQ activist, Jimmy Sham also led one of Hong Kong’s largest pro-democracy groups, the Civil Human Rights Front (CHRF).

The group disbanded in 2021, saying it could no longer operate amid “unprecedented” challenges posed by China’s crackdown.

Sham was violently attacked several times in 2019, and in one instance, was left on the streets with a head injury. The CHRF accused government supporters of this and other assaults against pro-democracy activists at the time, but it was never proven.

The 37-year-old married his partner in New York in 2013 and fought for Hong Kong to recognise overseas same-sex marriages. Hong Kong’s top court granted him a partial victory in 2023 when it ordered the government to establish a framework to recognise same-sex partnerships.

By then, Sham was in detention for his role in the Hong Kong primary.

He has been repeatedly denied bail, with a judge saying he was a “determined and resolute young man” who would likely continue to commit “acts endangering national security” should he be released.

He was sentenced on Tuesday to four years and three months in jail.

Before pivoting to politics, 33-year-old Gwyneth Ho had worked for several news at outlets – including BBC Chinese, government-run broadcaster RTHK and Stand News.

She shot to fame during the 2019 protests when she was beaten up by a mob while reporting on the movement. The attack landed her in hospital.

She ran in the 2020 primary and won a high number of votes in her constituency.

She said during her trial that it was “inevitable” that the 12 pro-democracy candidates, including her, were disqualified from contesting the legislative elections.

“I believe that most Hongkongers knew deep down in their hearts that fighting for democracy under the Chinese communist regime has always been a fantasy,” she said.

She has been sentenced to seven years in jail.

John Dramani Mahama has been Ghana’s president once before – and now he is back for another punt at the top job.

The 65-year-old led Ghana from 2012 to 2017 and is one of the West African country’s most experienced politicians. He has served at all levels of office, as an MP, deputy minister, minister, vice-president and president.

Long before it became a career, politics played a significant role in Mahama’s childhood. When Mahama was just seven, his father, a government minister, was jailed during a military coup and later went into exile.

Personal trials like this appear in Mahama’s acclaimed writing – he has been published by a number of international news outlets and his memoir, My First Coup D’etat, won praise from two African literary greats, Ngugi wa Thiong’o and Chinua Achebe.

When penning his manifesto for this year’s elections, Mahama told voters Ghana “is headed in the wrong direction and needs to be rescued”.

But critics argue he may not be the right man for the job, given that his administration was hit by economic problems and a string of corruption scandals.

Mahama’s journey began in 1958, when he was born in the northern town of Damongo. After a few years he moved to the capital, Accra, to live with his father, Emmanuel Adama Mahama.

In My First Coup d’Etat, Mahama Jr describes himself as “an observant child with an active imagination and an unbounded curiosity”.

He was also relatively privileged. The family had another home in the town of Bole, which at the time was not on the national grid. Mahama’s parents were able to invest in a diesel generator for their six-bedroom house, meaning theirs was the only house in the town with lights.

Local residents would gather outside the house when night fell, captivated by the curious orange glow.

The future president attended Achimota boarding school, a prestigious institution known for educating heads of state like Ghana’s Jerry John Rawlings, Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe and Kwame Nkrumah, Ghana’s first prime minister after it gained independence from the UK.

It was at Achimota, in 1966, that Mahama heard there had been a coup. Military and police personnel had stormed Ghana’s government buildings, seizing power from Nkrumah, who was away on a foreign trip.

As updates trickled in, Mahama became increasingly anxious – he had heard no word from his father. Seven-year-old Mahama feared his father had been killed because of his proximity to Nkrumah.

It turned out his father had been imprisoned – he would remain in jail for approximately a year.

In 1981, after a second military coup, Mahama’s father fled the country for Nigeria.

Meanwhile, Mahama spent his twenties and thirties studying – he got a Communication Studies degree from the University of Ghana before studying at Moscow’s Institute of Social Sciences.

Mahama noted that his stay in Russia, then part of the Soviet Union, alerted him to “the imperfections of the socialist system”.

After returning to Ghana in 1996, Mahama followed his father’s footsteps into politics.

He was elected as a Member of Parliament for the National Democratic Congress (NDC) party and from there, scaled the political ranks. He zeroed in on the NDC’s messaging, taking up roles as the parliamentary spokesperson and minister for communication.

In 13 years, Mahama worked his way up to become vice-president, second-in-command under President John Atta Mills.

But after just three years in office, Mills died unexpectedly at the age of 68.

Just hours after this tragedy, a 58-year-old Mahama was sworn in as president. In his speech, Mahama described the day as the “saddest” in Ghana’s history.

General elections were held later that year and voters chose to keep Mahama in office.

So what kind of leader is Mahama? Franklin Cudjoe, a Ghanaian political commentator and head of the Imani Centre for Policy and Education, told the BBC the former president was an “excellent communicator”.

While political scientist Dr Clement Sefa-Nyarko described Mahama as a “pragmatist”.

Mahama has the it-factor but only in a climate where “politics is driven by reality and intelligent communication”, said Dr Sefa-Nyarko, who lectures on African leadership at King’s College London.

But in contemporary Ghana, many voters are captivated by overambitious pledges, according to Dr Clement Sefa-Nyarko, which means pragmatic Mahama is “not able to charm the populace much”.

When campaigning to stay in power ahead of the 2016 elections, Mahama highlighted various infrastructure projects completed under his administration, such as those in the transportation, health, and education sectors.

But under his watch, Ghanaians also experienced an ailing economy and widespread power cuts. Mahama was nicknamed “Mr Dumsor” in reference to the blackouts – “dum” means off and “sor” means on in the local Twi language.

His term was also blighted by corruption scandals. For instance, a UK court found that aviation giant Airbus had used bribes to secure contracts with Ghana for military planes between 2009 and 2015 – but Ghana’s Office of the Special Prosecutor concluded there was no evidence that Mahama was involved in any corrupt activities himself.

There are “lingering issues” surrounding these graft scandals – ones that the current electorate will “remember”, Mr Cudjoe said.

But he also points out that, according to Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), corruption became worse under Nana Akufo-Addo, who beat Mahama in the 2016 elections.

Ghana averaged 45.8 under Mahama but dropped to 42 under Akufo-Addo in the CPI ranking where zero equates to “highly corrupt” and 100 is “very clean”.

Mahama attempted to win his old job back in 2020, but lost out to Akufo-Addo once again.

Despite these defeats, Mahama has remained in the political sphere – he is currently leader of the opposition.

He also enjoys a busy life away from politics – he has seven children and spends time with his wife, Lordina.

Mahama is also a prolific writer. Asides from his memoir, he has written for media outlets like The New York Times, leading African-American magazine Ebony and Ghana’s state-owned Daily Graphic.

Mahama has also expressed his passion for music, saying Nigerian Afrobeat icon Fela Kuti helped him form “political consciousness” and that Michael Jackson is “one of the greatest artistes that ever lived”.

And in a full-circle moment, the former president was immortalised in Mahama Paper, a song by Ghanaian dancehall star Shatta Wale. Wale said the title was a reference to the Ghanaian banknotes printed during Mahama’s administration.

Naturally, Mahama has used the hit in his current campaign, pointing out that under Akufo-Addo, Ghana has plummeted into its worst economic crisis in years.

He has also been reminding Ghanaians of his extensive political experience but the fact remains – he was voted out of power once before as the public felt his performance wasn’t good enough.

Mahama is seeking to persuade voters this time will be different – a communications whizz hoping his message is clear enough to win him a second chance in Ghana’s highest office.

• Gold, prices, and jobs: What’s at stake in Ghana’s elections?
• Jerry Rawlings: Remembering Ghana’s ‘man of the people’
• Sigh of relief for Ghana’s (not-so) new gender equality law

Winter has come to Delhi and with it, a familiar sense of gloom. The sky here is grey and there is a thick, visible blanket of smog.

If you stay outdoors for more than a few minutes, you can almost taste ash. You will feel breathless within minutes if you try to run or even walk at a brisk pace in the smog.

Newspapers are back to using words like toxic, deadly and poisonous in their main headlines.

Most schools have been shut and people have been advised to stay indoors – though those whose livelihoods depend on working outdoors can’t afford to do so.

Delhi’s air quality score was somewhere between 1,200 and 1,500 on Monday and Tuesday, according to different monitoring agencies. The acceptable limit is less than 100.

These scores measure the levels of particulate matter – called PM 2.5 and PM10 – in the air. These tiny particles can enter the lungs and cause a host of diseases.

On social media, people have been expressing shock, disappointment and anguish that it’s all happening again.

Along with the gloom, there is a strong sense of déjà vu – like we have seen this all many times before in the past 15 years.

I recorded this video of my drive to office in 2017, when smog had reduced visibility to less than 2m.

On Tuesday, my drive to work seemed even worse.

And we have covered every twist and turn of this story in the past two decades.

We have reported on how pollution is making people sick and reducing their life expectancy here, here and here, and how it affects children here, here and here. The crisis affects the poor the most but they mostly don’t have a choice but to go out and work in the smog, as we have covered here, here and here.

Every year, politicians blame each other, as we have reported here, here and here.

We have discussed the root cause of the problem here, here and here, and the solutions – both the ones that marginally worked and the ones that failed miserably – here, here and here.

Covering this story feels like watching (and being in) the same dystopian film every year – following the same characters, plot and script. The outcome is always the same – nothing changes.

The parks are empty again – people, particularly children and the elderly, have been told to stay indoors.

Those who must work – daily-wage labourers, rickshaw pullers, delivery riders – are coughing but still going out.

Hospitals are seeing an increasing number of people coming in with respiratory problems.

And amid all this, we are back to the same question again – why does nothing change?

The simple answer is that solving Delhi’s air problem requires monumental efforts and coordination.

The sources of the problem are many. One of them is the practice of farmers burning crop remains to clear their fields quickly to sow seeds for the next yield.

This mostly happens in the neighbouring states of Punjab, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh. The smoke from the farm fires engulfs Delhi every winter and hangs low in the atmosphere as wind speeds reduce during winter months.

But farmers can’t be entirely blamed for this because this is the cheapest way of clearing fields.

Different governments have talked about providing machines and financial incentives to stop crop burning, but very little has happened on the ground.

Delhi itself produces a huge chunk of the pollution – emission from vehicles, construction and factories.

Every year, in the winter months, people get angry, journalists write and produce reports, politicians blame each other and courts fume – until we do it all over again the next year.

A public health emergency like this would spark mass protests in most democracies. But the anger in Delhi is mostly limited to social media.

Activists say the reason is that pollution doesn’t cause immediate problems for most people. Ingesting high levels of PM2.5 deteriorates health slowly. A Lancet study found that pollution led to more than 2.3 million premature deaths in India in 2019.

And then there is the class divide. People who can afford to temporarily leave the city do that, those who can buy air purifiers do that, and those who can vent on social media do that.

The rest, who don’t have these options, just go about their lives.

The collective angst has so far not resulted in a massive protest and, as the Supreme Court once observed, politicians just “pass the buck” and wait for the season to get over.

Experts say governments at the federal level and in different states need to leave their party politics behind and work together to solve this problem. They need to focus on long-term solutions.

And citizens need to hold politicians accountable and courts have to pass decisive orders months before the pollution worsens.

This year, we are again in the thick of the season and temporary measures have been announced, like banning construction work.

But can these bring Delhi’s elusive blue skies back? The evidence from the past few years doesn’t give much hope.

Sir Keir Starmer has said he has “no plans” to join the Bluesky social media platform.

There has been a rising wave of popularity for the app – an alternative to Elon Musk’s X – in recent weeks.

Bluesky has at times been the most downloaded app on both the US and UK Apple Stores, with many social media users leaving X in the wake of the US election.

But the prime minister told reporters that “at the moment” there are no plans to establish official UK government accounts or a personal one in his name.

Some politicians have already set up Bluesky accounts including former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn and treasury minister Darren Jones.

Speaking at the G20 summit in Brazil, Sir Keir said it is “important for a government” to be able to communicate with “as many people as possible”, adding “we’re obviously still using Twitter (X)”.

X does not share its total user numbers but it is understood to be measured in the hundreds of millions.

Bluesky was started by Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey in 2019. The platform announced this week it had surpassed 19 million users.

Despite helping fund and start it, Mr Dorsey is no longer part of the team behind the social network.

The key difference between Bluesky and most other social media platforms is that it is decentralised, meaning it is operated on independent servers and not those owned by the company.

It describes itself as “social media as it should be” – a place where people can come together over shared interests “and have some fun again”.

Many new users have said their decision to join Bluesky was driven by Elon Musk, who heavily backed Donald Trump’s election campaign and intends to remain involved in the new administration.

Last week, the Guardian announced it will no longer post on X, saying the US election underlined its concerns that Musk had been able to use X to “shape political discourse”.

India’s forthcoming cricket tour of Australia continues a historic rivalry that has evolved since 1947-48. This fierce competition is now as keenly awaited as the Ashes. But the inaugural tour unfolded against the harrowing backdrop of India’s independence and partition, with cricketers confronting turmoil and communal strife at home, as they prepared to face Australia’s legendary Donald Bradman and his “Invincibles”.

In 1947, as India prepared for its first cricket tour of Australia, the nation was in the midst of unprecedented upheaval.

Independence had come with the painful partition that created Pakistan, sparking one of history’s largest and bloodiest migrations. Amidst this chaos and as millions crossed borders, religious violence spread with Hindus and Sikhs on one side, and Muslims on the other. India’s 16-member cricket squad – selected months earlier – also had to deal with both personal and national turmoil as they readied themselves for a landmark series.

Anthony De Mello, the president of Board of Control for Cricket in India, announced the team with a backdrop of a map of undivided India, proclaiming that the team would represent all of India.

Until then, the Indian cricket team – known as “All India” – had only toured three times for official Test matches to England between 1932 and 1946, losing the series on every occasion.

But in 1946 future Australian captain Lindsay Hassett brought an Australian Services team to India to celebrate the Allies’ victory in World War Two. India won the unofficial series of three matches 1-0 and Hassett reported back to the Australian cricket authorities that the Indians were worthy of an official Test series.

Excitement and anticipation ran high in Indian cricket circles as the team was expected to face the mighty Australians, led by legendary batsman Donald Bradman. His team was later dubbed “Bradman’s Invincibles” after returning undefeated from England in 1948.

De Mello’s India squad was led by ace opening batsman Vijay Merchant, with his reliable partner Mushtaq Ali serving as deputy.

Both had been exceptional on the English tours of 1936 and 1946, cementing their leadership roles. The squad also boasted elegant batter Rusi Modi and promising debutant fast bowler Fazal Mahmood, adding a dynamic mix of experience and fresh talent.

But both Merchant and Modi withdrew from the tour on medical grounds. Ali also withdrew following the death of his elder brother, leaving him with family responsibilities.

As a result, Lala Amarnath was announced as the new captain and Vijay Hazare his deputy.

However, the violence that erupted following partition nearly prevented Amarnath from reaching Australia. According to a 2004 biography by his son Rajender Amarnath, Lala Amarnath narrowly escaped a sectarian mob in Patiala in Indian Punjab. His home in Lahore, now in Pakistan, along with its priceless artefacts, was lost forever.

He also encountered danger during a train journey to Delhi.

At a station in Indian Punjab, a police official recognised Amarnath and gave him a kada – a steel bangle worn by Sikhs and many Hindus as a religious symbol. Later, a mob at the station spared the cricketer because of the kada – it probably led them to believe he shared their faith.

On the other side of the religious divide, pace bowler Mahmood found himself facing a deadly mob on a train.

The team had scheduled two weeks of training in Pune (then Poona) from 15 August – though it was not known then, that was the day India was partitioned.

Despite restrictions, Mahmood reached Poona for the training camp. Afterwards, he travelled to Bombay (now Mumbai) en route to Lahore. He writes in his 2003 autobiography that on the train, two men threatened him, but former Indian captain CK Nayudu intervened, bat in hand, and warned them off.

Once he reached curfew-bound Lahore, Mahmood was horrified by the bloodshed he witnessed there and decided to stay back in Pakistan and not tour Australia. He later became part of the Pakistani cricket team and made his Test debut in 1952-53 against India.

Two other members of India’s squad for the Australia tour – Gul Mohammad and Amir Elahi – also later moved to Pakistan and played against India in the 1952-53 series.

Despite these setbacks, India’s tour went ahead, though a weakened India faced Australia without four of its leading players and lost the series 4-0.

The two countries now play each other almost every two years. The miracle, however, is that the inaugural tour of 1947-48 happened at all, given the tumult at home.

Israel’s prime minister says it hit part of Iran’s nuclear programme last month, despite pleas from the US not to do so during the strikes it carried out in response to a missile attack.

“It’s not a secret. It was published,” Benjamin Netanyahu told the Israeli parliament. “There is a specific component in their nuclear programme that was hit.”

He gave no details, but last week Axios reported that a “nuclear weapons research facility” making plastic explosives at the Parchin military complex was destroyed.

There was no immediate comment from Iran, but it has previously said the Israeli strikes caused limited damage to radar systems and that its nuclear activities are entirely peaceful.

Iran has also insisted that it does not seek nuclear weapons, although evidence collected by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) suggests that until 2003 it conducted activities relevant to the development of a bomb. The agency says Iran has not yet answered outstanding questions related to its nuclear activity.

The IAEA also says Iran has produced enough highly enriched uranium to build several nuclear weapons since the US abandoned a nuclear deal and reinstated crippling sanctions six years ago with Netanyahu’s support.

On 26 October, the Israeli military announced it had conducted “precise strikes on military targets in Iran” in response to the 1 October attack that saw almost 200 ballistic missiles launched towards Israel.

The military said the targets included missile manufacturing facilities, as well as surface-to-air missile arrays and aerial capabilities intended to restrict Israel’s freedom of operation inside Iran.

Iran’s military said the attacks caused “limited and minor damage” to several radar systems and that four Iranian military officers and one civilian were killed. Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said the effect of the attacks should not be “magnified or downplayed”.

Satellite images analysed by the BBC showed damage to four structures at Parchin, about 30km (18.5 miles) east of Tehran.

Experts from the Institute for Science and International Security said three of the structures were related to missile production, and that the fourth, known as Taleghan 2, was previously involved in high explosive testing related to the development of nuclear weapons.

Axios’s report cited unnamed US and Israeli officials as saying that intelligence services had detected recent activity at the Taleghan 2 facility that was “part of an effort inside the Iranian government to conduct research that could be used for the development of nuclear weapons but could also be presented as research for civilian purposes”.

One former Israeli official said the strike destroyed “sophisticated equipment used to design the plastic explosives that surround uranium in a nuclear device and are needed to detonate it”, according to the report.

Benjamin Netanyahu told Israel’s parliament that “a nuclear Iran poses a massive threat to our existence, to the peace agreements we aim to achieve with more of our neighbours and to global peace”.

“We will be tested on our ability to thwart their nuclear ambitions,” he added.

He then mentioned the attack on the “specific component” of Iran’s nuclear programme before warning that the “programme itself, its capacity to act here, has not yet been thwarted”.

Before the Israeli strikes took place, US President Joe Biden had said publicly that he did not support attacks on Iran’s nuclear or oil facilities.

President-elect Donald Trump, who is expected to take a harder line with Iran when he takes office in January, meanwhile said he had advised Netanyahu to “hit the nuclear first and worry about the rest later”.

Last week, Iranian President Massoud Pezeshkian told the head of the IAEA, Rafael Grossi, that Iran was committed to resolving “doubts and ambiguities” surrounding its nuclear activities.

Mr Grossi visited Tehran ahead of a meeting of the IAEA’s board of governors this week, at which the UK, France and Germany are expected to pass a resolution critical of Iran’s co-operation.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi warned that Tehran would “take countermeasures and new actions in our nuclear programme” in response to any such resolution.

He also strongly denied media reports that Iran’s ambassador to the UN, Amir Saeed Iravani, had met Trump ally Elon Musk to defuse US-Iran tensions.

“We are still waiting for the new US administration to clarify its policies, and based on that, we will adjust our own policies. Right now, it is neither the time for such meetings nor is it appropriate,” he said.

The opposition leader of the self-declared republic of Somaliland, Abdirahman Mohamed Abdullahi, has won the territory’s presidential election.

More popularly known as Irro, he won with 64% of the vote to become Somaliland’s sixth president since it broke away from Somalia in 1991.

The 69-year-old, a former speaker of Somaliland’s parliament, beat incumbent Musa Abdi Bihi, who took 35% of the vote.

During campaigning, Irro said his party would review a controversial deal to lease landlocked Ethiopia a 20km (12-mile) section of its coastline for 50 years to set up a naval base – an agreement that has caused a diplomatic feud in the region.

As part of the deal, announced on New Year’s Day, Somaliland expects to be recognised by Addis Ababa as an independent nation.

This has upset Somalia, which regards Somaliland as part of its territory – and it has said it views the deal as an act of aggression.

Irro has never rejected the deal out of hand, but when discussing it has used diplomatic language, which suggests a change of tack.

Somaliland is located in a strategic part of the world, and is seen as a gateway to the Gulf of Aden and the Red Sea.

Despite its relative stability and regular democratic elections, it has not been recognised internationally.

• The unrecognised nation where 15-year-olds vote
• Somalia’s Christmas birthdays and lost memories
• Can the Horn of Africa rift be healed?

“We are all winners, the Somaliland state won,” Irro said, commending everyone for the peaceful vote on 13 November that was witnessed by diplomats from nine European countries and the US.

He also thanked outgoing President Bihi, who has led the breakaway region since 2017.

Critics say Bihi lost support because of a paternalistic style – saying he had been dismissive of public opinion at a time when economic difficulties have undermined the value of the local currency.

The president-elect, who will be sworn in on 14 December, is seen as a more unifying figure.

But he has said he will continue Somaliland’s relations with Taiwan – over which China claims sovereignty.

When the two established diplomatic relations in 2021 it angered both China and Somalia.

Somaliland is a former British protectorate that joined the rest of Somalia on 1 July 1960.

In a conflict leading up to the overthrow of President Siad Barre in 1991, tens of thousands of people were killed in Somaliland and its main city of Hargeisa was completely flattened in aerial bombardments.

In the chaos that followed Barre’s departure, Somaliland declared its independence and has since rebuilt the city, created its own currency, institutions and security structures.

This is often contrasted to Somalia, which collapsed into anarchy for decades and still faces many challenges, including from Islamist militants, and does not hold direct elections.

Born in Hargeisa, Irro went to school in Somalia and later attended college in the US – graduating with a master’s degree in business administration.

After university he pursued a diplomatic career, joining Somalia’s foreign service in 1981.

He was posted to Moscow where he worked at Somalia’s embassy. During the civil war, he became the country’s acting ambassador to the former Soviet Union.

Many people fled Somalia during the conflict, which tore the nation apart, including Irro’s family who went to live in Finland.

He was able to be reunited with them there and obtained Finnish citizenship.

Irro returned to Somaliland several years later, entering politics in 2002 as co-founder of the opposition Justice and Welfare party (UCID).

He went on to serve as speaker of the parliament for 12 years.

It was during this time that he established the Wadani Party, which has grown to be a powerful political force in Somaliland and on whose ticket he won this year’s election.

• Ethiopia warns against invasion amid regional tensions
• Why Ethiopia is so alarmed by an Egypt-Somalia alliance
• How a small African territory has upset China
• A quick guide to Somaliland

The jury in the Conor McGregor trial have been told it does not matter if they “loathe” him.

Remy Farrell SC, representing the Irish mixed martial arts (MMA) fighter, began his closing argument at Dublin High Court on Tuesday.

Dublin woman Nikita Hand has accused the sportsman of rape after a Christmas night out in December 2018. He denies all allegations.

The trial is a civil case in Dublin High Court after the Director of Public Prosecutions in Ireland refused to charge Mr McGregor criminally.

Mr Farrell told the jury that “what is important is the evidence”.

“The case is not about a hot take, or what colour writers in newspapers say its about, it doesn’t get reduced to one soundbite, it’s about evidence and nothing but the evidence,” he said.

He told the jury that their opinions on Mr McGregor did not matter.

“You may not like Mr McGregor. Mr McGregor is somebody who is hard to avoid, who elicits strong views, some people love him, some people very much do not,” he said.

“He’s not backwards about coming forwards with his own opinion about various things.

“It may be the case some, a lot, most of you, have negative views about Mr McGregor, some of you may even loathe him, there’s no point pretending it may be otherwise. It’s important I address that.”

The Irish sportsman claims he had consensual sex with Ms Hand twice in the Beacon Hotel in Dublin.

He also claimed in court that Ms Hand had sex with his associate and co-defendant James Lawrence. Ms Hand says she never had sex with Mr Lawrence.

The eight men and four women on the jury have sat through eight days of evidence, including Ms Hand, Mr McGregor and Mr Lawrence as well as doctors and two paramedics.

Speaking on Tuesday, Mr Farrell said his client had a “a forceful personality” and listed things Mr McGregor said or did in court that the jury may not have liked.

He referenced that there was a sharp intake of breath from the jury when Mr McGregor referred to Ms Hand and her friend as “two lovely ladies” on the stand during his testimony.

“You may also be unimpressed with a man who leaves his family home on Saturday, goes drinking with women in hotel penthouses… they’re all unlikely to endear him to you,” he added.

“I’m not asking you to like him, I’m asking you to look at the evidence.

“I’m not asking you to invite him to Sunday lunch, but to interrogate your own views.”

Mr Farrell said the CCTV evidence from the Beacon Hotel was irrefutable and claimed Ms Hand’s allegations varied and that she “invented” an account when speaking to her friend Eimear Brennan.

Ms Hand also sought to “airbrush” witness Danielle Kealy out of the situation, he alleged.

“Ms Hand knew full well the account she was giving made no sense if Danielle Kealy was there,” he said, adding it was “an elaborate fabrication”.

In their closing statement, Nikita Hand’s legal team said that Mr McGregor is an “arrogant” “cowardly” man who “savagely” beat Ms Hand.

John Gordon SC told the jury that Mr McGregor had lied throughout the trial about what happened between him and Ms Hand.

He added that he and his co-defendant James Lawrence sought to make Ms Hand look like a “hussy” and colluded together to do so.

“You’re being sold a pup by this arrogant man,” he said.

“Mr McGregor, far from dealing with it, has run away from it. There is no answer to his appalling behaviour.

“What should he have done if he was a man at all is to apologise to my client for what he did to her, he’s not a man, he’s a coward, a devious coward and you should treat him for what he is.”

Mr Gordon added that paramedics, psychologists and doctors have all supported Ms Hand’s version of events.

This includes that she continues to suffer from PTSD and that a tampon was lodged inside her vagina that had to be removed by forceps.

In a Republic of Ireland civil action – as opposed to a criminal case – neither the complainant nor the accused are entitled to automatic anonymity during the court proceedings.

Prince Harry has appeared in a knockabout comedy sketch about getting a tattoo, as he promotes the next round of his Invictus Games.

The prince plays the part of a nervous customer as he faces the prospect of getting a first tattoo from US singer Jelly Roll.

“Alright, screw it, let’s go,” says the prince, in a video published on social media.

In exchange the singer says he will appear at the Invictus Games for wounded service men and women, being held in Vancouver in February.

The release of the video might also explain why the prince was seen in a tattoo parlour in New York earlier this year.

Jelly Roll, no stranger to the tattooist’s art himself, says he wants to give the prince a tattoo on the neck, as the pair are filmed in the East Side Ink tattoo studio.

“I was thinking of my lower back or my…” as the prince points towards his backside and the captions turn to emojis.

Jelly Roll, who has spent time in jail, promises a small tattoo – which turns out to be a big advert for the games on Prince Harry’s neck.

“Commitment prince,” urges the singer, when Harry flinches and seems to have that inking feeling.

The comedy video and pretend tattoo, which seem a very long way from anything likely to be published by the royal palaces, are intended to grab attention for this winter’s Invictus Games.

Jelly Roll, who has won country music awards, will appear at the closing ceremony in Vancouver on 16 February.

Google has said it would harm consumers and businesses if it is forced to sell Chrome, the world’s most popular web browser.

The US Department of Justice (DOJ) will propose the measure to a judge on Wednesday, Bloomberg has reported.

Judge Amit Mehta ruled Google operates an online search monopoly in August, and has been considering what remedies or penalties to impose.

The DOJ has not commented on the report – but Google has made clear it is a proposal it opposes.

“The DOJ continues to push a radical agenda that goes far beyond the legal issues in this case,” said Google executive Lee-Anne Mulholland in a statement.

Google will also reportedly be asked to establish new measures around its artificial intelligence, Android operating system and use of data.

“The government putting its thumb on the scale in these ways would harm consumers, developers and American technological leadership at precisely the moment it is most needed,” Ms Mulholland added.

Chrome is the most used browser worldwide – with web traffic tracker Similarweb placing its global market share at 64.61% in October.

Meanwhile Google search corners an almost 90% share of the global search engine market as of October, according to Statcounter.

It is the default engine in Chrome as well as on many smartphone browsers, including Safari on iPhones.

Judge Mehta said in his ruling in August that the default search engine was “extremely valuable real estate” for Google.

“Even if a new entrant were positioned from a quality standpoint to bid for the default when an agreement expires, such a firm could compete only if it were prepared to pay partners upwards of billions of dollars in revenue share,” he wrote.

The DOJ had been expected to provide its final proposed remedies to the court by Wednesday.

It said in an October filing documenting initial proposals it would be considering seeking a break-up of Google.

Potential remedies “that would prevent Google from using products such as Chrome, Play [its app store], and Android to advantage Google search and Google search-related products” were among its considerations, it said then.

Google has previously denied operating a monopoly in online search.

In response to the DOJ’s filing in October, Google said “splitting off” parts of its business like Chrome or Android would “break them”.

“Breaking them off would change their business models, raise the cost of devices, and undermine Android and Google Play in their robust competition with Apple’s iPhone and App Store,” the company said.

It also said it would make it harder to keep Chrome secure.

• What could Google monopoly ruling mean for you?

Revenues from Google’s search and advertising businesses rose by 10% to $65.9bn, according to the company’s latest quarterly results.

Chief executive Sundar Pichai said the company’s AI search tools were now being accessed by millions of users.

Investors have been keeping a close eye on Google’s share price on Tuesday, following reports of the DOJ’s proposed remedies.

Donald Trump has picked World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE) co-founder and his transition co-chair, Linda McMahon, as his nominee for education secretary.

A long-time Trump ally, McMahon led the Small Business Administration during Trump’s first presidency and donated millions of dollars to his presidential campaign.

Announcing his pick on Truth Social, Trump said McMahon “will use her decades of Leadership experience, and deep understanding of both Education and Business, to empower the next Generation of American Students and Workers, and make America Number One in Education in the World.”

Her appointment comes after Trump chose Mehmet Oz, a doctor and former television host, to run Medicaid.

The two selections on Tuesday, along with Trump’s choice of Howard Lutnick for commerce secretary, follows a pattern of Trump appointing loyal supporters to top roles in his White House cabinet.

McMahon has a long history with the WEE and Trump, who used to make occasional appearances at wrestling matches. She co-founded the wrestling league with her husband in 1980, resigning as CEO in 2009 in order to undertake a failed bid to run for the Senate.

She has little background in education, but did serve on Connecticut state’s board of education from 2009 until 2010.

She is the board chair of the pro-Trump think tank the America First Policy Institute, meaning her confirmation in the Republican-majority Senate is highly likely.

“For the past four years, as the Chair of the Board at the America First Policy Institute, Linda has been a fierce advocate for Parents’ Rights,” Trump said in his statement.

“As Secretary of Education, Linda will fight tirelessly to expand ‘Choice’ to every State in America, and empower parents to make the best Education decisions for their families.”

Trump has criticised the Department of Education, and has promised to close the agency down – a job McMahon could be tasked with.

In his statement on Truth Social, Trump said McMahon would “spearhead” the effort to “send Education BACK TO THE STATES”, in reference to the pledge.

McMahon was named in a lawsuit filed last month involving the WWE.

It alleges that she, her husband and other company leaders knowingly allowed young boys to be abused by a ringside announcer who died in 2012.

A lawyer for the McMahons told USA Today Sports the allegations are “false claims” that stem from “absurd, defamatory and utterly meritless” media reports.

Trump earlier picked Mehmet Oz to run the powerful agency that oversees the healthcare of millions of Americans.

Oz, who was selected to lead the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Service, trained as a surgeon before finding fame on The Oprah Winfrey Show in the early 2000s, later hosting his own TV programme.

Oz has been criticised by experts for promoting what they called bad health advice about weight loss drugs and “miracle” cures, and suggesting malaria drugs as a cure for Covid-19 in the early days of the pandemic.

“There may be no Physician more qualified and capable than Dr. Oz to Make America Healthy Again,” Trump said in a statement

The Trump transition team said in a statement that Oz “will work closely with [Health Secretary nominee] Robert F Kennedy Jr to take on the illness industrial complex, and all the horrible chronic diseases left in its wake”.

Oz will need to be confirmed by the Senate next year before he officially takes charge of the agency.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services oversee the country’s largest healthcare programs, providing coverage to more than 150 million Americans. The agency regulates health insurance and sets policy that guides the prices that doctors, hospitals and drug companies are paid for medical services.

In 2023, the US government spent more than $1.4 trillion on Medicaid and Medicare combined, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

Trump said in a statement that Oz would “cut waste and fraud within our Country’s most expensive Government Agency”, and the Republican Party platform pledged to increase transparency, choice and competition and expand access to healthcare and prescription drugs.

Oz, 64, trained as a cardiothoracic surgeon – specialising in operations on the heart and lungs – and worked at New York City’s Presbyterian Hospital and Columbia University.

After he appeared in dozens of Oprah segments, he started The Dr Oz Show, where he doled out health advice to viewers.

But the line between promotion and science on the show was not always clear, and Oz has recommended homeopathy, alternative medicine and other treatments that critics have called “pseudoscience”.

He was criticised during Senate hearings in 2014 for endorsing unproven pills that he said would “literally flush fat from your system” and “push fat from your belly”.

During those hearings Oz said he never sold any specific dietary supplements on his show. But he has publicly endorsed products off air and his financial ties to health care companies were revealed in fillings made during his 2022 run for the US Senate in Pennsylvania.

During the Covid-19 pandemic, Oz promoted the anti-malaria drugs hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, which experts say are ineffective against the virus.

The Russian military is accelerating its gains along the front line in Ukraine at a crucial time for the conflict.

Data from the Institute for the Study of War (ISW) shows that Russia has gained almost six times as much territory in 2024 as it did in 2023, and is advancing towards key Ukrainian logistical hubs in the eastern Donbas region.

Meanwhile, Ukraine’s surprise incursion into Russia’s Kursk region is faltering. Russian troops have pushed Kyiv’s offensive backwards. Experts have questioned the success of the offensive, with one calling it a “strategic catastrophe” given manpower shortages faced by Ukraine.

These developments come at a time of heightened uncertainty with a second Donald Trump administration looming. The US president-elect has vowed to bring the war to a close when he takes office in January, with some fearing he could cut future military aid to Ukraine.

In the first few months of the war the front line moved quickly, with Russia gaining ground quickly before being pushed back by a Ukrainian counteroffensive. But in 2023 neither side made any major gains – with the conflict largely sliding into a stalemate.

But new ISW figures suggest the story in 2024 is more favourable for Russia. The ISW bases its analysis on confirmed social media footage and reports of troop movements.

The ISW data shows Moscow’s forces have seized around 2,700 sq km of Ukrainian territory so far this year, compared with just 465 sq km in the whole of 2023, a near six-fold increase.

Dr Marina Miron, a defence researcher at Kings College London, suggested to the BBC that there was a possibility the Ukrainian eastern front “might actually collapse” if Russia continued to advance at pace.

More than 1000 sq km was taken between 1 September and 3 November, suggesting the push accelerated in recent months. Two areas bearing the brunt of these advances are Kupiansk in Kharkiv region, and Kurakhove, a stepping stone to the key logistical hub of Pokrovsk in Donetsk region.

Kupiansk and areas to the east of the Oskil river were liberated in the Kharkiv offensive of 2022, but Russia has progressively retaken the latter area. In a recent intelligence update, the UK’s Ministry of Defence said Russian forces were trying to breach the north-eastern outskirts of the city.

Footage posted on 13 November and verified by the BBC is consistent with this analysis. The video shows a convoy of Russian armour being repelled after making it to within 4km of the key bridge at Kupiansk, the last major road crossing in the area.

While these reports do not necessarily translate to control of an area, it is indicative of how stretched Ukraine’s defensive line has become.

Elsewhere, since retaking the city of Vuhledar in October – an elevated position which sits above key supply lines and which Moscow spent two years fighting for – Russia has thrown resources at Kurakhove.

Ukraine’s forces defending the city have so far repelled attacks to the south and east. But the front line creeps ever closer, with Russia also threatening to encircle defenders from the north and west.

Col Yevgeny Sasyko, a former head of strategic communications with Ukraine’s general staff, said Russia places “powerful jaws” around the flanks of a city that slowly “grind though” defences until they collapse.

Footage from the city verified by the BBC showed massive destruction, with residential buildings heavily damaged.

The ISW concludes Moscow now holds a total of 110,649 sq km in Ukraine. For comparison, Ukrainian forces seized just over 1,171 sq km in the first month of its incursion into Kursk – though Russian forces have now retaken nearly half of that territory.

Despite its territorial gains, Russia’s advance has come at a huge cost.

An analysis carried out by BBC Russian confirmed that at least 78,329 troops have been killed since Russia launched its full-scale invasion in February 2022, with Moscow’s losses from September to November this year more than one-and-a-half times greater than the same period in 2023.

The losses are compounded by the “meat grinder” approach said to be favoured by Russian commanders – describing the waves of recruits thrown towards Ukrainian positions in a bid to exhaust troops.

Despite the Russian advances, some experts have noted that the actual speed of the offensive is still slow. David Handelman, a military analyst, suggested Ukrainian troops in the east were slowly withdrawing to preserve manpower and resources, rather than suffering from a broader collapse.

Ukraine launched its shock incursion into Russia’s Kursk region in August. It is unclear why Russia took so long to respond to the operation, which saw Kyiv’s troops quickly gain control over a number of border communities.

Dr Miron suggested that while the Kremlin would suffer a domestic political cost for as long as the incursion continued, Russia’s general staff had been keen to keep Ukraine’s forces tied down in Kursk as its forces made gains elsewhere along the front line.

But Moscow is now clearly intent on reclaiming the territory lost on its own soil. Some 50,000 troops have been deployed to the region.

Verified videos from the Kursk region show fierce fighting is taking place – and that Russia is suffering considerable losses in terms of manpower and equipment. But the data clearly shows Ukraine’s control of the region is shrinking.

Since the start of October, Russian counter-attacks have regained some 593 sq km worth of territory in the border region, ISW figures showed.

The Kursk incursion was initially a major boon for Ukraine in terms of morale at a time of serious setbacks, and the audacity of the operation was a reminder of its ability to surprise and harm its enemy.

But Dr Miron said while the Kursk incursion was a moment of “tactical brilliance” it has also been a “strategic catastrophe” for Ukraine.

“The whole idea was to maybe gain some political leverage in potential negotiations, but militarily to draw the Russian forces away from the Donbas in order to liberate Kursk. And what we’re seeing instead is that Ukrainian units are tied down there.”

Some of Kyiv’s most experienced and effective units are known to be fighting in Kursk. Mechanised units equipped with state-of-the-art Western armour are also involved in the offensive.

Ukrainian leaders had hinted that they hoped the incursion would force Moscow to redirect some of its forces from eastern Ukraine, slowing the Russian advance there. Instead, experts say most reinforcements were moved to Kursk from parts in Ukraine where the fighting is not as intense.

“According to Ukrainian soldiers from different parts of the front, the Russian troops reinforcing Kursk were mainly pulled from Kherson and Zaporizhzhia,” Yurri Clavilier, a land analyst with the International Institute for Strategic Studies, told the BBC.

“The fighting there is not as intense as it is in the East. Some Russian units attacking Kharkiv were also redirected to Kursk as Ukraine managed to stall the Russian onslaught there,” he added.

The importance of territory to both sides is the strength it lends to their position in any potential negotiations. Although no peace negotiations have been discussed, US President-elect Trump has claimed he could end the war within 24 hours, without saying exactly how.

​​On Tuesday, Ukraine fired US-supplied long-range missiles into Russia for the first time – a day after Washington gave it permission to do so.​​ It is thought that the decision was made in part to help Ukraine hold on to part of the Kursk region, to use as a bargaining chip in future negotiations.

But Dr Miron told the BBC that Russia’s advance has handed them a stronger negotiating position as Trump’s new foreign policy team prepare to take office.

“What they’re controlling right now, it does give them a certain advantage,” she said. “If it came to negotiations, I’m sure that as the Russian side has been stressing, ‘we will do it based on the battlefield configuration’.

“From a Russian perspective, they have much better cards than the Ukrainians.”

What do you want BBC Verify to investigate?

Winter has come to Delhi and with it, a familiar sense of gloom. The sky here is grey and there is a thick, visible blanket of smog.

If you stay outdoors for more than a few minutes, you can almost taste ash. You will feel breathless within minutes if you try to run or even walk at a brisk pace in the smog.

Newspapers are back to using words like toxic, deadly and poisonous in their main headlines.

Most schools have been shut and people have been advised to stay indoors – though those whose livelihoods depend on working outdoors can’t afford to do so.

Delhi’s air quality score was somewhere between 1,200 and 1,500 on Monday and Tuesday, according to different monitoring agencies. The acceptable limit is less than 100.

These scores measure the levels of particulate matter – called PM 2.5 and PM10 – in the air. These tiny particles can enter the lungs and cause a host of diseases.

On social media, people have been expressing shock, disappointment and anguish that it’s all happening again.

Along with the gloom, there is a strong sense of déjà vu – like we have seen this all many times before in the past 15 years.

I recorded this video of my drive to office in 2017, when smog had reduced visibility to less than 2m.

On Tuesday, my drive to work seemed even worse.

And we have covered every twist and turn of this story in the past two decades.

We have reported on how pollution is making people sick and reducing their life expectancy here, here and here, and how it affects children here, here and here. The crisis affects the poor the most but they mostly don’t have a choice but to go out and work in the smog, as we have covered here, here and here.

Every year, politicians blame each other, as we have reported here, here and here.

We have discussed the root cause of the problem here, here and here, and the solutions – both the ones that marginally worked and the ones that failed miserably – here, here and here.

Covering this story feels like watching (and being in) the same dystopian film every year – following the same characters, plot and script. The outcome is always the same – nothing changes.

The parks are empty again – people, particularly children and the elderly, have been told to stay indoors.

Those who must work – daily-wage labourers, rickshaw pullers, delivery riders – are coughing but still going out.

Hospitals are seeing an increasing number of people coming in with respiratory problems.

And amid all this, we are back to the same question again – why does nothing change?

The simple answer is that solving Delhi’s air problem requires monumental efforts and coordination.

The sources of the problem are many. One of them is the practice of farmers burning crop remains to clear their fields quickly to sow seeds for the next yield.

This mostly happens in the neighbouring states of Punjab, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh. The smoke from the farm fires engulfs Delhi every winter and hangs low in the atmosphere as wind speeds reduce during winter months.

But farmers can’t be entirely blamed for this because this is the cheapest way of clearing fields.

Different governments have talked about providing machines and financial incentives to stop crop burning, but very little has happened on the ground.

Delhi itself produces a huge chunk of the pollution – emission from vehicles, construction and factories.

Every year, in the winter months, people get angry, journalists write and produce reports, politicians blame each other and courts fume – until we do it all over again the next year.

A public health emergency like this would spark mass protests in most democracies. But the anger in Delhi is mostly limited to social media.

Activists say the reason is that pollution doesn’t cause immediate problems for most people. Ingesting high levels of PM2.5 deteriorates health slowly. A Lancet study found that pollution led to more than 2.3 million premature deaths in India in 2019.

And then there is the class divide. People who can afford to temporarily leave the city do that, those who can buy air purifiers do that, and those who can vent on social media do that.

The rest, who don’t have these options, just go about their lives.

The collective angst has so far not resulted in a massive protest and, as the Supreme Court once observed, politicians just “pass the buck” and wait for the season to get over.

Experts say governments at the federal level and in different states need to leave their party politics behind and work together to solve this problem. They need to focus on long-term solutions.

And citizens need to hold politicians accountable and courts have to pass decisive orders months before the pollution worsens.

This year, we are again in the thick of the season and temporary measures have been announced, like banning construction work.

But can these bring Delhi’s elusive blue skies back? The evidence from the past few years doesn’t give much hope.

Los Angeles, the second largest US city, is setting itself up for a standoff with President-elect Donald Trump over immigration.

On Tuesday, its city council passed a “sanctuary city” ordinance to bar using local resources to help federal immigration authorities.

LA’s public school system also reaffirmed itself as a “sanctuary” for undocumented immigrants and LGBTQ students in a series of emergency resolutions.

Trump, who will be sworn in in two months, has promised mass deportations once he returns to the White House. His chosen “border czar”, Tim Homan, has urged sanctuary cities to “get the hell out of the way” of federal immigration crackdowns.

The term “sanctuary city” has been popular in the US for more than a decade to describe places that limit their assistance to federal immigration authorities. Since it is not a legal term, cities have taken a variety of approaches to becoming “sanctuaries”, such as setting policies in laws or simply changing local policing practices.

Aimed at making a 2019 executive order into city law, the city council’s sanctuary city ordinance prohibits using city resources for immigration enforcement, including cooperating with federal immigration agents, NBC News Los Angeles reports.

The ordinance will “prevent federal immigration enforcement from being able to access city facilities or to use city resources in the pursuit of immigration enforcement”, council member Nithya Raman told CBS News, the BBC’s US partner, ahead of the vote.

It will also prohibit some data sharing between immigration authorities and city officials and agencies.

The ordinance will go into effect once it has been signed by Mayor Karen Bass.

Officials in a number of other cities, including Boston and New York City, have similarly promised that local resources would not be allocated to helping federal immigration enforcement issues.

Since Trump was elected the first time, dozens of school districts have declared themselves “sanctuaries” or “safe havens” to reassure students they will not be deported.

The Los Angeles school district – roughly 140 miles (225km) from the country’s southern border with Mexico – also voted on a series of emergency resolutions explicitly aimed at combatting what the board’s president, Jackie Goldberg, has described as an anti-immigrant and LGBTQ sentiment from the incoming president.

As well as restating a sanctuary policy for students and families within the school district, the resolution also calls for training for teachers and staff about how they should communicate with immigration authorities.

“We’re not going to be running in fear,” she said in quotes cited by the LA Times ahead of the resolution’s passing. “We’re going to fight you, every inch of the way.”

The move is likely to put the city on a collision course with the incoming Trump administration, which has vowed it will begin a large-scale mass deportation effort from the very beginning of the administration.

Trump’s chosen “border czar”, former acting Immigrations and Customs Enforcement director Tom Homan, has repeatedly said that “sanctuary” city designations would not prevent the administration from carrying out its immigration policy goals.

In an 11 November interview with Fox, Homan said “nothing will stop us from deporting migrant criminals.”

“We’re going to do the job with you, or without you,” he said.

Ukraine has fired US-supplied longer-range missiles at Russian territory for the first time, the Russian government said, a day after Washington gave its permission for such attacks.

US officials also confirmed use of the Army Tactical Missile System (Atacms) to CBS news, the BBC’s US partner. Ukraine has not commented.

Russia’s defence ministry said the strike had targeted the Bryansk region bordering Ukraine to the north on Tuesday morning.

It said five missiles had been shot down and one had caused damage – with its fragments starting a fire at a military facility.

But two US officials said initial indications suggested Russia had intercepted just two missiles out of around eight fired by Ukraine.

The BBC has not been able to independently verify the contradicting figures.

Russia’s Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov, accused Washington of trying to escalate the conflict.

“That Atacms was used repeatedly overnight against Bryansk Region is of course a signal that they [the US] want escalation,” he said.

“And without the Americans, use of these high-tech missiles, as [Russian President Vladimir] Putin has said many times, is impossible.”

He said Russia would “proceed from the understanding” that the missiles were operated by “American military experts”.

“We will be taking this as a renewed face of the Western war against Russia and we will react accordingly,” he told a press conference at the G20 in Rio de Janeiro.

Earlier on Tuesday, the Kremlin approved changes to Russia’s nuclear doctrine, setting out new conditions under which the country would consider using its arsenal.

It now says an attack from a non-nuclear state, if backed by a nuclear power, will be treated as a joint assault on Russia.

Commenting on the changes, US state department spokesperson Matthew Miller said: “Since the beginning of its war of aggression against Ukraine, [Russia] has sought to coerce and intimidate both Ukraine and other countries around the world through irresponsible nuclear rhetoric and behaviour.”

He added that the US had not “seen any reason” to change its own nuclear posture, but would “continue to call on Russia to stop bellicose and irresponsible rhetoric”.

UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer also described the move as “irresponsible rhetoric”, adding that was “not going to deter our support for Ukraine”.

Ukraine has already been using Atacms in Russian-occupied areas of its own territory for more than a year.

The missiles can hit targets at a range of up to 300km (186 miles) and are difficult to intercept.

Kyiv is now able to strike deeper into Russia using the missiles, including around the Kursk region, where Ukrainian forces hold more than 1,000 sq km of territory. Ukrainian and US officials reportedly expect a counter-offensive in the region.

• Atacms: What we know about missile system Ukraine is using to strike Russia

In a statement, Russia’s defence ministry said the strike had been launched at 03:25 (00:25 GMT).

A fire caused by fallen debris from one of the missiles was quickly extinguished and there were no casualties, it said.

Ukraine’s military earlier confirmed that it had struck an ammunition warehouse in the Russian region of Bryansk, but it did not specify whether Atacms had been used.

It said the attack, on a depot around 100km from the border near the town of Karachev, had caused 12 secondary explosions.

Google has said it would harm consumers and businesses if it is forced to sell Chrome, the world’s most popular web browser.

The US Department of Justice (DOJ) will propose the measure to a judge on Wednesday, Bloomberg has reported.

Judge Amit Mehta ruled Google operates an online search monopoly in August, and has been considering what remedies or penalties to impose.

The DOJ has not commented on the report – but Google has made clear it is a proposal it opposes.

“The DOJ continues to push a radical agenda that goes far beyond the legal issues in this case,” said Google executive Lee-Anne Mulholland in a statement.

Google will also reportedly be asked to establish new measures around its artificial intelligence, Android operating system and use of data.

“The government putting its thumb on the scale in these ways would harm consumers, developers and American technological leadership at precisely the moment it is most needed,” Ms Mulholland added.

Chrome is the most used browser worldwide – with web traffic tracker Similarweb placing its global market share at 64.61% in October.

Meanwhile Google search corners an almost 90% share of the global search engine market as of October, according to Statcounter.

It is the default engine in Chrome as well as on many smartphone browsers, including Safari on iPhones.

Judge Mehta said in his ruling in August that the default search engine was “extremely valuable real estate” for Google.

“Even if a new entrant were positioned from a quality standpoint to bid for the default when an agreement expires, such a firm could compete only if it were prepared to pay partners upwards of billions of dollars in revenue share,” he wrote.

The DOJ had been expected to provide its final proposed remedies to the court by Wednesday.

It said in an October filing documenting initial proposals it would be considering seeking a break-up of Google.

Potential remedies “that would prevent Google from using products such as Chrome, Play [its app store], and Android to advantage Google search and Google search-related products” were among its considerations, it said then.

Google has previously denied operating a monopoly in online search.

In response to the DOJ’s filing in October, Google said “splitting off” parts of its business like Chrome or Android would “break them”.

“Breaking them off would change their business models, raise the cost of devices, and undermine Android and Google Play in their robust competition with Apple’s iPhone and App Store,” the company said.

It also said it would make it harder to keep Chrome secure.

• What could Google monopoly ruling mean for you?

Revenues from Google’s search and advertising businesses rose by 10% to $65.9bn, according to the company’s latest quarterly results.

Chief executive Sundar Pichai said the company’s AI search tools were now being accessed by millions of users.

Investors have been keeping a close eye on Google’s share price on Tuesday, following reports of the DOJ’s proposed remedies.

A New York priest who let popstar Sabrina Carpenter film provocative scenes for a music video inside his church has been accused of mismanagement and stripped of his duties.

Monsignor Jamie Gigantiello was relieved of “any pastoral oversight or governance role” at the church, the Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn said in a statement.

Church officials launched an investigation after the October 2023 music video release for Carpenter’s hit song Feather, filmed inside the Our Lady of Mount Carmel Church.

The Diocese said the investigation found other instances of mismanagement beyond the music video that appalled some, including unapproved financial transfers.

“I am saddened to share that investigations conducted by Alvarez & Marsal and Sullivan & Cromwell LLP have uncovered evidence of serious violations of Diocesan policies and protocols,” Bishop Robert Brennan said in the statement, according to the BBC’s media partner CBS News.

A replacement was installed and Mr Gigantiello was removed from his responsibilities, the statement read.

Mr Gigantiello’s administrative powers had been revoked last November shortly after the criticism of Carpenter’s video.

He was also removed from fundraising duties as vicar of development for the diocese.

Images from Carpenter’s video show a crucifix with profanity printed on it and also Carpenter dancing on the altar in a short black dress.

The diocese at the time said it was “appalled” and that proper procedures for filming had not been followed, the Associated Press reported.

In a letter to parishioners last year, Mr Gigantiello said allowing Carpenter to film inside the church was a “lapse in judgment”. He has not responded to the allegations that led to his dismissal.

On Monday, Bishop Brennan said a larger review under the investigation detected other instances of administrative impropriety, including Mr Gigantiello using a credit card for personal expenses.

Bishop Brennan also said that, from 2019 to 2021, Mr Gigantiello transferred nearly $2m (£1.5M) in church funds to bank accounts affiliated with a former staff member of New York City Mayor Eric Adams.

Adams was indicted in September on five counts of criminal offences, including bribery, wire fraud and soliciting illegal foreign campaign donations. A number of investigations have centred on Adams and those in his orbit – leading to subpoenas, law enforcement raids and a flurry of resignations of top officials who help lead New York City.

Gisèle Pelicot has denounced the mass rape case of 51 men as a “trial of cowardice”, and said it is high time that France’s “macho, patriarchal society” which “trivialises rape” changes.

Her ex-husband, Dominique Pelicot, has admitted recruiting dozens of men online to rape her while she was drugged and unconscious over the course of almost a decade at their home in Mazan.

During a dramatic day in court there was uproar when a defence lawyer accused her of still being under her ex-husband’s control and of being unable to condemn him fully.

Ms Pelicot has attended the mass rape trial from its start in September. She has waived her right to anonymity so the entire trial can be heard in court in Avignon in the full glare of publicity.

The case has not just shocked France, it has attracted interest from around the world. It has highlighted the issue of drug-induced sexual assault and raised questions about whether consent should become part of the French definition of rape.

Warning: Some of the details in this report are graphic from the start

Tuesday’s session was the last chance that lawyers for the men on trial for rape might have to convince the judges that her ex-husband Dominique Pelicot had somehow tricked them into raping her while she was unconscious.

About 15 defendants sat in the defendants’ box while Dominique Pelicot sat in another box, resting his chin on his hand. A handful of the 50 admit raping Gisèle Pelicot, but the majority do not.

Dominique Pelicot was asked whether he accepted that he had manipulated the other defendants into raping his wife or if he had drugged them, he said firmly: “Absolutely not.”

He suggested they had used that defence “to save themselves”.

Gisèle Pelicot’s lawyer also asked him what he had to say to his family, especially his daughter Caroline.

Partially naked images of Caroline were found on Dominique Pelicot’s laptop, and when asked about the file he had called “my naked daughter”, he addressed her across the room: “I have watched her fall apart… Caroline, I never touched you.”

She shouted across the court: “You are lying; I am sick of your lies, you’re alone in your lie, you will die lying.”

There was complete silence as they looked at each other and Dominique Pelicot then held his head in his hands.

The rest of the family, their faces filled with anguish, stared at him, while Gisèle Pelicot herself did not react.

Not long before Ms Pelicot took the stand, the last of the 50 defendants, Philippe L, said he had been “surprised” by the situation when Dominique Pelicot had welcomed him into his home and insisted that he penetrate Gisèle Pelicot.

He also denies rape, arguing he put his conscience aside and “was thinking with my penis instead of my brain”.

After Philippe L left the dock, Ms Pelicot told the court that by giving up her right to a trial behind closed doors she “knew what I was signing up for”, although she conceded “today I can feel the tiredness”.

Asked whether she thought there was a difference between those who had admitted to raping her and those who had not, Ms Pelicot said that “all came to rape me… all committed a crime”.

But she emphasised that when the accused had admitted to rape in the dock “I looked them in the eye”.

“I’ve seen individuals who deny rape parade before the court,” she said. “I want to tell these men: at which moment when you enter that bedroom did Ms Pelicot give you consent?”

“I’ve heard ‘I was manipulated’, I’ve heard ‘I drank a glass of water, I was drugged’. But at what point did they not realise?”

Ms Pelicot was also asked why she continued to use her ex-husband’s name when her own children had been using other names.

The room was hushed as she responded calmly that when she had first gone into the court in Avignon her children were ashamed of the name, but that her grandchildren were still called Pelicot.

“Today I want them to be proud of their grandmother,” she declared.

“My name is known across the world now. They shouldn’t be ashamed of carrying that name. Today we will remember Gisèle Pelicot.”

The atmosphere in the courtroom became heated when Ms Pelicot was questioned by defence lawyer Nadia El-Bouroumi, who suggested she had used “harsh words” towards the other defendants, but not her husband.

“Looking at you – and I’m sorry to say this – I wondered whether we’d ever see you cry,” El-Bouroumi asked at one point.

The lawyer’s combative and sometimes aggressive tone elicited gasps from the public and the media inside the courtroom, and several people shook their heads in disbelief.

Ms Pelicot rejected suggestions that looking back she might have “seen the signs” that something might not have been right on the mornings after being drugged: “I would wake up with my usual pyjamas on, so no.”

She spoke of losing 10 years of her life through medical worries caused by the drugs her former husband had given her without her knowledge.

“I thought I’d either die or end up in a mental hospital,” she reflected. “I am 72 now and I don’t know how much time I have left.”

Defence lawyers also asked her about the images on Dominique Pelicot’s laptop of their daughter Caroline.

The Pelicots’ children then stormed out of the courtroom and did not come back for some time, while Gisèle Pelicot said later that it “isn’t a family trial”.

When a defence lawyer put it to Ms Pelicot that she was still under her ex-husband’s control and could not bring herself to condemn him fully, she stood silently in court as the lawyers from both sides shouted at each other.

The presiding judge had to intervene to bring the argument to an end.

Later in the day the court heard a statement from Dominique Pelicot given to police in November 2020, two months after he was caught filming under women’s skirts by a supermarket security guard.

That eventually led police to find thousands of videos that he had filmed of men having sex with his wife while she was unconscious. She had no idea of what had gone on and realised he had been drugging her from 2011 to 2020.

The trial is due to wind up next month with a verdict in the second half of December.

Hip-hop mogul Sean “Diddy” Combs is currently in federal custody awaiting trial on charges of racketeering and sex trafficking.

His arrest in New York came amid a series of civil suits alleging sexual assault and physical violence, some going back to the 1990s.

More than two dozen people have filed lawsuits against the rapper, accusing him of using his influence in the entertainment industry to do everything from drugging, assaulting and raping people.

The latest batch of lawsuits include allegations from two men who were underage at the time of the alleged sexual assaults. Both described being hopeful that Mr Combs could help jumpstart their careers in the entertainment industry.

The Harlem-born rapper has denied all the allegations, both those laid out in lawsuits and in his federal indictment.

Mr Combs, 54, was arrested on Monday 16 September in a New York hotel on charges of racketeering conspiracy, sex trafficking by force and transportation for purposes of prostitution.

Federal prosecutors have accused him of “creating a criminal enterprise” in which he “abused, threatened, and coerced women and others around him to fulfil his sexual desires, protect his reputation, and conceal his conduct”.

They said Mr Combs had used drugs, violence and the power of his status to “lure female victims” into extended sex acts called “Freak Offs”.

They also revealed they had uncovered firearms, ammunition and more than 1,000 bottles of lubricant during raids on Mr Combs’ homes in Miami and Los Angeles in March.

Prosecutors have reportedly been in touch with several witnesses who worked under Mr Combs and some of the accusers currently suing him, and have left open the possibility of more charges.

The singer-producer has pleaded not guilty to the three felony counts against him and his attorney told reporters he was a “fighter” who was “not afraid of the charges”.

Mr Combs is currently being held at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, a federal jail notorious for its violence and poor inmate care.

MDC includes an extra-security section with barracks-style housing reserved for special detainees, and US media report that Mr Combs is sharing the space with convicted cryptocurrency fraudster Sam Bankman-Fried.

His legal team sought his release pending trial because of the jail’s “horrific” conditions, but prosecutors argued he posed “a serious flight risk” and Mr Combs has twice been denied bail.

If convicted, he faces a sentence of anywhere from 15 years to life in prison.

Mr Combs’ former on-and-off girlfriend, Casandra “Cassie” Ventura, was first to blow the whistle on the self-proclaimed “bad boy for life”.

In a lawsuit filed last November, the model and musician alleged he had “trapped” her for over a decade in a “cycle of abuse, violence, and sex trafficking”.

Mr Combs “vehemently” denied the claims. A day after the suit landed in court, both parties said they had “amicably” settled the case, though Mr Combs’ attorney said the settlement was “in no way an admission of wrongdoing”.

But in May, CNN obtained surveillance footage that showed the entertainer-turned-entrepreneur assaulting Ms Ventura in a 2016 altercation that is detailed in her suit.

Mr Combs finally acknowledged the incident in an Instagram video two days later, saying he was “disgusted” by what he had done.

“My behaviour on that video is inexcusable. I take full responsibility for my actions,” he said.

At least 27 others – including several men – have since come forward with their own claims. Here are details from some of the cases – many have included plaintiffs who filed anonymously.

Joi Dickerson-Neal, who said Ms Ventura had inspired her to speak out, alleged Mr Combs had “intentionally drugged” and raped her when she was a Syracuse University student in 1991, and had made her a victim of revenge porn by filming the assault and showing it to others.

Representatives for Mr Combs blasted the lawsuit as “purely a money grab” and have asked for it to be dismissed.

Liza Gardner accused Mr Combs and R&B crooner Aaron Hall of plying her with drinks and then forcing her to have sex with them against her will when she was 16 years old. She also claimed that Mr Combs had visited her home the next day and choked her until she passed out. Mr Combs’ attorney slammed the claims as “bogus”.

The three initial lawsuits were brought under New York state’s Adult Survivors Act, which granted adult victims a one-year window to bring claims against their abusers regardless of statutes of limitation.

A woman so far identified only as Jane Doe claimed that Mr Combs, former Bad Boy Records president Harve Pierre and a third person had violently gang-raped her in a New York City studio when she was a 17-year-old high school student.

A few days later, Mr Combs broke his silence on social media against “sickening allegations… by individuals looking for a quick pay day”. His attorneys are seeking to dismiss the “baseless and time-barred” case. Mr Pierre has meanwhile called the suit a “tale of fiction”.

Rodney “Lil Rod” Jones, a producer and videographer who worked on Mr Combs’ most recent album, accused the mogul of running an illegal racketeering enterprise in which he was forced to procure drugs, solicit sex workers and tape sex acts. He also claimed Mr Combs and actor Cuba Gooding Jr had groped him without consent.

Grace O’Marcaigh, who worked on a yacht leased by the Combs family in 2022, accused the rapper and his son, Christian “King” Combs, of sexual assault. She blamed them for creating an “environment of debauchery” with suspected sex workers and top celebrities aboard.

Crystal McKinney claimed she had been drugged and sexually assaulted by Mr Combs following a Men’s Fashion Week event in 2003 when she was 22 years old. She also said he had subsequently “blackballed” her in the modelling world.

April Lampros, who says she met Mr Combs as a student at New York’s Fashion Institute of Technology in 1994, detailed “four terrifying sexual encounters” through the early 2000s.

Adria English, a former adult-film actress who worked with Mr Combs in the 2000s, said he had used her as a “sexual pawn for the pleasure and financial benefit of others” during the “White Parties” he hosted at his homes in New York and Miami.

Dawn Richards, who once sang in two Combs-assembled groups including Danity Kane, said she had personally witnessed his violence against Ms Ventura and that he had threatened her life when she tried to intervene.

Thalia Graves, who is backed by celebrity lawyer Gloria Allred, claimed Mr Combs and his bodyguard Joseph Sherman had sedated, overpowered and tied her up before recording themselves raping her and later distributing the sex tape.

Six anonymous accusers: Six lawsuits were filed on 14 October by four men and two women. One of the women accused Mr Combs of raping her at a hotel and another suit accused the rapper of ordering a 16-year-old boy to undress when the teen was talking to him about breaking into the music industry.

Ashley Parham filed a lawsuit on 15 October claiming that Mr Combs had raped her as “payback” for a comment she made suggesting that he was responsible for the murder of rapper Tupac Shakur. Shakur’s murder has never been solved, but a man currently on trial for his murder has previously claimed that Mr Combs had paid for him to be killed.

Mr Combs’ legal team has dismissed the flurry of lawsuits as “clear attempts to garner publicity.”

“Mr Combs and his legal team have full confidence in the facts, their legal defences, and the integrity of the judicial process,” his attorneys said in a statement, adding: “Mr Combs has never sexually assaulted anyone – adult or minor, man or woman.”

Nine more lawsuits were filed anonymously between 20 October and 28 of October. Many of the lawsuits were filed by adults who said they were underage at the time of the alleged sexual assaults.

Two male accusers said in lawsuits that they were sexually assaulted while meeting with the mogul about their careers in the music industry while they were minors.

Several of the lawsuits included details that the incidents happened at some of Mr Combs’ notorious parties.

Five more anonymous lawsuits were filed against Mr Combs on 19 November from three men and two women. The suits centre on allegations of sexual assault at parties with at least two of them outlining rape accusations against Mr Combs.