French President Emmanuel Macron will address the nation on Thursday night, a day after Prime Minister Michel Barnier was ousted in a no-confidence vote.

The presidency said on Thursday that Barnier had resigned his post, but would remain in office on a caretaker basis with his ministers until a new government was appointed.

Names for a new prime minister have been swirling, including Defence Minister Sébastien Lecornu, Interior Minister Bruno Retailleau and centrist former presidential candidate François Bayrou.

But finding a name that would not immediately be shot down by one of the large parliamentary factions could take some time, as it did in the summer, when former PM Gabriel Attal stayed on as caretaker for two months.

Barnier’s government collapsed after MPs voted overwhelmingly in support of the motion against him, just three months after he was appointed by Macron.

Wednesday night’s vote was the first time a French government had been voted down by parliament in more than 60 years.

Marine Le Pen’s far right and the left-wing New Popular Front both united to censure Barnier’s government after the former Brexit negotiator used special powers to force through his budget without a vote.

A total of 331 voted in support of the motion, far more than the 288 required for it to pass.

Barnier presented the resignation of his government after the vote, while the budget which triggered his downfall was automatically withdrawn.

As president, Macron is constitutionally unaffected by Barnier’s resignation.

But many opposition politicians are increasingly open about wanting to force him to resign and call early presidential elections – something Macron has insisted is off the cards.

The left-wing alliance New Popular Front (NFP), which won the most seats in the parliamentary elections, had previously criticised Macron’s decision to appoint centrist Barnier as prime minister over its own candidate.

Alongside the far-right National Rally (RN), it deemed Barnier’s budget – which included €60bn (£49bn) in deficit reduction – unacceptable.

Marine Le Pen, the RN leader, said the budget was “toxic for the French”.

Ahead of the vote, Barnier told the National Assembly that voting him out of office would not solve the country’s financial problems.

“We have reached a moment of truth, of responsibility,” he said, adding that “we need to look at the realities of our debt”.

“I did not present almost exclusively difficult measures because I wanted to.”

In an interview with French broadcaster TF1 on Wednesday, Le Pen said there was “no other solution” than to remove Barnier.

Asked about the French president’s prospects, she replied: “I am not asking for the resignation of Emmanuel Macron.”

Many of her allies, however, are increasingly openly hoping they can force him to resign. RN adviser Philippe Olivier told Le Monde the president was “a fallen republican monarch, advancing with his shirt open and a rope around his neck up to the next dissolution [of parliament]”.

No new parliamentary elections can be held until July, so the current deadlock in the Assembly – where no group can hope to have a working majority – is set to continue.

The northeastern Indian state of Assam has banned the consumption of beef in public places including restaurants and events.

This is an expansion to an earlier rule that restricted the sale of beef near certain religious places like temples, Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma said on Wednesday.

However, the meat can still be purchased from shops and eaten within homes or private establishments in the state.

The consumption of beef is a sensitive issue in India, as cows are revered by Hindus, who comprise 80% of the country’s population.

Several states ruled by Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) – which is also in power in Assam – have cracked down heavily on cow slaughter in recent years.

About two-thirds of India’s 28 states, many of them governed by the BJP, have partially or fully banned cattle slaughter and beef consumption (though consumption of buffalo meat is legal in some of these places).

In many parts of India, cow vigilante groups have been accused of enforcing the ban through violence, often leading to deadly attacks on Muslim meat sellers and cattle traders and Dalits (formerly untouchables), for whom beef is a staple and cheap form of protein.

In Assam, the sale and purchase of beef was banned in 2021 in areas where Hindus, Jains and Sikhs – who don’t usually eat beef – live. That law also prohibited the sale of beef near temples.

Sarma said that the new ban on public consumption will be added to that existing law.

The decision comes days after India’s main opposition party Congress claimed that Sarma had used beef to win a by-election in Samaguri, a Muslim-majority constituency – a charge denied by the BJP.

Congress legislator Rakibul Hussain had said that by “offering beef” to voters, the chief minister had “betrayed” his own party’s Hindu nationalist values.

The statements sparked a political slugfest, with Sarma on Wednesday saying he was willing to impose a complete ban on beef in the state, if that’s what the Congress wanted.

Meanwhile, other political parties have criticised the ban, saying it interfered with people’s right to eat what they want.

“If they cannot ban beef in Goa or other northeastern states, why in Assam?” said Hafiz Rafiqul Islam, a member of the All India United Democratic Front.

The sale and consumption of beef is legal in some states, including Goa and Arunachal Pradesh, which are ruled by the BJP.

Antibiotics are hailed as medical saviours.

But they are increasingly facing a crafty adversary: bacteria that mutate and adapt and outwit the very drugs designed to defeat them and cure the infections they cause.

These antibiotic-resistant “superbugs” directly caused 1.14 million deaths worldwide in 2021, according to The Lancet, a medical journal. Antibiotics – which are considered to be the first line of defence against severe infections – did not work on most of these cases.

India is among the countries hardest hit by “antimicrobial resistance”. In 2019 alone, antibiotic-resistant infections caused around 300,000 deaths. They alone are responsible for the deaths of nearly 60,000 newborns each year.

But some hope is on the horizon. A number of promising locally-developed new drugs show potential to combat antibiotic-resistant pathogens. They also offer a game-changing solution to preserve last-resort treatments.

Enmetazobactam, developed by Chennai-based Orchid Pharma, is the first antimicrobial invented in India to be approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). This injectable drug treats severe conditions like urinary tract infections (UTIs), pneumonia and bloodstream infections by targeting bacteria’s defence mechanisms rather than the bacteria itself.

Bacteria often produce enzymes, like beta-lactamase, to destroy antibiotics. Enmetazobactam binds tightly to those enzymes, neutralising them and allowing the antibiotic to kill the bacteria effectively.

To put it simply, the drug immobilises the bacteria’s “weapon” without triggering resistance easily. This also preserves the effectiveness of other antibiotics, including carbapenems, which are the reliable “last line of defence” drugs.

Trials across 19 countries – the drug has been approved by global regulators – with more than 1,000 patients have shown its effectiveness. “The drug has shown remarkable potency against these bacteria that have evolved over the years. It is administered via intravenous [IV] infusion in hospitals, specifically for critically ill patients, and is not available over the counter,” Dr Maneesh Paul, the lead co-inventor of the drug, told the BBC.

Mumbai-based Wockhardt is testing a new antibiotic, called Zaynich, for severe drug-resistant infections. Developed over 25 years, the drug is currently in Phase-3 trials and expected to launch next year.

Dr Habib Khorakiwala, founder chairman of Wockhardt, has described Zaynich as a “ground-breaking, one-of-its-kind new antibiotic designed to combat all major superbugs”. It was administered on compassionate grounds to 30 critically ill patients in India who were unresponsive to any other antibiotics. Remarkably, all survived. “This would make India proud,” Dr Khorakiwala said.

Also in Phase-3 testing is Wockhardt’s Nafithromycin, trademarked as MIQNAF, a three-day oral treatment for community-acquired bacterial pneumonia with a 97% success rate. Existing treatments to the disease have resistance as high as 60%. Its trials are set to conclude next year and once it’s approved, the company says it could be launched commercially by late next year.

A 30-member Bengaluru-based biopharma firm Bugworks Research has partnered with Geneva-based non-profit Global Antibiotic Research and Development Partnership, or GARDP, to develop a new class of antibiotics for treating serious drug-resistant infections. Currently in early Phase-1 trials, the drug is five-to-eight years from market readiness.

“Antibiotics are becoming less effective, but big money is in drugs for cancer, diabetes and other conditions, not antibiotics,” Anand Anandkumar, CEO of Bugworks, told the BBC. “There’s little innovation because antibiotics are kept as a last-resort option. Big pharma isn’t focusing on antibiotic resistance. We’ve been funded by different organisations, but less than 10% of our funding comes from India.”

But that needs to change. A 2023 drug resistance surveillance report by Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), which analysed nearly 100,000 bacterial cultures from 21 specialised care hospitals around India, highlighted worrying trends in antibiotic resistance.

E.coli (Escherichia coli), commonly found in the intestines of humans and animals after consumption of contaminated food, was the most frequently isolated pathogen.

This was followed by Klebsiella pneumoniae, which can cause pneumonia and also infect the blood, cuts in the skin and the lining of the brain to cause meningitis. Coming close was the rise of the multidrug-resistant pathogen called Acinetobacter baumannii, which attacks the lungs of patients on life support in critical care units.

The survey found antibiotic effectiveness against E.coli had consistently sharply declined while Klebsiella pneumoniae showed an alarming rise in drug resistance. Doctors found that some of the main antibiotics were less than 15% effective in treating infections caused by these pathogens. Most worrying was the rising resistance to carbapenems, a critical last-resort antibiotic.

“It’s like playing whack-a-mole with bacteria. They evolve at an incredibly fast pace, and we’re always playing catch-up. You get rid of one, another pops up. We need more innovation and to learn from past mistakes,” Dr Manica Balasegaram, executive director of GARDP, told the BBC.

Not surprisingly, GARDP is focussing on India. It’s collaborating with Hyderabad-based Aurigene Pharmaceutical Services to produce zoliflodacin, a novel oral antibiotic for gonorrhea, a sexually transmitted disease which is showing increasing resistance to antibiotics. GARDP has also partnered with Japan’s pharma company Shionogi to distribute cefiderocol – a breakthrough FDA-approved antibiotic for tough infections like UTIs and hospital-acquired pneumonia – in 135 countries, with plans for production in India.

But this is only one part of the story. Doctors say drug prescription practices in India urgently need reform. The widespread use of broad-spectrum antibiotics – they target many bacteria types but can kill good bacteria, cause side-effects and increase antibiotic resistance – fuels drug resistance by encouraging the emergence of drug resistant bacterial mutants.

Instead, say doctors, narrow-spectrum antibiotics should be prioritised. But hospitals often lack antibiograms – microbiology-based antibiotic guidelines – forcing doctors to prescribe “broadly and blindly”.

“I am definitely excited that we will have these new drugs. But what is also important is that we should create mechanisms that they should not be misused the way we have previously done with [what were once also] blockbuster drugs. Improper and irresponsible use will compromise the longevity of these new drugs,” warns Dr Kamini Walia, a scientist at ICMR.

The rapid mutation of bacteria, which can evolve in a matter of hours, underscores the urgency of a holistic approach. This includes reducing infections through better water, sanitation and hygiene, improving vaccine uptake, strengthening hospital infection control policies, educating physicians and deterring self-medication by patients. “Combating antimicrobial resistance is a complex, multi-faceted challenge tied to healthcare equity and systemic accountability,” says Dr Walia.

The message is clear: without urgent action, we risk a future where even relatively minor infections could become untreatable.

Syrian rebels say they have taken control of the major city of Hama, after the military withdrew its troops amid fierce battles.

The leader of the Islamist militant group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), Abu Mohammed al-Jawlani, declared “victory” in the city and vowed there would be “no revenge”.

Earlier, a rebel commander said HTS fighters and their allies had taken over a prison and released inmates, while the military said it had redeployed troops to “preserve civilian lives and prevent urban combat”.

Hama is home to one million people and is 110km (70 miles) south of Aleppo, which the rebels captured last week after launching a surprise offensive from their stronghold in the north-west.

The rebel commander told residents of Homs, which is the next city south on the highway from Aleppo to Damascus, that “your time has come”.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR), a UK-based monitoring group, says that more than 720 people, including 111 civilians, have been killed across the country since the start of the rebel offensive eight days ago.

More than half a million people in Syria have been killed since a civil war erupted in 2011 after President Bashar al-Assad’s government cracked down violently on peaceful pro-democracy protests.

Earlier this week, the United Nations expressed alarm at the sudden escalation of the conflict and warned that the country was “grave danger of further division, deterioration, and destruction”.

President Assad has vowed to “crush” the rebels and accused Western powers of trying to redraw the map of the region, while his key allies Russia and Iran have offered their “unconditional support”.

Russian warplanes have intensified their strikes on rebel-held areas in recent days, Iran-backed militias have sent fighters to reinforce the government’s defensive lines, and Iran has said it is ready to send additional forces to Syria if asked.

Turkey, which supports the Syrian opposition but has denied reports that it is involved in the HTS-led offensive, has urged Assad to engage in a political process with the opposition to bring an end to Syria’s 13-year civil war.

Turkish-backed rebel factions have meanwhile capitalised on the government’s retreat in the north by launching a separate offensive on a pocket of territory near Aleppo that was controlled by a Kurdish-led militia alliance, the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). Turkey, which has a large restive Kurdish minority, considers the Kurds in Syria as a threat.

Before the start of the rebel offensive, the government had regained control of Syria’s main cities with the help of Russia, Iran and Iran-backed militias. However, large parts of the country remained out of its control.

The rebels’ last stronghold was in Aleppo and Idlib provinces, which border Turkey and where more than four million people were living, many of them displaced from government-held areas.

The enclave was dominated by HTS, which is designated as a terrorist organisation by the UN, US, Turkey and other countries because it was al-Qaeda’s affiliate in Syria until it formally broke ties in 2016.

A number of allied rebel factions and jihadist groups were also based there, along with Turkish-backed SNA factions and Turkish forces.

Calin Georgescu, the fringe nationalist politician leading the presidential race in Romania, has told the BBC that he would end all support for Ukraine if elected.

He is facing a second-round run-off in the elections on Sunday, where he will run against Elena Lasconi, a former TV presenter who is campaigning on a firmly pro-EU platform.

Georgescu, whose only election campaigning has been on social media, said he would make “the Romanian people” his priority.

But he denied that his surprise success so far was the result of a Russian-backed influence operation, saying he did not care about the “lies” of his country’s intelligence agencies as he was working with God and the people.

On Wednesday, in a highly unusual move, Romania’s outgoing president published declassified documents that detailed what was called a massive and “highly organised” campaign for Georgescu on TikTok co-ordinated by a “state actor”.

The papers included an intelligence assessment that Russia was carrying out hybrid attacks on Romania, which it sees as an “enemy state”.

The constitutional court is now being flooded with requests to look into the allegations of meddling with a view to possibly cancelling the election.

Prosecutors today announced they were opening a criminal investigation but there is no timeline on when that might conclude.

“They are afraid,” is how Georgescu brushed away evidence that hundreds of thousands of dollars were spent pushing campaign content for him, breaking both Romanian election law and TikTok’s own rules.

He denied that he was “Moscow’s man”, referring derisively to Romania’s “un-intelligence agencies”.

“They can’t accept that the Romanian people finally said, ‘we want our life back, our country, our dignity’,” he said, portraying himself as battling against an unyielding establishment.

In a sometimes tetchy interview in which he praised Donald Trump and the Hungarian populist leader Viktor Orban, Georgescu referred to Vladimir Putin as a “patriot and a leader”.

He then added: “But I am not a fan.”

But when questioned about Russia’s war on Ukraine, he first asked, “Are you sure of that?”, appearing to deny the war’s very existence.

He then said Romania was interested only in pushing for peace on its border but refused to say that this should be on Kyiv’s terms.

When asked whether he agreed with standing by Ukraine, as the EU puts it, “for as long as it takes”, Georgescu said “No.” He said things would change.

“I agree just that I have to take care of my people. I don’t want to involve my people,” he replied, clarifying that Romania – an EU and Nato member – would provide no more military or political support for its neighbour.

“Zero. Everything stops. I have to take care just about my people. We have a lot of problems ourselves.”

It would be a dramatic change in position for Bucharest, and one that would be music to Russian ears.

The president in Romania has considerable power, including influence on areas such as foreign policy. He is also the commander-in-chief of the armed forces and appoints the prime minister.

Romania shares a long border with Ukraine and has been a staunch supporter of Kyiv since the full-scale invasion in 2022.

It’s provided a Patriot missile defence system as well as financial support. It’s also become a key export route for Ukrainian grain, as Russian bombardments have crippled the work of ports there.

Under a Georgescu presidency, Romania would join Hungary and Slovakia as Russia-sympathisers on the eastern flank of Nato.

It would also be a serious dent to EU solidarity on Ukraine, just as it faces the prospect of assuming more responsibility for aiding Kyiv with Donald Trump back in the White House.

Georgescu underlined that he would keep Romania inside the EU and Nato, but that everything from now on would be “negotiated” and focus on his country’s interests.

He refused to say that Vladimir Putin’s Russia was a security threat for the West.

His endorsement of conspiracy theories has also sparked concerns, including denying the Covid pandemic and doubting that anyone ever landed on the Moon.

Romania is home to a giant Nato military base, close to the Black Sea, as well as a US missile defence facility.

Georgescu now describes himself as a university teacher, but has previously worked in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and with the UN.

He clearly does have supporters – his clean-living, Romania-first message has popular appeal, especially outside Bucharest.

But in the capital many people are worried about the direction their country may be taking.

This evening, protesters will gather in central Bucharest to call for Romania to remain closely allied with Europe.

When asked if he understood why they were scared, Georgescu shook his head: “That’s just propaganda.”

US President-elect Donald Trump has chosen billionaire and private astronaut Jared Isaacman to lead Nasa after he takes office in January.

Earlier this year, 41-year-old Isaacman became the first non-professional astronaut to walk in space. He bankrolled the Polaris Dawn mission that carried him on a rocket owned by SpaceX, the company of fellow Trump appointee Elon Musk.

Worth an estimated $1.9bn (£1.46bn), Isaacman made his fortune from payment processing company Shift4 Payments, which he founded in 1999 aged 16.

Trump highlighted Isaacman’s business achievements, saying he would drive the American space agency’s “mission of discovery and inspiration”.

Isaacman said he was “passionate about America leading the most incredible adventure in human history”, in a statement after the announcement.

The Nasa administrator role – which requires the confirmation of US Senate – would be Isaacman’s first in politics, representing a departure from the last two men appointed to the job.

Isaacman has a longstanding interest in flying – having first taken pilot lessons in 2004 and later setting a world record for circumnavigating the world in a light jet.

As well as the Polaris Dawn mission, in 2021 Isaacman bankrolled and led the first private, all-civilian team to ever orbit the Earth.

That crew – named Inspiration4 – left on a SpaceX capsule from Florida and spent three days in space before splashing down successfully in the Atlantic Ocean.

Time magazine estimated that Isaacman paid $200m to Musk for all four seats aboard the SpaceX craft.

If confirmed for the Nasa job, Isaacman is expected to develop Nasa’s use of private companies to boost its work.

• Mission Polaris Dawn sets off on record orbit

Isaacman was born in Union, New Jersey. At 15, he dropped out of high school and later took a GED (a high-school equivalency exam), according to the Netflix docuseries Countdown: Inspiration4 Mission to Space.

“I was a horrible student,” Isaacman said in the series. “And I wasn’t, like, happy in school, either.”

A year later, he launched his successful company Shift4 Payments from his parents’ basement, according to a report by Forbes.

The company now handles payments for a third of restaurants and hotels in the US, including big names like Hilton, Four Seasons, KFC and Arby’s; and processes over $260bn annually, according to its website.

Isaacman also founded Draken International in 2011, a defence firm that trains Air Force pilots and owns the world’s largest fleet of private military aircrafts.

In 2019, Isaacman sold a majority stake in the firm to Blackstone, a Wall Street firm, for a nine-figure sum, Forbes reported, launching himself into billionaire status.

Forbes dubbed him a “thrill seeker” in a 2020 profile. It said Isaacman “bullets the MiG (Soviet aircraft) faster than the speed of sound and climbs mountains to unwind from non-stop, intense 80-plus-hour weeks”.

He also set a world speed record in 2009 for flying around the globe.

Isaacman is married, has two daughters and lives with his family in New Jersey.

Prince Harry said his life in the US is what his mother Princess Diana would have “wanted” for him.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex relocated to Montecito, California four years ago, after announcing they would step back as senior royals and work to become financially independent.

Speaking to Andrew Sorkin at The New York Times Dealbook Summit on Wednesday, the prince was asked if he planned to remain in America for good. “I do,” he said, “I very much enjoy living here and bringing my kids up here”.

He added his family were able to access a degree of privacy and freedom they “undoubtedly wouldn’t be able to do in the UK” due to concerns around security.

Harry has pursued legal action over changes to his police protection for when he is in the UK. His security was downgraded when he stopped being a working royal.

In the interview he spoke of the impact of life in the spotlight on his mental health and on his mother, Princess Diana who was killed in a 1997 car crash in Paris while being chased by photographers.

“I think again, when you are kind of trapped within this bubble, it kind of feels like there’s no way out,” Harry said.

He continued: “What happened to my mom and the fact that I was a kid and felt helpless, there comes the inner turmoil. I felt helpless.

“One of my biggest weaknesses is feeling helpless.”

He said what worried him most was “that would happen to me, or to my wife, or to my kids”.

For now, Harry said his focus was on “being the best husband and the best dad that I can be”.

Asked about the press attention he and his wife receive, he made a joke that they had apparently moved house and divorced “10-12 times”.

“It’s just like what? It’s hard to keep up with but that’s why you sort of ignore of it,” he said.

The Duchess of Sussex meanwhile made an appearance at a fundraising gala in Beverly Hills, California, on Wednesday night.

Bitcoin’s price has blasted through the much-anticipated threshold of $100,000, raising questions about how much higher it could go – and whether it can shake off its notorious volatility.

The world’s largest cryptocurrency rose to around $103,400 shortly after 04:00 GMT on Thursday, before falling slightly.

Dan Coatsworth, investment analyst at AJ Bell, described it as a “magic moment” for the cryptocurrency and said it had a “clear link” to Donald Trump’s election victory.

Trump took to social media to celebrate the milestone, posting “congratulations Bitcoiners” and “you’re welcome!”

The president-elect had previously pledged to make the US the “crypto capital” and “Bitcoin superpower” of the world, helping to push Bitcoin’s price higher once he was elected president.

It broke through the $100k barrier after Trump said he would nominate former Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) commissioner Paul Atkins to run the Wall Street regulator.

Mr Atkins is seen as being far more pro-cryptocurrency than the current head, Gary Gensler.

“Clearly there is anticipation that the new administration is going to be somewhat more favourable to crypto than the old administration was,” said Andrew O’Neill, digital assets expert at S&P Global.

“So for the price of Bitcoin, I think that that’s what’s driven the trend so far [and it will] likely continue into the new year,” he added.

However, Bitcoin has a history of sharp falls as well as rapid rises – and some analysts have cautioned that is unlikely to change.

“A lot of people have got rich from the cryptocurrency soaring in value this year, but this high-risk asset isn’t suitable for everyone,” said Mr Coatsworth.

“It’s volatile, unpredictable and is driven by speculation, none of which makes for a sleep-at-night investment.”

During the US presidential election campaign, Trump sought to appeal to cryptocurrency investors with a promise to sack Gary Gensler – chair of the US financial regulator the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) – on “day one” of his presidency.

Mr Gensler’s approach to the cryptocurrency sector has been decidedly less friendly than Trump’s.

He told the BBC in September it was an industry “rife with fraud and hucksters and grifters”.

Under his leadership, the SEC brought a record 46 crypto-related enforcement actions against firms in 2023.

Mr Gensler said in November he would step down on 20 January – the day of Trump’s inauguration.

The choice of Paul Atkins to replace him at the helm of the SEC has been welcomed by crypto advocates.

Mike Novogratz, founder and chief executive of US crypto firm Galaxy Digital said he hoped the “clearer regulatory path” would now accelerate the digital currency ecosystem’s entry into “the financial mainstream.”

Bitcoin has seen fewer drastic falls in value during 2024 than in previous years.

In 2022 its price fell sharply below $16,000 after crypto exchange FTX collapsed into bankruptcy.

A number of key events besides Trump’s victory in the election have helped boost investor confidence that its value will keep going up.

The SEC approved several spot Bitcoin exchange traded funds (ETFs) allowing giant investment firms like Blackrock, Fidelity and Grayscale to sell products based on the price of Bitcoin.

Some of these products have seen billions of dollars in cash inflows.

But its potential to suddenly plummet in value serves as a reminder that it is not like orthodox currencies – and investors have no protection or recourse if they lose money on Bitcoin investments.

Carol Alexander, professor of finance at Sussex University, told BBC News that fear of missing out (FOMO) among younger people will see Bitcoin’s price continue to rise.

But she added that while this could spark a rise in other cryptocurrencies, many of the younger investors investing in meme coins are losing money.

Kathleen Breitman, co-founder of another cryptocurrency – Tezos – also had a word of caution for those tempted to invest in Bitcoin.

“These are markets that tend to move on momentum so you need to be extraordinarily cautious with it,” she told the BBC.

South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol is facing mounting pressure to resign over his failed attempt to impose martial law, as parliament moves closer to a vote on his impeachment.

The capital, Seoul, has seen a second day of street protests demanding Yoon’s resignation, while police said he was being investigated for “insurrection”.

The opposition is pushing for a vote on the motion to impeach Yoon on Saturday, even as the president’s party has said it opposes the move.

It needs at least eight members of Yoon’s party to vote for his impeachment for the motion to pass with a two-thirds majority in the 300-seat parliament.

South Korea was plunged into political turmoil late on Tuesday night when Yoon made the shock martial law declaration.

He cited threats from “anti-state forces” and North Korea. However, it soon became clear that his move had been spurred not by external threats but by his own domestic political troubles.

Yoon rolled back the declaration six hours later after MPs voted it down. Some lawmakers jumped over barricades and fences to get past security forces in order to convene in parliament and void Yoon’s decree.

His attempt to rule by martial law has caused public outrage and street protests. He has not spoken publicly since revoking his decision early on Wednesday.

Before his attempt to place the country under military rule, Yoon had been beset by low popularity ratings, corruption allegations and an opposition-led legislature that reduced him to a lame-duck leader.

Further rallies calling for Yoon’s resignation took place on Thursday, including one by candlelight in the evening. There have also been some rallies in support of him, but they have been much smaller.

Some lawmakers are also staying near the National Assembly to make sure that they are ready to void another martial law decree, should Yoon attempt it again.

Authorities have started investigating Yoon for alleged insurrection following a complaint by the opposition, said Woo Jong-soo, head of the National Investigation Headquarters of the National Police Agency. Insurrection is punishable by death and transcends presidential immunity.

The National Assembly also started investigating the martial law declaration on Thursday.

“The Yoon Suk Yeol regime’s declaration of emergency martial law caused great confusion and fear among our people,” opposition Democratic Party lawmaker Kim Seung-won said.

Yoon’s defence minister, Kim Yong-hyun, resigned on Thursday and took full responsibility for the martial law declaration.

It was Kim who suggested martial law to Yoon, Interior Minister Lee Sang-min told the parliament hearing. South Korean media have carried similar reports.

It became clear during the hearing that few knew about Yoon’s plan. The defence vice-minister, Kim Seon-ho, said he learnt about it on the news.

Army chief Park An-su said he had been handed the text of the martial law notice only on Tuesday night.

“There were four of us who were reviewing the draft… While we are military experts, we are not experts on martial law. Time was passing and we were all saying, ‘What are we to do, what are we to do?’ he told MPs.

Meanwhile, outside the National Assembly, scuffles broke out between lawmakers and soldiers who were sent to block them from entering the National Assembly.

Footage of Ahn Gwi-ryeong, a spokesperson for the opposition Democratic Party, grabbing the weapon of a soldier during the commotion was shared widely online.

“When I saw the armed soldiers… I felt like I was witnessing the regression of history,” she told the BBC Korean Service.

“I didn’t think… I just knew we had to stop this,” she said.

A motion to impeach Yoon was tabled in parliament late on Wednesday. South Korean law requires that it be put to a vote within 72 hours.

The main opposition Democratic Party is pushing for a vote on Saturday evening.

If the impeachment is approved, the president will be immediately suspended from office, while the prime minister becomes acting president.

A trial will then be held before the Constitutional Court, a nine-member council that oversees South Korea’s branches of government. The process could take up to 180 days.

If six of the court’s members vote to sustain the impeachment, the president will be removed from office.

Amnesty International has accused Israel of committing genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza war, which Israel strongly denies.

The UK-based human rights group said its conclusion was based on “dehumanising and genocidal statements” by Israeli officials, digital images and witness testimony and must serve as “a wake-up call” to the international community.

Israel’s foreign ministry described the 295-page report as “entirely false and based on lies”, while the Israeli military said the claims were “entirely baseless and fail to account for the operational realities” it faces.

In the past day, meanwhile, local medics say at least 50 Palestinians have been killed in Israeli strikes in Gaza.

The biggest number of people were killed in the al-Mawasi tent camp for displaced people, where Israel says it was targeting Hamas operatives.

Amnesty says that its research over months “has found sufficient basis to conclude that Israel has committed – and is continuing to commit – genocide against Palestinians”.

The 1948 Genocide Convention, enacted following the mass murder of Jews in the Nazi Holocaust, defines genocide as “acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group”.

Agnès Callamard, Amnesty’s secretary general, said Israeli actions “include killings, causing serious bodily or mental harm and deliberately inflicting on Palestinians in Gaza conditions of life calculated to bring about their physical destruction”.

“Month after month, Israel has treated Palestinians in Gaza as a subhuman group unworthy of human rights and dignity, demonstrating its intent to physically destroy them,” she continued.

The report by the global campaign group comes as the UN’s top court, the International Court of Justice at The Hague, continues to examine allegations by South Africa that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza.

Israel has called the case “wholly unfounded” and based on “biased and false claims”.

Responding to the allegations by Amnesty, Israel’s foreign ministry spokesperson, Oren Marmorstein, described the human rights group as a “deplorable and fanatical organisation”.

“The genocidal massacre on 7 October 2023, was carried out by the Hamas terrorist organisation against Israeli citizens,” he stated, adding that Israel as acting in self-defence and “fully in accordance with international law”.

The Israeli military said it was “actively working to dismantle Hamas’ military infrastructure” in Gaza and that it “takes all feasible measures to mitigate harm to civilians during operations”.

About 1,200 people in southern Israel, mostly civilians, were killed during the Hamas-led attacks 15 months ago, which triggered the Gaza war.

Since then, at least 44,532 people have been killed in Gaza, mostly civilians, according to the Hamas-run health ministry, whose figures are seen as reliable by the UN.

In the past day, Israel has continued to carry out attacks across the length of the Palestinian territory.

At least 23 people were killed and many more wounded in an air strike on a camp for displaced people in al-Mawasi in Khan Younis. Social media video shows residents battling fires overnight.

At the nearby Nasser Hospital, a local BBC cameraman filmed the arrival of the wounded, including blood-stained children and a disabled man. The bodies of two small children were among the dead brought wrapped up in blankets.

Israel’s military said its attack targeted senior Hamas operatives acting in what it considers a humanitarian zone. “Following the strike, secondary explosions were identified, suggesting the presence of weaponry in the area,” it said in a statement.

It said it had taken steps “to mitigate the risk of harming civilians” and accused Hamas of using civilians “as human shields for terrorist activity”.

On Thursday, BBC footage showed people picking through the mangled wrecks of shacks and piles of ash.

“The strike hit us without any warning and did this big massacre,” Mohammed Abu Shahli said. “The people here are refugees from different places – from Rafah and the north. They came to a place they thought was safe.”

His head bandaged, Abdul Rahman Jamaa said seven members of his family were killed including his father and three brothers.

He told the BBC: “There are no protected safe areas as the Israelis say. These are all lies. May God protect us.”

One of the biggest questions on people’s minds in Seoul on Wednesday is: what was the president thinking?

In a late-night address that threw South Korea’s parliament into chaos and tested the country’s commitment to democracy, President Yoon Suk Yeol declared that he was imposing martial law.

Less than 24 hours later, his political future is on the brink, with protests on the streets and impeachment proceedings against him under way.

So, what happened?

• What is martial law and why was it declared?
• Woman who grabbed South Korean soldier’s gun speaks to BBC
• How two hours of martial law chaos unfolded

Martial law was last introduced in South Korea in 1979, sparked by the assassination of the then-military ruler in a coup. Today’s South Korea, however, is a far cry from that, and the repressive years that followed.

It is a stable, prosperous democracy – yet Yoon claimed he was introducing military rule to save the country from dark forces. He called the opposition-controlled National Assembly a “den of criminals” that was “attempting to paralyse” the government.

Hours later, he was forced to back down as furious protesters and lawmakers gathered outside the National Assembly – the MPs made it inside and voted down the order.

His shock declaration was, in fact, a bid to get the kind of grip on power that has eluded him since he won the presidency in 2022 by the slimmest margin in South Korea’s history.

And barely a month has passed since then without controversy.

In late 2022, he was criticised for his government’s response to the horrific crowd crush during Halloween, which killed 159 young people in Seoul.

Then there were calls to investigate his wife after she was caught accepting a Dior handbag as a gift – a scandal that is always hovering close to the headlines.

In April this year, his party was defeated in parliamentary elections, leaving him in a lame-duck position. This week alone he has been locked in a political battle with opposition lawmakers over the country’s budget.

Even before he told South Koreans he was suspending their rights, his approval rate was below 20%.

There are some clues in Yoon’s address as to what he was thinking.

What was immediately evident was that he was frustrated with the opposition-controlled parliament. In his Tuesday night address, he called the assembly where they exercise their mandate a “monster that destroys the liberal democratic system”.

The reference to a threat from North Korea and “anti-state forces” suggests he was also hoping to garner support from the kind of right-wing conservatives in South Korea who label liberal politicians “communists”.

But the president misread his country and its politics.

His declaration was a chilling reminder of a period many in South Korea have tried to forget. On television, newsreaders were seen shaking.

In 1980, when pro-democracy activists, many of them students, took to the streets of the city of Gwangju to protest at martial law, the army responded with violence and around 200 people were killed.

While martial law lasted three years – 1979 to 1981 – there had been military rule for decades before, and it continued until 1987. And in those years South Korea was rife with suspicion, when anti-government activists were dubbed Communist spies and arrested or killed.

Yet, during his election campaign Yoon praised authoritarian general Chun Doo-hwan and said he had managed government affairs well – except for his suppression of pro-democracy activists.

He was later forced to apologise and said he “certainly did not defend or praise Chun’s government”.

But it does provide some insight into the president’s view of what constitutes power.

There have been rumours in South Korean political circles for months that Yoon was considering imposing martial law. In September, opposition leaders and party members declared it was a possibility. Most dismissed it as too extreme an option.

But he may well have been driven by something more: the fear of prosecution.

Park Geun-hye, the country’s first female leader, was jailed after being found guilty of abuse of power and corruption. Her predecessor, Lee Myung-bak, was investigated over allegations he was involved in stock price manipulation. He was sentenced to 17 years in prison for corruption and bribery in 2020.

Another former president, Roh Moo-hyun, took his own life in 2009 while under investigation for allegedly receiving millions in bribes.

In South Korea, prosecutions have almost become a political tool – a threat for the opposition to wield. It may partly explain why President Yoon took such drastic action.

Whatever his motives, Yoon’s career will struggle to recover from this. He is also facing calls to resign, and some local media reported that members of his own People Power Party were discussing expelling him from the party.

South Korea is a stable democracy – but it is a noisy one. And it refused to accept another authoritarian diktat.

President Yoon will now face the judgement of a parliament and a people after they rejected the most serious challenge to the country’s democracy since the 1980s.

South Korea’s president shocked the country on Tuesday night when, out of the blue, he declared martial law in the Asian democracy for the first time in nearly 50 years.

Yoon Suk Yeol’s drastic decision – announced in a late-night TV broadcast – mentioned “anti-state forces” and the threat from North Korea.

But it soon became clear that it had not been spurred by external threats but by his own desperate political troubles.

Still, it prompted thousands of people to gather at parliament in protest, while opposition lawmakers rushed there to push through an emergency vote to remove the measure.

Defeated, Yoon emerged a few hours later to accept the parliament’s vote and lift the martial law order.

Now, lawmakers will vote on whether to impeach him over what the country’s main opposition has called his “insurrectionary behaviour”.

• The president’s gamble backfired: What was he thinking?
• Woman who grabbed South Korean soldier’s gun speaks to BBC
• How two hours of martial law chaos unfolded

Yoon has acted like a president under siege, observers say.

In his address on Tuesday night, he recounted the political opposition’s attempts to undermine his government before saying he was declaring martial law to “crush anti-state forces that have been wreaking havoc”.

His decree temporarily put the military in charge – with helmeted troops and police deployed to the National Assembly parliament building where helicopters were seen landing on the roof.

Local media also showed scenes of masked, gun-toting troops entering the building while staffers tried to hold them off with fire extinguishers.

Around 23:00 local time on Tuesday (14:00 GMT), the military issued a decree banning protests and activity by parliament and political groups, and putting the media under government control.

But South Korean politicians immediately called Yoon’s declaration illegal and unconstitutional. The leader of his own party, the conservative People’s Power Party, also called Yoon’s act “the wrong move”.

Meanwhile, the leader of the country’s largest opposition party, Lee Jae-myung of the liberal Democratic Party, called on his MPs to converge on parliament to vote down the declaration.

He also called on ordinary South Koreans to show up at parliament in protest.

“Tanks, armoured personnel carriers and soldiers with guns and knives will rule the country… My fellow citizens, please come to the National Assembly.”

Thousands heeded the call, rushing to gather outside the now heavily guarded parliament. Protesters chanted: “No martial law!” and “strike down dictatorship”.

Local media broadcasting from the site showed some scuffles between protesters and police at the gates. But despite the military presence, tensions did not escalate into violence.

And lawmakers were also able to make their way around the barricades – even climbing fences to make it to the voting chamber.

Shortly after 01:00 on Wednesday, South Korea’s parliament, with 190 of its 300 members present, voted down the measure. President Yoon’s declaration of martial law was ruled invalid.

Martial law is temporary rule by military authorities in a time of emergency, when civil authorities are deemed unable to function.

The last time it was declared in South Korea was in 1979, when the country’s then long-term military dictator Park Chung-hee was assassinated during a coup.

It has never been invoked since the country became a parliamentary democracy in 1987.

But on Tuesday, Yoon pulled that trigger, saying in a national address he was trying to save South Korea from “anti-state forces”.

Yoon, who has taken a noticeably more hardline stance on North Korea than his predecessors, described the political opposition as North Korea sympathisers – without providing evidence.

Under martial law, extra powers are given to the military and there is often a suspension of civil rights for citizens and rule of law standards and protections.

Despite the military announcing restrictions on political activity and the media, protesters and politicians defied those orders. And there was no sign of the government seizing control of free media – Yonhap, the national broadcaster, and other outlets kept reporting as normal.

Yoon was voted into office in May 2022 as a hardline conservative, but has been a lame duck president since April when the opposition won a landslide in the country’s general election.

His government since then has not been able to pass the bills they wanted and have been reduced instead to vetoing bills passed by the liberal opposition.

He has also seen a fall in approval ratings – hovering around lows of 17% – as he has been mired in several corruption scandals this year, including one involving the First Lady accepting a Dior bag, and another around alleged stock manipulation.

Just last month he was forced to issue an apology on national TV, saying he was setting up an office overseeing the First Lady’s duties. But he rejected a wider investigation, which opposition parties had been calling for.

Then this week, the opposition proposed slashing a major government budget bill – which cannot be vetoed.

At the same time, the opposition also moved to impeach cabinet members and several top prosecutors- including the head of the government’s audit agency – for failing to investigate the First Lady.

The opposition Democratic Party has moved to impeach Yoon.

Parliament will have to vote by Saturday on whether to do this.

The impeachment process is relatively straightforward in South Korea. To succeed, it would require support from more than two-thirds of the 300-member National Assembly – at least 200 votes.

Once an impeachment is approved, a trial is held before the Constitutional Court – a nine-member council that oversees South Korea’s branches of government.

If six of the court’s members vote to sustain the impeachment, the president is removed from office.

If this happens, it wouldn’t be the first time that a South Korean president has been impeached. In 2016, then-President Park Geun-hye was impeached after being accused of helping a friend commit extortion.

In 2004 another president, Roh Moo-hyun, was impeached and suspended for two months. The Constitutional Court later restored him to office.

Yoon’s rash action stunned the country – which views itself as a thriving, modern democracy that has come far since its dictatorship days.

Many see this week’s events as the biggest challenge to that democratic society in decades.

Experts contend it may be more damaging to South Korea’s reputation as a democracy than even the 6 January riots in the US.

“Yoon’s declaration of martial law appeared to be both legal overreach and a political miscalculation, unnecessarily risking South Korea’s economy and security,” one expert, Leif-Eric Easley at Ewha University in Seoul said.

“He sounded like a politician under siege, making a desperate move against mounting scandals, institutional obstruction and calls for impeachment, all of which are now likely to intensify.”

South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol’s future is hanging in the balance after a chaotic night during which he dramatically declared martial law and then withdrew it just as suddenly, plunging the country into turmoil.

Yoon, who won the top job by a whisker in 2022, was already deeply unpopular and under growing pressure since losing parliamentary elections in April, regarded as a vote of confidence on his time in office.

He’s been plagued by personal problems too. Last month he apologised in a televised address to the nation for a string of controversies surrounding his wife that included allegedly accepting a luxury Dior handbag and stock manipulation.

Now he’s facing demands that he resign and lawmakers have said they will move to impeach him.

• The president’s gamble backfired: What was he thinking?
• What is martial law and why was it declared?
• Woman who grabbed South Korean soldier’s gun speaks to BBC
• How two hours of martial law chaos unfolded

Tuesday night’s short-lived attempt to impose martial law took everyone by surprise.

It sent lawmakers scrambling to the National Assembly in Seoul to vote against the order. Outside, police had assembled as thousands of protesters gathered in fury.

The same crowd erupted in cheers when Yoon backtracked within hours and declared he would withdraw the martial law order.

That he would play such a high-stakes game, and then back off so easily, came as a surprise to South Koreans and the rest of the world.

Yoon was a relative newcomer to politics when he won the presidency. He had risen to national prominence for prosecuting the corruption case against disgraced former President Park Geun-hye in 2016.

In 2022, the political novice narrowly beat his liberal opponent Lee Jae-myung by less than 1% of the vote – the closest result the country has seen since direct elections started to be held in 1987.

At a time when South Korean society was grappling with widening divisions over gender issues, Yoon appealed to young male voters by running on an anti-feminism platform.

People had “high hopes” for Yoon when he was elected, said Don S Lee, associate professor of public administration at Sungkyunkwan University. “Those who voted for Yoon believed that a new government under Yoon will pursue such values as principle, transparency and efficiency.”

Yoon has also championed a hawkish stance on North Korea. The communist state was cited by Yoon on Tuesday night when he tried to impose martial law.

He said he needed to protect against North Korean forces and “eliminate anti-state elements”, even though it was apparent from the outset that his announcement was less about the threat from the North and more about his domestic woes.

Yoon is known for gaffes, which haven’t helped his ratings. During his 2022 campaign he had to walk back a comment that authoritarian president Chun Doo-hwan, who declared martial law and was responsible for massacring protestors in 1980, had been “good at politics”.

Later that year he was forced to deny insulting the US Congress in remarks made after meeting US President Joe Biden in New York.

He was caught on a hot mic and seen on camera seemingly calling US lawmakers a Korean word that can be translated as “idiots” or something much stronger. The footage quickly went viral in South Korea.

Yoon has had some success in foreign policy, notably improving ties in his country’s historically fraught relationship with Japan.

Yoon’s presidency has been mired in scandal. Much of it centred around his wife Kim Keon Hee, who was accused of corruption and influence peddling – most notably allegedly accepting a Dior bag from a pastor.

In November, Yoon apologised on behalf of his wife while rejecting calls for an investigation into her activities.

But his presidential popularity remained wobbly. In early November, his approval ratings tumbled to 17%, a record low since he took office.

In April, the opposition Democratic Party won the parliamentary election by a landslide, dealing a crushing defeat for Yoon and his People Power Party.

Yoon was relegated to a lame duck president and reduced to vetoing bills passed by the opposition, a tactic that he used with “unprecedented frequency”, said Celeste Arrington, director of The George Washington University Institute for Korean Studies.

This week, the opposition slashed the budget the government and ruling party had put forward – and the budget bill cannot be vetoed.

Around the same time, the opposition was moving to impeach cabinet members, mainly the head of the government audit agency, for failing to investigate the first lady.

With political challenges pushing his back against the wall, Yoon went for the nuclear option – a move that few, if any, could have predicted.

“Many observers worried in recent weeks about a political crisis because of the confrontation between the president and the opposition-controlled National Assembly,” said Dr Arrington, “though few predicted such an extreme move as declaring martial law.”

President Yoon’s declaration of martial law was a “legal overreach and a political miscalculation”, according to Leif-Eric Easley, professor of international studies at Ewha Womans University in Seoul.

“With extremely low public support and without strong backing within his own party and administration, the president should have known how difficult it would be to implement his late-night decree,” Dr Easley told the BBC.

“He sounded like a politician under siege, making a desperate move against mounting scandals, institutional obstruction, and calls for impeachment, all of which are now likely to intensify.”

Yoon has drawn ire from politicians on both sides, as hastily-gathered lawmakers – including some from Yoon’s party – voted to lift martial law on Tuesday night. The opposition Democratic Party is trying to impeach Yoon, and even Yoon’s own party leadership has demanded the president’s withdrawal from the party. Yoon’s senior aides offered to resign en masse on Wednesday, Yonhap news agency reported.

Opposition leader Lee is projecting optimism, telling reporters that Yoon’s “illegal declaration of martial law” is a “decisive opportunity to break the vicious cycle and return to normal society”.

The repercussions of Tuesday night are set to ripple beyond South Korea’s borders. Yoon’s announcement has rattled South Korea’s allies. Officials in the US, a key ally, said they were caught off guard by Yoon’s announcement, and are urging South Korea to resolve the crisis “in accordance with the rule of law”. Japan says that it is monitoring the situation in South Korea with “exceptional and serious concerns”.

Meanwhile, North Korea, which has ratcheted up tensions with the South in recent months, may “attempt to exploit divisions in Seoul,” said Dr Easley.

Anger is still sweeping South Korea. On Wednesday protesters streamed onto the streets condemning Yoon. One of the country’s largest labour unions with over one million members is calling on workers to go on strike until he resigns.

It is unclear what Yoon plans to do. He has yet to make a public appearance since the fiasco.

“He was increasingly unpopular for the way he has dealt with the problems that have been raised with his own conduct and the conduct of the first lady,” former South Korean foreign minister Kang Kyung-wha told the BBC Newsday programme. “The ball is in the president’s court to find a way out of this corner that he has put himself in.”

But no matter how Yoon chooses to play it, his botched martial law declaration may already be shaping up to be the last straw that breaks his shaky presidency.

A chaotic night in South Korea produced scenes most thought were consigned to the nation’s history.

One in particular has caught the attention of many: a woman confronting soldiers who were sent to block lawmakers from entering the National Assembly.

Footage of Ahn Gwi-ryeong, 35, a spokesperson for the opposition Democratic Party, grabbing the weapon of a soldier during the commotion has been shared widely online.

“I didn’t think… I just knew we had to stop this,” she told the BBC Korean Service.

Ahn made her way to the assembly building as soldiers descended on it, shortly after the president declared martial law across South Korea.

Like many in South Korea’s younger generation, the word “martial law” was foreign to her. It was last declared in 1979.

When Ahn first heard the news, she admitted “a sense of panic took over”.

• Fear, fury and triumph: Six hours that shook South Korea
• The president’s gamble backfired: What was he thinking?
• What is martial law and why was it declared?
• How two hours of martial law chaos unfolded

When martial law is declared, political activities like rallies and demonstrations are banned, strikes and labour actions are prohibited, and media and publishing activities are controlled by the authorities. Violators can be arrested or detained without a warrant.

Shortly after the declaration of martial law, opposition leader Lee Jae-myung called on lawmakers to gather in the National Assembly and hold a vote to annul the declaration.

Arriving at the assembly building just past 23:00 local time, Ahn recalled turning off office lights to avoid detection as helicopters circled overhead.

By the time she reached the main building, soldiers were engaged in a stand-off with officials, aides and citizens.

She said: “When I saw the armed soldiers… I felt like I was witnessing the regression of history.”

Ahn and her colleagues were desperate to prevent the troops from entering the main building, where the vote would be held.

They locked the revolving doors from the inside and piled furniture and other heavy objects in front of the doors.

When the military began advancing, Ahn stepped forward.

“Honestly, I was scared at first,” she said, adding: “But seeing such confrontation, I thought, ‘I can’t stay silent’.”

The assembly passed the resolution calling for the lifting of martial law at around 01:00. All 190 members who were present voted to repeal it.

At 04:26, President Yoon announced he was reversing his decision.

After the chaos subsided, Ahn slept for a short time inside the assembly building.

She continued: “I was actually a little scared to go outside the assembly in the morning because there didn’t seem to be any taxis running, and after such a storm last night, it was hard to get back to reality.”

During her conversation with the BBC, Ahn was wearing the same black turtleneck and leather jacket she had been wearing in the footage from the night before.

At times, she was overcome with emotion.

“It’s heartbreaking and frustrating that this is happening in 21st century Korea,” she said.

Under heavy grey skies and a thin coating of snow, hulking grey and green Cold War relics recall Ukraine’s Soviet past.

Missiles, launchers and transporters stand as monuments to an era when Ukraine played a key role in the Soviet Union’s nuclear weapons programme – its ultimate line of defence.

Under the partially raised concrete and steel lid of a silo, a vast intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) peeks out.

But the missile is a replica, cracked and mouldy. For almost 30 years, the silo has been full of rubble.

The whole sprawling base, near the central Ukrainian city of Pervomais’k, has long since turned into a museum.

As a newly independent Ukraine emerged from under Moscow’s shadow in the early 1990s, Kyiv turned its back on nuclear weapons.

But nearly three years after Russia’s full-scale invasion, and with no clear agreement among allies on how to guarantee Ukraine’s security when the war ends, many now feel that was a mistake.

Thirty years ago, on 5 December 1994, at a ceremony in Budapest, Ukraine joined Belarus and Kazakhstan in giving up their nuclear arsenals in return for security guarantees from the United States, the UK, France, China and Russia.

Strictly speaking, the missiles belonged to the Soviet Union, not to its newly independent former republics.

But a third of the USSR’s nuclear stockpile was located on Ukrainian soil, and handing over the weapons was a regarded as a significant moment, worthy of international recognition.

“The pledges on security assurances that [we] have given these three nations…underscore our commitment to the independence, the sovereignty and the territorial integrity of these states,” then US President Bill Clinton said in Budapest.

As a young graduate of a military academy in Kharkiv, Oleksandr Sushchenko arrived at Pervomais’k two years later, just as the process of decommissioning was getting under way.

He watched as the missiles were taken away and the silos blown up.

Now he’s back at the base as one of the museum’s curators.

Looking back after a decade of misery inflicted by Russia, which the international community has seemed unable or unwilling to prevent, he draws an inevitable conclusion.

“Seeing what’s happening now in Ukraine, my personal view is that it was a mistake to completely destroy all the nuclear weapons,” he says.

“But it was a political issue. The top leadership made the decision and we just carried out the orders.”

At the time, it all seemed to make perfect sense. No-one thought Russia would attack Ukraine within 20 years.

“We were naive, but also we trusted,” says Serhiy Komisarenko, who was serving as Ukraine’s ambassador to London in 1994.

“When Britain and United States and then France joined,” he says, “we were thinking that’s enough, you know. And Russia as well.”

For a poor country, just emerging from decades of Soviet rule, the idea of maintaining a ruinously expensive nuclear arsenal made little sense.

“Why use money to make nuclear weapons or keep them,” Komisarenko says, “if you can use it for industry, for prosperity?”

But the anniversary of the fateful 1994 agreement is now being used by Ukraine to make a point.

Appearing at the Nato foreign ministers’ meeting in Brussels this week, Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Andriy Sybiha brandished a green folder containing a copy of the Budapest Memorandum.

“This document failed to secure Ukrainian and transatlantic security,” he said. “We must avoid repeating such mistakes.”

A statement from his ministry called the Memorandum “a monument to short-sightedness in strategic security decision-making”.

The question now, for Ukraine and its allies, is to find some other way to guarantee the country’s security.

For President Volodymyr Zelensky, the answer has long been obvious.

“The best security guarantees for us are [with] Nato,” he repeated on Sunday.

“For us, Nato and the EU are non-negotiable.”

Despite Zelensky’s frequently passionate insistence that only membership of the Western alliance can ensure Ukraine’s survival against its large, rapacious neighbour, it’s clear Nato members remain divided on the issue.

In the face of objections from several members, the alliance has so far only said that Ukraine’s path to eventual membership is “irreversible”, without setting a timetable.

In the meantime, all the talk among Ukraine’s allies is of “peace through strength”. to ensure that Ukraine is in the strongest possible position ahead of possible peace negotiations, overseen by Donald Trump, some time next year.

“The stronger our military support to Ukraine is now, the stronger their hand will be at the negotiating table,” Nato Secretary General Mark Rutte said on Tuesday.

Unsure what Donald Trump’s approach to Ukraine will be, key providers of military assistance, including the US and Germany, are sending large new shipments of equipment to Ukraine before he takes office.

Looking further ahead, some in Ukraine are suggesting that a country serious about defending itself cannot rule out a return to nuclear weapons, particularly when its most important ally, the United States, may prove unreliable in the near future.

Last month, officials denied reports that a paper circulating in the Ministry of Defence had suggested a simple nuclear device could be developed in a matter of months.

It’s clearly not on the agenda now, but Alina Frolova, a former deputy defence minister, says the leak may not have been accidental.

“That’s obviously an option which is in discussion in Ukraine, among experts,” she says.

“In case we see that we have no support and we are losing this war and we need to protect our people… I believe it could be an option.”

It’s hard to see nuclear weapons returning any time soon to the snowy wastes outside Pervomais’k.

Just one of the base’s 30m-deep command silos remains intact, preserved much as it was when it was completed in 1979.

It’s a heavily fortified structure, built to withstand a nuclear attack, with heavy steel doors and subterranean tunnels connecting it to the rest of the base.

In a tiny, cramped control room at the bottom, accessible by an even more cramped lift, coded orders to launch intercontinental ballistic missiles would have been received, deciphered and acted upon.

Former missile technician Oleksandr Sushchenko shows how two operators would have turned the key and pressed the button (grey, not red), before playing a Hollywood-style video simulation of a massive, global nuclear exchange.

It’s faintly comic, but also deeply sobering.

Getting rid of the largest ICBMs, Oleksandr says, clearly made sense. In the mid-1990s, America was no longer the enemy.

But Ukraine’s nuclear arsenal included a variety of tactical weapons, with ranges between 100 and 1,000km.

“As it turned out, the enemy was much closer,” Oleksandr says.

“We could have kept a few dozen tactical warheads. That would have guaranteed security for our country.”

Dayane Leite never wanted to become a sex worker but at the age of 17 her husband died of a heart attack and she couldn’t pay for the funeral.

Her home town, Itaituba in Brazil’s northern Para state, is at the heart of the country’s illegal gold-mining trade, so a friend suggested raising the money by having sex with miners, deep in the Amazon.

“Going to the mines is a roll of the dice,” she says.

“The women are seriously humiliated there. They may be slapped in the face and yelled at.

“I was sleeping in my bedroom and a guy jumped through the window and put a gun to my head. And if they pay, they want to own the women.”

Dayane successfully gathered the money for the funeral, and at the age of 18 she had her first child. For the last 16 years, like many women in Itaituba, she has been returning periodically to the mines to work as a cook, a washerwoman, a barmaid and a sex worker.

She now has a family of seven to support.

“I’m not going to say that all the women in the city do it, but a fair share of them do sex work. So it’s kind of normal. We don’t really care,” says Natalia Cavalcante, who became a sex worker in a remote mining settlement at 24. Four years later, after marrying the owner of a bar, she became the madam of a brothel – a job she only gave up recently, to look after her nieces in the city.

Life in mining villages in the rainforest is harsh – most consist of just a dirt track, saloon bars and a church. But the miners themselves live even further out, in shacks made of wood and canvas, surrounded by snakes and jaguars, and in total darkness once the generator is switched off. Women working as cooks have to live in these camps, alongside the men.

The miners appear in the village whenever they have found gold and have money to spend, Natalia adds. Sometimes they have to be persuaded to have a shower before sex, women say.

Running a brothel is illegal under Brazilian law, but Natalia says she took no commission, she just employed bar staff and rented out rooms.

Young women would contact her asking for work, and she sometimes lent them money for the journey, a seven-hour drive from Itaituba.

Asked whether she had misgivings about involving other women in the work, she replied: “Sometimes I think: ‘I’ve been through that, and I know it’s not that nice.’ But then I think: ‘The girl has a family, sometimes a child to raise. Many of the girls who go have one or two children.’ So we accept it.”

Even before marrying, Natalia had made a lot of money.

She now has her own house in Itaituba, a motorbike, and considerable quantities of gold that she sometimes received as payment for sex, two or three grams at a time. Her goal is to study, to become a lawyer or an architect.

Some women in Itaituba, nicknamed Gold Nugget City, have set themselves up in business with the money they made, she says.

But it’s a big risk to venture as a woman into the violent and lawless mining settlements.

While the environmental harm of the mines is well known, the human cost – which the UN says includes violence, sexual exploitation and trafficking – goes largely unreported.

A dealer in precious metals told the BBC that the illegal gold from these mines would typically be relabelled as gold from a licensed mining co-operative, before being exported and turned into jewellery and components for mobile phones, or other electronic goods.

The three largest customers of Brazilian gold are Canada, Switzerland and the UK. More than 90% of all exports to Europe are from areas where illegal mining occurs, according to the Instituto Escolhas think tank.

It’s not unknown for women to be murdered in mining villages. The dead body of 26-year-old Raiele Santos was found last year in the room where she had been living near the Cuiú-Cuiú gold mine, 11 hours’ drive from Itaituba.

Her elder sister, Railane, says a man had offered her money for sex and she had refused, so he found her later and beat her to death.

“A lot of women die on a daily basis, a lot of women,” Railane says.

“I was born in the mines, I grew up in the mines, and now I’m afraid to live in the mines.”

A man has been arrested in connection with Raiele’s murder, but has not yet been tried. He denies all the charges against him.

The land covered by Brazil’s illegal gold mines more than doubled in the 10 years to 2023, to 220,000 hectares – an area larger than Greater London. No-one knows how many women work in this area, or even how many illegal miners there are. The Brazilian government says the latter figure could be anywhere from 80,000 to 800,000.

Under President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, the government has taken steps to close illegal mines and to stop dealers buying the gold they produce, but high gold prices continue to drive many men to try their luck.

Dayane wants to stop working in the mining areas because of the risks and the toll the hardship takes on her body, but she is planning what she hopes will be one last trip. Her goal is to earn enough in two or three months to open a snack bar on her return, though she realises she may not succeed.

Whenever she is alone, walking in the forest, she will worry about her children, she says.

“I will keep trying, until I can’t any more,” she says. “Because I think that one day, my children will say: ‘My mum worked so hard. She went through what she went through for us, and she never gave up.’”

BBC 100 Women names 100 inspiring and influential women around the world every year. Follow BBC 100 Women on Instagram and Facebook. Join the conversation using #BBC100Women.

A chaotic night in South Korea produced scenes most thought were consigned to the nation’s history.

One in particular has caught the attention of many: a woman confronting soldiers who were sent to block lawmakers from entering the National Assembly.

Footage of Ahn Gwi-ryeong, 35, a spokesperson for the opposition Democratic Party, grabbing the weapon of a soldier during the commotion has been shared widely online.

“I didn’t think… I just knew we had to stop this,” she told the BBC Korean Service.

Ahn made her way to the assembly building as soldiers descended on it, shortly after the president declared martial law across South Korea.

Like many in South Korea’s younger generation, the word “martial law” was foreign to her. It was last declared in 1979.

When Ahn first heard the news, she admitted “a sense of panic took over”.

• Fear, fury and triumph: Six hours that shook South Korea
• The president’s gamble backfired: What was he thinking?
• What is martial law and why was it declared?
• How two hours of martial law chaos unfolded

When martial law is declared, political activities like rallies and demonstrations are banned, strikes and labour actions are prohibited, and media and publishing activities are controlled by the authorities. Violators can be arrested or detained without a warrant.

Shortly after the declaration of martial law, opposition leader Lee Jae-myung called on lawmakers to gather in the National Assembly and hold a vote to annul the declaration.

Arriving at the assembly building just past 23:00 local time, Ahn recalled turning off office lights to avoid detection as helicopters circled overhead.

By the time she reached the main building, soldiers were engaged in a stand-off with officials, aides and citizens.

She said: “When I saw the armed soldiers… I felt like I was witnessing the regression of history.”

Ahn and her colleagues were desperate to prevent the troops from entering the main building, where the vote would be held.

They locked the revolving doors from the inside and piled furniture and other heavy objects in front of the doors.

When the military began advancing, Ahn stepped forward.

“Honestly, I was scared at first,” she said, adding: “But seeing such confrontation, I thought, ‘I can’t stay silent’.”

The assembly passed the resolution calling for the lifting of martial law at around 01:00. All 190 members who were present voted to repeal it.

At 04:26, President Yoon announced he was reversing his decision.

After the chaos subsided, Ahn slept for a short time inside the assembly building.

She continued: “I was actually a little scared to go outside the assembly in the morning because there didn’t seem to be any taxis running, and after such a storm last night, it was hard to get back to reality.”

During her conversation with the BBC, Ahn was wearing the same black turtleneck and leather jacket she had been wearing in the footage from the night before.

At times, she was overcome with emotion.

“It’s heartbreaking and frustrating that this is happening in 21st century Korea,” she said.

Namibia’s governing party, Swapo, has retained its hold on power after more than 30 years, however its grip has been loosened – the latest African country where incumbents have had a difficult time this year.

According to official results, Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah, the Swapo candidate, won the presidential election with 57% of the vote, becoming the country’s first female leader.

Opposition parties have refused to accept the outcome after the polls were marred by logistical problems and irregularities.

Other important questions that have yet to be answered include how it was possible that Swapo increased its share of the presidential vote when in the parliamentary election it recorded its worst-ever performance, losing 12 of its 63 seats and only just holding on to its parliamentary majority.

Swapo is not alone in suffering a major electoral setback.

This year has been an “annus horribilis” for those governments in sub-Saharan Africa that have had to face voters at the ballot box.

In almost every election held in the region this year under reasonably democratic conditions, the governing party either lost a significant number of seats or lost power completely.

This trend has been driven by a combination of factors:

• the economic downturn
• growing public intolerance of corruption
• and the emergence of increasingly assertive and well-coordinated opposition parties.

The trend is likely to continue into 2025.

One of the most striking aspect of the elections that have taken place in 2024 is that many have resulted in landslide defeats for governments that have previously appeared to have a strong grip on power – including in countries that have never before experienced a change at the top.

The Botswana Democratic Party (BDP) that had ruled the country since independence in 1966 was crushed in October’s general elections.

As well as losing power, the BDP went from holding 38 seats in the 69-strong parliament to almost being wiped out.

After winning only four seats, the BDP is now one of the smallest parties in parliament, and faces an uphill battle to remain politically relevant.

There was also a landslide defeat for the governing party in Mauritius in November, where the Alliance Lepep coalition, headed by Pravind Jagnauth of the Militant Socialist Movement, won only 27% of the vote and was reduced to just two seats in parliament.

With the opposition Alliance du Changement sweeping 60 of the 66 seats available, Mauritius has experienced one of the most complete political transformations imaginable.

Senegal and the self-declared republic of Somaliland also saw opposition victories.

In the case of Senegal, the political turnaround was just as striking as in Botswana, albeit in a different way.

Just weeks ahead of the election, the main opposition leaders Bassirou Diomaye Faye and Ousmane Sonko were languishing in jail as the government of President Macky Sall abused its power in a desperate bid to avert defeat.

After growing domestic and international pressure led to Faye and Sonko being released, Faye went on to win the presidency in the first round of voting, with the government’s candidate winning only 36% of the vote.

Even in cases where governments have not lost, their reputation and political control have been severely dented.

Like Swapo, South Africa’s African National Congress (ANC) retained power but only after a bruising campaign that saw it fall below 50% of the vote in a national election for the first time since the end of white-minority rule in 1994.

This forced President Cyril Ramaphosa to enter into a coalition government, giving up 12 cabinet posts to other parties, including powerful positions such as Home Affairs.

As a result, a region that is known more for governments that manage to hold on to power for decades has seen 12 months of vibrant, intensely contested, multiparty politics.

The only exceptions to this have been countries where elections were seen as neither free nor fair, such as Chad and Rwanda, or in which governments were accused by opposition and rights groups of resorting to a combination of rigging and repression to avert defeat, as in Mozambique.

Three trends have combined to make it a particularly difficult year to be in power.

In Botswana, Mauritius and Senegal, growing citizen concern about corruption and the abuse of power eroded government credibility.

Opposition leaders were then able to play on popular anger at nepotism, economic mismanagement and the failure of leaders to uphold the rule of law to expand their support base.

Especially in Mauritius and Senegal, the party in power also undermined its claim to be a government committed to respecting political rights and civil liberties – a dangerous misstep in countries where the vast majority of citizens are committed to democracy, and which have previously seen opposition victories.

The perception that governments were mishandling the economy was particularly important because many people experienced a tough year financially.

High food and fuel prices have increased the cost of living for millions of citizens, increasing their frustration with the status quo.

In addition to underpinning some of the government defeats this year, economic anger was the main driving force that triggered the youth-led protests in Kenya that rocked President William Ruto’s government in July and August.

This is not an African phenomenon, of course, but a global one.

Popular discontent over inflation played a role in the defeat of Rishi Sunak and the Conservative Party in the UK and the victory of Donald Trump and the Republican Party in the United States.

What was perhaps more distinctive about the transfers of power in Africa this year was the way that opposition parties learned from the past.

In some cases, such as Mauritius, this meant developing new ways to try and protect the vote by ensuring every stage of the electoral process was carefully watched.

In others, it meant forging new coalitions to present the electorate with a united front.

In Botswana, for example, three opposition parties and a number of independent candidates came together under the banner of the Umbrella for Democratic Change to comprehensively out-mobilise the BDP.

A similar set of trends could make life difficult for Ghana’s New Patriotic Party (NPP) in Saturday’s election, and will also cause the Malawian government of President Lazarus Chakwera major problems when general elections come around in 2025.

If Ghana does see a transfer of power, sub-Saharan Africa will have experienced five opposition victories in 2024 – more than any other year in its history.

That so many governments are being given an electoral bloody nose against a backdrop of global democratic decline that has seen a rise in authoritarianism in some regions is particularly striking.

It suggests that Africa has much higher levels of democratic resilience than is often recognized, notwithstanding the number of entrenched authoritarian regimes that continue to exist.

Civil society groups, opposition parties and citizens themselves have mobilised in large numbers to demand accountability, and punish governments that have failed both economically and democratically.

International governments, organizations, and activists looking for new ways to defend democracy around the world should pay more attention to a region that is often assumed to be an inhospitable environment for multiparty politics, yet has seen more examples of democratic bounce-back than other regions of the world.

• From freedom fighter to Namibia’s first female president
• Why voters fall out of love with liberation movements
• What’s on the minds of Ghanaian voters explored in seven charts
• Children shot dead after joining pot-banging protests in Mozambique

Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy head to Capitol Hill on Thursday to discuss their newly-announced advisory team that the two billionaires say will cut regulations, spending, and headcounts within the federal government.

The Department of Government Efficiency, or “Doge” – seemingly a winking reference to Musk’s cryptocurrency of choice, dogecoin – was first announced by Donald Trump last month.

“It will become, potentially, ‘The Manhattan Project’ of our time,” the president-elect wrote on his social media platform, referring to a top-secret World War Two programme to develop nuclear weapons. “Republican politicians have dreamed about the objectives of ‘DOGE’ for a very long time.”

But despite Trump’s enthusiasm, much remains unclear about Doge and how it will function. As Musk and Ramaswamy meet with lawmakers, here’s a look at what we know about their nascent agency.

Though Doge has the clear support of Trump, and has the word “department” in its name, it is not an official government department – the type of body that has to be established through an act of Congress and typically employs thousands of staff.

Instead, it seems Doge will operate as an advisory body, run by two of Trump’s closest allies and with a direct line to the White House.

In an opinion piece published in the Wall Street Journal last month, Musk and Ramaswamy said they would “serve as outside volunteers, not federal officials or employees”.

The pair will assist the Trump transition team in recruiting the Doge team, they said, who will provide guidance to the White House on spending cuts, and compile a list of regulations they believe are outside agencies’ legal authority.

“DOGE will present this list of regulations to President Trump, who can, by executive action, immediately pause the enforcement of those regulations and initiate the process for review and rescission,” they wrote.

• Who has joined Trump’s top team?
• Trump’s legal cases – what now?
• Just how big was Trump’s victory?

The specifics do not seem nailed down, but the overall picture is clear – Doge’s leaders want major government reform, by way of major cuts.

The federal bureaucracy “represents an existential threat to our republic,” Musk and Ramaswamy wrote in the Journal. “Unlike government commissions or advisory committees, we won’t just write reports or cut ribbons. We’ll cut costs.”

Musk, the world’s richest person, has said he can find more than $2tn in savings – around a third of annual federal government spending.

And the two have said they will slash federal regulations, oversee mass layoffs and shut down some agencies entirely.

Ramaswamy, a financier who ran for the Republican presidential nomination earlier this year, vowed during his campaign to shutter the Education Department, the FBI, and the IRS – promises he has repeated in recent weeks.

Speaking at a gala held at Mar-a-Lago last month, Ramasamy thanked Trump “for making sure that Elon Musk and I are in a position to start the mass deportations of millions of unelected federal bureaucrats out of the DC bureaucracy”.

“And I don’t know if you’ve got to know Elon yet, but he doesn’t bring a chisel, he brings a chainsaw, and we’re going to be taking it to that bureaucracy,” Ramaswamy said. “It’s going to be a lot of fun.”

Musk has solicited employees on X, formerly Twitter, the social media platform he owns.

Doge-hopefuls have been asked to send their resumes directly to the newly-created Doge account on X. Applicants should expect 80+ hour workweeks, according to a post from Doge, devoted to “unglamorous cost cutting”. And, according to Musk, all that work at Doge will not be rewarded with a salary.

“This will be tedious work, make lots of enemies & compensation is zero,” he wrote on X.

Only the “top 1% of applicants” will be reviewed by Musk and Ramaswamy, the DOGE account said, though it did not specify how applicants will be ranked.

Even before it’s really up and running, Doge’s expiration has been set – 4 July, 2026.

“A smaller Government, with more efficiency and less bureaucracy, will be the perfect gift to America on the 250th Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence,” Trump said when announcing the new body.

Some Trump allies hope Doge will mirror the Grace Commission, a private-sector commission established by President Ronald Reagan in 1982 to reform the federal bureaucracy and control spending.

During its two-year tenure, the Grace Commission submitted more than 2,500 recommendations to the White House and Congress. Most were never implemented, however.

Musk and Ramaswamy’s bold promises have incited some incredulity among experts, who say the size and scope of their mandate borders on the impossible.

“Every few decades you really need to look at everything,” Elaine Kamarck, a senior fellow in governance studies at the Brookings Institution, told the BBC’s US partner CBS.

But to slash one-third of the government’s spending – like Musk has pledged – is “insane”, she said. Roughly two-thirds of the total budget is mandatory, and includes programmes like Social Security and Medicare. “This is the first warning sign that this is going to be a failed operation.”

Still, some parts of Doge have attracted somewhat unlikely praise.

Bernie Sanders, an independent Senator from Vermont who caucuses with Democrats, said this week Musk “is right” about proposed cuts to the defence budget. The Pentagon has “lost track of billions”, Sanders wrote on X, saying the department had failed its seventh audit in a row.

Other Democrats have offered similar glimmers of support. Representative Ro Khanna of California said he also supported cuts to Pentagon spending. And this week, Democratic Representative Jared Moskowitz of Florida became the first in his party to join the House Doge caucus, a Congressional caucus that is tasked with reducing government spending, but does not report directly to the Doge advisory board.

“Reducing ineffective government spending should not be a partisan issue,” he said in a statement.

• How these new recruits will be vetted
• What Trump can and can’t do on day one
• How undocumented migrants feel about deportations
• Can RFK Jr make America healthy again?
• What Trump’s Ukraine envoy has said about war

Police in New York are using facial recognition technology and a discarded mobile phone to track down the killer of a healthcare chief executive.

UnitedHealthcare boss Brian Thompson, 50, was fatally shot in the back on Wednesday morning outside the Hilton hotel in Midtown Manhattan.

The attacker fled the scene without taking any of Thompson’s belongings. Police believe the victim was targeted in a pre-planned killing.

They are focusing on a surveillance image taken in a branch of Starbucks just before the shooting.

Here’s what we know about the suspect and the investigation.

• Follow live updates on the search for the suspect

The shooting took place at about 06:45 EST (11:45 GMT) in a busy part of Manhattan close to Times Square and Central Park. Thompson had been scheduled to speak at an investor conference later in the day.

According to police, the suspect – who was clad in a black face mask and light brown or cream-coloured jacket – appeared to be waiting for Thompson for five minutes outside the Hilton hotel where he was expected to speak.

Thompson, who arrived on foot, was shot in the back and leg, and was pronounced dead about half an hour later at a local hospital.

• Story in full: Police hunt gun-wielding killer of UnitedHealthcare CEO

New York Police Department (NYPD) Chief of Detectives Joseph Kenny has revealed that the suspect’s weapon appeared to jam, but that he was able to quickly fix it and keep shooting.

CCTV footage appears to show the gunman had fitted a suppressor, also known as a silencer, to his pistol, BBC Verify has established.

Video shows him fleeing the scene on foot. Officials initially said the suspect used an electric Citi Bike owned by Lyft.

But Lyft, which owns and operates Citi Bike, later said it had been told by the NYPD that one of its vehicles had not been used, according to the BBC’s US partner, CBS News.

So far, the investigation into Thompson’s killing has centred on a few clues that police are using to identify the suspect.

Police revealed the suspect was photographed at a nearby Starbucks just minutes before the shooting.

While he is masked in the image, police sources told CBS that the mask is pulled down far enough so that his eyes and part of his nose can be seen.

With that, investigators are using facial recognition software to try to find a match.

Additionally, police are testing three bullet casings and three live rounds found at the scene for DNA.

The words “deny,” “defend” and “depose” were discovered on the casings, according to US media reports.

A mobile phone was discovered in an alley along the suspect’s escape route. Police say they are “working through” the phone.

Investigators also said they would search Thompson’s room at the nearby Marriott, which is down the street from where the incident took place.

Thompson joined UnitedHealth, the biggest private insurer in the US, from accountancy firm PricewaterhouseCoopers in 2004.

He rose through the ranks and became CEO in 2021, leading the company through some very profitable years.

• Who was Brian Thompson?

Investigators have so far not identified a motive in the killing, although police did note that the assailant fled without taking any of Thompson’s belongings.

In an interview with MSNBC, Thompson’s wife said that there had “been some threats” against him earlier, although she was unable to provide details.

“I just know that he said there were some people that had been threatening him,” she said.

According to police in Thompson’s hometown of Maple Grove, Minnesota, there had previously been one suspicious incident at his home in 2018.

The incident was cleared with no criminal activity detected. No additional details were provided.

In the dark, early morning hours of 26 March, US transportation secretary Pete Buttigieg’s phone rang – and he immediately knew he had a problem.

“If my phone rings in the middle of the night, it’s not a good thing,” he recalled.

The Dali, a massive 948ft (289m) cargo ship had slammed into Baltimore’s iconic Francis Scott Key Bridge, sending the 1.5-mile (2.4km) bridge into the cold waters of the state’s Patapsco River.

“It wasn’t immediately clear what we were dealing with,” Buttigieg told the BBC in an interview. “How many people had been impacted, and how much of the bridge had been destroyed.”

Six men, all members of a road crew working on the bridge, were killed in the incident, which left the Dali – still afloat – stuck under huge chunks of shredded metal and concrete. Another man was pulled from the icy water, seriously injured.

A new documentary from BBC One – available on iPlayer on 5 December – reveals new details of the investigation into the crash, including a possible cause: a cable that shook loose, disrupting the ship’s power supply and causing an initial blackout minutes before it struck the bridge.

After that, investigators believe they discovered a lack of fuel pressure to the generators may have created power fluctuations that tripped breakers and caused the ship to go dark again, with no time to change course before slamming into the bridge.

• Watch on iPlayer: Why Bridges Collapse: The Baltimore Disaster
• Lost power, a mayday call and the crash that brought down a Baltimore bridge

Previously unseen bodycam footage taken after the collapse shows first responders and officials struggling to come to grips with the enormity of what they faced in the confusing hours after the crash.

“Key Bridge is down. It was last reported that there are at least several vehicles in the water,” an officer can be heard saying. “And several people still unaccounted for.”

In the aftermath of the collapse, an estimated 3,000 to 4,000 tonnes of debris blocked the Patapsco, a 700ft (213m) wide and 50ft (15m) deep and economically vital shipping channel.

Recovering the bodies and removing the twisted, broken steel and concrete from the channel – plus moving the Dali – fell to a massive team including US Army, Navy and Coast Guard members, as well as Maryland authorities and specialist private firms.

The woman who led the effort, Colonel Estee Pinchasin, the Army Corps of Engineers Baltimore district commander, said that she had “never seen anything of that magnitude before”.

“Everything [was] mangled up on top and around,” she said. “You had these big, large spans that were just laying in the water. You see four-inch steel that’s been bent… how can you even start to think about the force?”

The dangerous work of searching the debris field and determining which pieces could be safely removed – and when – fell, in part, to teams of divers who inspected both the ship and the destruction beneath the surface.

Never-before-seen footage obtained by the BBC shows the difficult conditions they faced: jagged and potentially dangerous pieces of rubble and muddy, brown water, which often meant they could not see more than a foot or two ahead of them.

“There was no visibility. I kind of compared it to a metal jungle gym underwater,” recalled Robyn Bianchi, the assistant salvage master for one of the firms involved, Donjon Marine.

“You turn off all the lights in the room and try tell me all the pieces of where they connect to that metal jungle gym. Oh, and by the way, the jungle gym is completely twisted and looks nothing like it did when it was built to perfection.”

A preliminary report from the National Transportation Safety Board, or NTSB, found that two electrical blackouts disabled equipment ahead of the incident, and noted that the ship lost power twice in the 10 hours leading up to the crash.

In the aftermath, NTSB investigators were tasked with determining what happened. Eventually, they discovered a loose cable, which it is believed may have caused a power surge that tripped two breakers and disrupted electricity.

As the crew struggled to restart the engine, a second blackout took place, likely as the result of a pump supplying generators with fuel shutting down and not restarting automatically.

The erratic generators may have created additional power fluctuations that trip the ship’s breakers – a common occurrence faced by seafarers, but which mostly takes place in open waters.

Sal Mercogliano, a maritime historian and former merchant mariner, said that the silence the sailors must have heard in those moments is “the worst sound you ever hear” on a ship.

“At that moment, you realise you don’t have control of the ship anymore,” he added. “It is a nightmare… you have a very short period of time in which to restore power.”

In the Dali’s case, it was already too late. The time between the ship losing power and striking the bridge, it was later determined, was about four minutes.

Despite the destruction and loss of life, officials are relieved that the incident was not worse.

On the night of the collapse, police were able to stop traffic, with the last car clearing the bridge just 40 seconds before it fell.

“Cars would have kept coming,” Maryland Governor Wes Moore said. “By the time the people driving the vehicles realised the bridge was gone, it just would have been too late.”

“I can’t tell you how many lives they saved,” he added. “Because the answer is countless.”

A Kenyan court has convicted a photographer for the murder of LGBT activist Edwin Kiprotich Kipruto, popularly known as Edwin Chiloba, whose body was found dumped in a metal box nearly two years ago.

The court in the western city of Eldoret ruled that the prosecution had proved that Jacktone Odhiambo, who was living with Chiloba, had killed him.

Chiloba’s body had been found dumped on the roadside in Eldoret, where he was a university student.

The murder sparked global condemnation, with human rights groups saying it was because of his sexuality.

Kenya is a relatively conservative society and gay sex is illegal, punishable by up to 14 years in prison, although it is not clear whether there has been any convictions.

However the Supreme Court last year affirmed a ruling allowing LGBT people the right to associate and register a rights organisation.

• Body of Kenyan LGBTQ activist dumped in metal box
• Kenya’s discreet church set up to welcome LGBT worshippers
• Will Kenya be the latest to pass anti-gay law?

Judge Reuben Nyakundi ruled that the evidence, which included DNA tests, had linked the accused to the murder.

The evidence also indicated that the suspect had sexually assaulted Chiloba before killing him.

The judge said the prosecution had proved the suspect’s deliberate intention and deep hatred against the deceased.

“He was a young man whom you strangled until he lost his life at the peak of his life. You were close friends, and you should have protected his life,” said the judge.

The court did not make any finding about the motive for the killing.

Chiloba’s body was found in early January last year with socks stuffed into his mouth and a piece of denim from jeans tied around his face.

A post-mortem indicated that he had died from lack of oxygen, caused by smothering.

Odhiambo, who was believed to have been in a relationship with the deceased, was accused of killing Chiloba between 31 December 2022 and 3 January 2023. He had denied the charges.

On Wednesday, the prosecution said in a post on X that it had presented evidence from 23 witnesses “detailing the events leading to Chiloba’s death and proving beyond reasonable doubt that [Odhiambo] intentionally caused the unlawful death”.

The National Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission said the “landmark ruling” was a “significant step toward justice for Edwin and all LGBTQ residents of Kenya, Africa and beyond”.

Odhiambo is due to be sentenced on 16 December.

• Kenyan LGBTQ activist Edwin Chiloba buried
• Gay rights in Kenya: ‘Why our fight isn’t over’
• Kenyan anger after lesbian’s murder
• The countries where it is illegal to be gay

The ghostwriter of Gregg Wallace’s 2012 autobiography has claimed he sexually harassed her.

Shannon Kyle told BBC Newsnight the MasterChef presenter answered the door wearing only a towel, which he later dropped, made “revolting” and “sickening” sexualised suggestions to her, and touched her inappropriately.

Kyle, who was 35 at the time, was writing Wallace’s memoir Life On A Plate.

Lawyers representing Wallace said: “Our client has denied that he has engaged in any such behaviour, and he specifically denies any sexual misconduct with Ms Kyle.”

Kyle claimed Wallace shared explicit details of his own sex life when working on the book between May and August 2012.

The now 47-year-old also alleges Wallace inappropriately touched her thigh when she was sitting in the passenger seat of his sports car, and felt her bottom after he appeared at the Good Food Show in Birmingham.

Kyle said she had chosen to speak out to highlight what she described as Wallace’s “predatory” behaviour.

Newsnight put these fresh allegations to Wallace’s representatives on Tuesday.

The presenter’s lawyers have strongly denied he engages in behaviour of a sexually harassing nature.

• How damaging is the Gregg Wallace scandal for the BBC?
• ‘Groping’ and ‘touching’: Fresh claims against Gregg Wallace
• BBC pulls MasterChef Christmas specials
• Wallace’s response to MasterChef claims was misogynistic, says No 10
• Gregg Wallace allegations ‘truly upsetting’, says John Torode

It comes as the Sun published fresh allegations that bosses on Strictly Come Dancing were alerted to alleged inappropriate behaviour from Wallace when he appeared on the show in 2014.

According to the newspaper, at least one member of staff raised concerns about the 60-year-old, who was voted off after the first week.

Video footage of one of Wallace’s training sessions with dance partner Aliona Vilani has also recently resurfaced, which shows him telling her about how he had not worn underwear in years and grabbing his crotch.

A BBC representative has said: “Whilst we do not comment on individuals, we take any issues that are raised with us seriously and we have robust processes in place to deal with them.”

Last week Banijay UK, the production company behind the BBC show, announced that Wallace would be “stepping away from his role on MasterChef” following complaints from individuals in relation to historical allegations of misconduct.

It followed a BBC News investigation which heard from 13 people, spanning a range of ages across five different programmes, who made allegations about inappropriate sexual comments.

Other women have since come forward with further claims against the TV host.

Banijay UK has announced an “immediate, external review to fully and impartially investigate” and said that Wallace was “committed to fully cooperating throughout the process”.

When beginning work with Wallace on the book, Kyle said: “The first interview we did was pretty straightforward, and then we agreed to meet whenever he was available.”

Kyle, who has written numerous books, alleges that on the “second or third interview”, which had taken place in his own restaurant around 8am to account for Wallace’s “very busy schedule filming”, he “started to talk about his love life”.

“He was dating lots of different women. And he started telling me about these dates, who the women were, where he met them. And then in very graphic details, what sexual acts they had done together,” Kyle said.

“He talked about spanking a lot. He also talked about one of his girlfriends on all fours in front of a mirror. He talked in incredibly sexual detail, which at the time it was just so shocking because it was completely unnecessary for the book.”

On one occasion, she said a meeting was arranged at Wallace’s flat, and he opened the door “completely naked, except for a towel around his waist”.

Wallace, she claims, said he had just got back from the gym and had a shower and said it would be OK for her to go into the living room.

Kyle said she asked Wallace: “Look, can you just go and get dressed?”

She said that she sat on the sofa while waiting for him. Wallace then returned in the towel and, she claims, said his trousers were folded behind the cushion she was next to.

“Then I kind of looked up and then he dropped the towel,” she said.

Newsnight asked whether the towel dropping could have been an accident, to which Ms Kyle said “definitely not”.

“I felt quite vulnerable because I’m on my own in a flat with a man. He’s naked,” she said.

Kyle, who was a single parent at the time, had signed a non-disclosure agreement (NDA), before beginning the project.

The NDA said the “writer understands that Wallace enjoys a high public profile and her obligations to him of loyalty and confidentiality are therefore of particular significance”.

“I was worried about losing the job,” she said, “because I’d given up all the work for this job. So I thought to myself… I’m just going to try and navigate this, [I’ll] just try and push on through,” she said. “It was just really revolting.”

At another meeting for the book, Kyle said that, during a restaurant meal, the TV presenter made other sexualised comments, including: “If you won’t let me sleep with you, would you lick my [anus]?”

She said another comment, while she was eating dessert, included: “What would you think if I put some of the Eton Mess you’re eating on my willy, then?”

Kyle said it was “sickening… obscene. It was, you know, obviously designed to cause discomfort of some sort”.

On another occasion when they were finishing an interview at his flat, while saying goodbye, she said, Wallace initiated a “really big hug”.

“His face was just right next to mine… I just completely froze.”

She alleges that Wallace, speaking into her ear, said: “Just give me a little kiss. Just a little one.”

Kyle said she then “paused” and “he either let go or I kind of pushed him off a little bit. And, and then I just really quickly wanted to get away.”

She said she left “in tears”.

The incident at the flat wasn’t the only time Kyle said she faced inappropriate behaviour and harassment from Wallace.

On a separate occasion, she claims that after she was picked up in his sports car on the way to conduct an interview, he inappropriately touched her on the thigh and around the knee when changing gear.

Kyle said the action made her move away and she told him to stop.

She claims that after the interview in a restaurant, while driving home Wallace “started trying to touch my knee and my thigh again”.

She said it was at this point “I started to lose my temper because I really had had enough”.

After threatening to hit Wallace while in the car, she said he stopped and “he didn’t try again”.

But the alleged harassment and inappropriate touching continued at a later date, according to Kyle.

In one of the final interviews for the book, she travelled to Birmingham where Wallace was scheduled to appear at the Good Food Show.

Following the event, she said Wallace inappropriately touched her on the bottom in a hotel car park.

When the allegations about Wallace’s inappropriate comments and behaviour emerged last week, Kyle said it felt “a long time coming”.

She described his behaviour as “predatory”, and said: “Sometimes you do have to speak up for what’s right.”

The ghostwriter claims that Wallace’s alleged actions have been minimised by some as “cheeky barrow-boy humour” but she describes it as “revolting misogyny”.

The BBC has pulled its MasterChef Christmas specials since allegations around Wallace’s behaviour came to light last Thursday.

On Wednesday, Wallace’s co-host John Torode said he found the recent allegations “truly upsetting”.

A BBC spokesperson thanked those who “had the courage to speak out” over allegations about Wallace. It said production company Banijay UK had launched a review because they have the contractual relationship with Wallace.

“He is not employed by the BBC. When issues have been raised with the BBC we have taken action, referring issues to the relevant production company and challenging his behaviour directly as has been widely reported.”

The spokesman said it hoped the independent investigation could be concluded “rigorously and as swiftly as possible”.

The BBC is also running its own review into workplace culture.

The regular British army could be wiped out in as little as six months if forced to fight a war on the scale of the Ukraine conflict, a defence minister has warned.

Alistair Carns said a rate of casualties similar to that prompted by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine would lead to the army being “expended” within six to 12 months.

He said it illustrated the importance of having reserves in order to be able to fight in a “war of scale”.

Official figures show the army had 109,245 personnel on 1 October, including 25,814 volunteer reservists.

Carns, a former Royal Marines colonel who is also a reservist, said Russia was suffering losses of around 1,500 soldiers, killed or wounded, a day.

“In a war of scale – not a limited intervention, but one similar to Ukraine – our army for example on the current casualty rates would be expended, as part of a broader multinational coalition, in six months to a year,” he added.

In a speech on reserves at the Royal United Services Institute defence think tank in London, Carns, the minister for veterans and people, said: “That doesn’t mean to say we need a bigger army, but it does mean we must be able to generate depth and mass rapidly in the event of a crisis.

“The reserves are critical, absolutely central, to that process.

“Without them we cannot generate mass, we cannot meet the plethora of defence tasks and challenges that we require, and we cannot seamlessly integrate the very best experts into the heart of our armed forces.”

Speaking separately at the same think tank, the head of the armed forces said it was important to note there was only a “remote” chance that Russia would launch a “significant direct attack or invasion” on the UK, or other Nato member.

Admiral Sir Tony Radakin added that Russia “knows the response would be overwhelming, whether conventional or nuclear”.

But he added that it showed the need for nuclear deterrence to be “kept strong and strengthened,” warning that the world was entering a “third nuclear age” following the Cold War and subsequent period of disarmament.

This new age would be defined by the “almost total absence of the security architectures that went before,” and more countries having nuclear weapons.

He added that China’s increasing nuclear weapons stockpile meant the United States could face a “two-peer challenge” from Beijing and Moscow, with both countries possessing significant arsenals.

Army reservists serve in their spare time, getting paid to train outside their main jobs.

Carns said the reality of wars such as the one being fought in Ukraine was that they were “attritional in nature”.

He also said the UK needed to “catch up with Nato allies” by placing a greater emphasis on its reserves.

A Ministry of Defence spokesperson said the UK’s armed forces were “amongst the best in the world and offer a 24/7 defence of the UK, operating alongside our allies and partners to prepare for any event”.

“The Strategic Defence Review will look at the threats we face and the capabilities we need so that our Armed Forces are better ready to fight, more integrated and more innovative,” they added.

“Our Reserves are an essential and extremely valued element of the Armed Forces and the contributions they make to our resilience and our ability to call on additional personnel when required are vital.”

Earlier, the prime minister’s official spokesman said the Budget had “invested billions of pounds into defence”.

Last month, Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff Lieutenant General Sir Rob Magowan told MPs on the Defence Select Committee: “If the British Army was asked to fight tonight, it would fight tonight.

“I don’t think anybody in this room should be under any illusion that if the Russians invaded eastern Europe tonight, then we would meet them in that fight.”

Earlier on Wednesday, Foreign Secretary David Lammy urged Nato’s European members to step up their defence spending ahead of Donald Trump’s return to the White House.

The US president-elect has accused European countries of relying on American taxpayers for their security.

At a meeting of Nato’s foreign ministers in Brussels, Lammy said “the time to act is now” – although the UK government has yet to set out its own plans for increasing its spending on defence to 2.5% of national output.

He highlighted Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and its involvement in conflicts around the world, including the Middle East.

“In the United Kingdom, we are at 2.3%, heading to 2.5% as soon as we can get there, and we urge all allies across the Nato family to get serious about defence spending.

“All of our populations require us to understand the tremendous security challenges that we are facing at this time,” he added.

Rescuers are likely to need an extra day of digging to find a missing woman who is believed to have fallen into a mine when a sinkhole opened in Pennsylvania, with police saying the search is likely to have now entered the recovery phase.

“Unless it’s a miracle, most likely this is [a] recovery [effort],” Pennsylvania State Police Trooper Stephen Limani said.

Elizabeth Pollard, 64, was reported missing by family members after she went out to search for her cat on Monday night.

Officials believe she could have fallen into a 30-ft (9m) deep sinkhole connected to a mine in the town of Marguerite, that may have opened up below her as she was searching for her cat.

Speaking at a news conference Wednesday afternoon, Mr Limani said oxygen levels in the mine had lowered since they first started searching it.

“I know we have a lot of hopes, and maybe there is still a glimmer of hope, but based off of oxygen levels being a little lower, even though we’ve pumped oxygen into the mine, it’s lower than what you would want for someone to try and sustain their life. It’s been difficult,” he said.

The two-day search operation for Mrs Pollard was hampered Wednesday as rescuers said the abandoned mine had become too dangerous to send people in to search underground.

“Because of the fragile state of the mine, we’ve had to change what we were trying to do,” Mr Limani said.

“We were trying to basically suction the removal of dirt and debris and rocks, and even using water to try and soften the debris up or even push it out of our way to [now] where we have to dig out a massive area, more than four times the size of the area that we had originally done, to try and secure the mine so we can access it to try and go in there and recover her.”

Cameras and electronic devices like microphones have been sent down into the mine, but rescuers have found no sign of Mrs Pollard so far.

Mr Limani said they had, however, spotted what appeared to be a shoe for a second time in the dirt and mud.

• What are sinkholes and what causes them?

In an interview earlier on Wednesday with CBS News, the BBC’s US news partner, Mrs Pollard’s son, Axel Hayes, said he was going through a range of emotions.

“I’m upset that she hasn’t been found yet, and I’m really just worried about whether she’s still down there, where she is down there, or she went somewhere and found somewhere safer,” Mr Hayes said.

“Right now, I just hope she’s alive and well, that she’s going to make it, that my niece still has a grandmother, that I still have a mother that I can talk to.”

The family has been notified of the move to a recovery operation.

Mrs Pollard’s car was found parked behind Monday’s Union Restaurant in the town of Marguerite, 40 miles (65km) east of Pittsburgh, early Tuesday morning.

Her five-year-old granddaughter was inside, officials said, adding that the girl was cold but not hurt.

Officials believe that the sinkhole opened up as Mrs Pollard was standing on top of it while looking for her cat, named Pepper. They hope that she is sheltering in an underground “void”.

“The sinkhole, it appears that it was most likely created during the time, unfortunately, that Mrs Pollard was walking around,” Mr Limani said Tuesday.

“We don’t see any evidence of any time where that hole would have been there prior to deciding to walk around and look for her cat.”

At one point, more than 100 people were assisting in the rescue.

Temperatures, which have been below freezing the last several days, are much warmer inside the hole than they are at the surface.

Authorities had also not detected any dangerous gases that are sometimes found in abandoned mines.

A Georgian opposition leader has been dragged from his party office by police and others have been physically attacked, after the prime minister vowed that organisers of a week of pro-EU protests, which he called “violent actions”, would face justice.

Nika Gvaramia, 48, a leader from one of four opposition groups, was carried by his arms and legs by police from his party HQ in a side street next to parliament in the capital Tbilisi.

Other leaders were later ambushed after they met at a hotel and decided to push for a general strike.

Nightly demonstrations have been held since last Thursday, after ruling party Georgian Dream said it was halting the country’s bid to start talks on joining the EU.

More than 330 protesters have been arrested and rights groups say many have been beaten in detention, however authorities started going after opposition leaders after a strident briefing from Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze.

“Politicians who organised violence but hid in offices will not be able to evade responsibility for the events that have unfolded over the past days,” he warned, accusing protesters of spreading “liberal fascism”.

Protests had initially erupted late in October after a contested election that monitoring groups said was marred by a string of violations.

But they burst into life last Thursday when Kobakhidze’s increasingly authoritarian Georgian Dream party said it was suspending the country’s bid to start talks on joining the EU. Two days later, the US suspended Georgia’s long-sought strategic partnership.

Georgian Dream has enacted increasingly authoritarian laws targeting civil society and LGBT groups as well as freedom of speech, and opposition parties accuse the party of moving Georgia back into the sphere of influence of neighbour Russia.

Georgia’s interior ministry says more than 100 officers have been hurt by fireworks, rocks and other projectiles, but the country’s ombudsman for human rights has accused the police of exercising brutality and torture toward protesters.

In the early hours of Monday, Nika Gvaramia who is one of the leaders of Coalition for Change, told the BBC that the protesters had no other option but to take to the streets, because the alternative was the elimination of their country, “not just in Russia’s zone of influence but some kind of puppet territory”.

He also predicted that his party HQ would soon be raided by Georgia’s authorities, and that took place less than 36 hours later.

Other opposition leaders met for an hour during the evening in a hotel in Tbilisi’s central Liberty Square, and decided to step up co-operation and push for a general strike in the wider general public.

“It’s a total campaign of terror against free speech, against freedom of opinion, against democracy,” Levan Tsutskiridze of Strong Georgia told the BBC.

Another leader of Coalition for Change, Zurab Girchi Japaridze, said it was not a pleasant feeling, realising that more arrests could come: “You think you’re prepared for this but you never are.”

As they left the meeting, some leaders came under attack in Liberty Square and two were seen being detained by waiting police, including opposition figure and world champion wrestler Zurabi Datunashvili.

In all, the opposition said 11 members had been arrested, including a Strong Georgia leader Aleko Elisashvili and two colleagues. The United National Movement said five members from its youth office had been taken away too.

Authorities also raided the home of an activist from Daitove, a large anti-government Facebook group that helps detained protesters, and then moved to the home of its co-founder Nancy Woland. They also targeted activists from other movements.

Gvaramia was taken initially to a detention centre of the outskirts of Tbilisi where many of the 300 detained protesters have been held, and then on to another detention centre in Marneuli, south of the capital, reports say.

The former head of an opposition TV channel, Gvaramia spent 13 months in jail for abuse of authority, but he was pardoned in June 2023 by pro-Western President Salome Zourabichvili.

Amnesty International said at the time the charges against him were groundless and politically motivated.

Georgian Dream has been stung by a series of resignations, including ambassadors to the US, Czech Republic, the Netherlands and other countries. The deputy foreign minister has also stepped down, but so far they have steered clear of speaking publicly.

Tea Maisuradze posted on X that it had been honour to serve Georgia’s interests, “fostering European and Euro-Atlantic integration” and she made clear she remained committed to Georgia’s future as part of the European Union.

Late on Wednesday night, Irakli Shaishmelashvili, who headed a unit in the interior ministry’s special tasks department, and was therefore heavily involved in forcing the dispersal of protests, stepped down from his job citing family reasons.

The only other reason he gave came from two emojis – a Georgian and an EU flag.

Donald Trump’s embattled nominee for defence secretary says he still has the president-elect’s backing after reports suggested his nomination may be in jeopardy over allegations of misconduct.

Trump is considering replacing Pete Hegseth with Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, the BBC’s partner CBS News reported, after Hegseth’s nomination came under intense scrutiny.

Since Trump nominated the former Fox News host, questions about Hegseth’s qualifications have been raised – and a past sexual assault allegation has surfaced.

Hegseth has denied any wrongdoing, and was never arrested or charged.

Hegseth, on Wednesday, did not address the DeSantis reports directly and told reporters that Trump had told him to “keep going, keep fighting”.

He spent most of the day in closed-door meetings on Capitol Hill, seeking to quell concerns and shore up support in the Senate.

“I spoke to the president this morning. (Trump) supports me fully. We’re not going anywhere,” Hegseth told the BBC, stopping to speak outside the Senate chamber.

In a post on X on Wednesday morning, Hegseth accused “the Left” of trying to smear him with “fake” stories.

But his nomination is also the subject of growing scrutiny by members of his own party – including US senators who have the power to confirm or deny his appointment when asked to vote on it.

“I think some of these articles are very disturbing,” Republican Senator Lindsey Graham told CBS on Tuesday. “He obviously has a chance to defend himself here, but some of this stuff is going to be difficult.”

“The president gets the benefit of the doubt with his nominees,” fellow Republican Senator Mike Rounds of South Dakota told the BBC. “But we still have a role to play. We’ll ask him questions and we’ll go from there.”

Other Republicans signalled that they supported Hegseth despite the controversies.

Senator Rick Scott of Florida said he believed Hegseth would receive a Senate confirmation. He told reporters that Hegseth was “somebody that’s clearly smart, and he’s somebody that clearly wants to make changes.”

DeSantis, who was elected Florida governor in 2018, did not reply to a request for comment. A spokesperson for Trump declined to say whether DeSantis was under consideration for the post.

DeSantis ran against Trump in the Republican primary, and before dropping out, he was considered by some to be “Trump 2.0” – a Republican who could deliver Trump’s populist agenda without the baggage.

The latest speculation – first reported by the Wall Street Journal – comes as Hegseth meets members of Congress this week to discuss the job and drum up support.

Jasmine Crockett, a House Democrat from Texas and vocal Trump critic, does not view DeSantis as a better choice.

Like Hegseth, Crockett says DeSantis will “continue the culture war issues” he battled as Florida governor that could hinder the military’s “problem with recruitment”.

A graduate of Princeton and Harvard universities, Hegseth was an infantry platoon leader in Guantanamo Bay and Iraq, and was awarded the Bronze Star Medal.

In nominating Hegseth, who is also a former Fox News TV host, Trump highlighted the former soldier’s education, and his military experience in Afghanistan and Iraq.

“With Pete at the helm, America’s enemies are on notice – our military will be great again, and America will never back down,” Trump wrote.

But even as a veteran of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the 44-year-old does not have the extensive experience typical for the cabinet position. He also would be the second-youngest person to serve in the office.

In addition, since his nomination, a police report detailing accusations of an alleged sexual assault in 2017 has surfaced.

The woman quoted in the complaint said that Hegseth, then a Fox host, took her phone and blocked the door to a hotel room while at a Republican conference in California.

Hegseth denies any wrongdoing, saying the encounter was consensual.

In an interview published Wednesday, conservative journalist Megyn Kelly asked Hegseth if he had assaulted a woman in Monterey, California, in 2017.

“Absolutely not,” he replied.

His mother, Penelope Hegseth, defended her son on the Fox and Friends programme on Wednesday morning after the New York Times published details of an email she wrote to him in 2018, accusing him of routinely mistreating women.

“I wrote that in haste. I wrote that with deep emotions,” she said of the email, adding that her son and his first wife were “going through a very difficult divorce”.

“He’s redeemed, forgiven, changed. I think we all are after seven years,” she said.

• Police report details sexual assault allegations against Hegseth
• Hegseth paid accuser to save Fox News job, but denies claim
• Who else has joined Trump’s team so far?

In addition to the accusations, some of Hegseth’s past comments about how he might change the defence department have also raised eyebrows.

On a recent podcast, Hegseth said the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff – the top military leader in the US – should be fired, along with any military leader “involved in any of the DEI [diversity, equity and inclusion] woke [expletive]”.

He also has argued that women should not serve in combat roles because this practice had not made the military “more effective” or “more lethal”.

“As we think about his comments that talk about DEI, it’s yet another disqualifying attribute that he has,” Representative Marilyn Strickland, a Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, told the BBC.

There is increasing scepticism about Hegseth’s chances of getting enough votes to be confirmed by the Senate, CBS reports.

At least four Republican senators would be likely to vote against him if they voted today, two sources told the news outlet.

Republicans are expected to have a three-seat majority in the Senate, with 53 out of 100 senators, which must confirm cabinet-level positions in Trump’s new team. Losing four Republican votes would be enough to sink Hegseth’s nomination, provided Democrats and independents also vote against him.

Hegseth is not Trump’s first controversial nomination before he returns to the White House.

Former Florida Congressman Matt Gaetz, who Trump nominated for US attorney general, also faced scrutiny over allegations of sexual misconduct – which he denied – that were the subject of a congressional report.

Gaetz eventually withdrew his nomination in late November, saying that the controversy against him “was unfairly becoming a distraction” from the work of the incoming Trump administration.

• How these new recruits will be vetted
• What Trump can and can’t do on day one
• How undocumented migrants feel about deportations
• Can RFK Jr make America healthy again?
• The rise and fall of Matt Gaetz, in eight wild days

North America correspondent Anthony Zurcher makes sense of US politics in his twice weekly US Election Unspun newsletter. Readers in the UK can sign up here. Those outside the UK can sign up here.

A South Carolina mother is suing toy company Mattel after it mistakenly printed the address of a pornographic website on the packaging of a doll.

The company released the singing dolls last month ahead of release of the film Wicked, starring Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande.

Mattel apologised for what it described as an “unfortunate error” and recalled the dolls.

But Holly Ricketson filed a civil lawsuit on Tuesday, claiming she bought the doll for her minor daughter who then visited the adult entertainment website on the packaging.

Her daughter immediately showed her the site featuring “hardcore, full-on nude pornographic images,” the lawsuit claims. They were “horrified” by what they saw and suffered emotional distress, her lawyers added.

The court documents say that the pornographic website was an “inexcusable error” which rendered the dolls “unfit for their intended purpose”.

They also claim the company has not offered any refunds, despite the error.

Ms Ricketson said she would not have bought the doll had she been aware of the mistake.

The class action lawsuit is seeking $5m (£3.94m) in damages for anyone in the United States who bought the dolls with the error on their packaging.

It also accuses Mattel of negligence, selling products unfit for sale, and violating California consumer protection laws.

The musical Wicked, based on a book inventing the backstory of the Wicked Witch of the West, premiered on Broadway in 2003 and has been running on the West End for two decades.

The film adaptation with Ariana Grande playing Galinda and British actor Cynthia Erivo starring as Elphaba was released in the US and UK on 22 November.

According to Box Office Mojo, since its release last month, it has grossed $263.2 million in the United States and $360.3 million worldwide.

Mattel has been approached for comment.

A man in Canada’s far north leapt onto a polar bear to protect his wife from being mauled, police say.

The unnamed man suffered serious injuries but is expected to recover, according to the Nishnawbe Aski Police Service.

The couple left their house at around 05:00 local time (11:00 GMT) on Tuesday to find their dogs, when a bear – which was in the driveway of their home – lunged at the woman.

The incident happened in Fort Severn First Nation, a small community of about 400 people in the far north of Ontario.

“The woman slipped to ground as her husband leapt onto the animal to prevent its attack,” police said in a statement. “The bear then attacked the male, causing serious but non-life-threatening injuries to his arm and legs.”

A neighbour arrived with a gun and shot the bear several times. It retreated into nearby woods where it died of its injuries.

The man was transported to a community nursing station where he was treated for his injuries.

Nishnawbe Aski police said they “continued to patrol the area to ensure no other bears were roaming the community”.

Alysa McCall, a scientist at Polar Bear International, told the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) that polar bears rarely attack humans.

When an attack occurs, the bear is often hungry, young and unwell, she said.

Normally the bears are far from human settlements, instead preferring to spend their time at sea hunting ice seals. But climate change has led to temperature fluctuations, breaking up ice and in some cases driving bears inland to look for food.

“If you’re attacked by a polar bear, definitely do not play dead — that is a myth,” she told CBC. “Fight as long as you can.”

Police in New York are using facial recognition technology and a discarded mobile phone to track down the killer of a healthcare chief executive.

UnitedHealthcare boss Brian Thompson, 50, was fatally shot in the back on Wednesday morning outside the Hilton hotel in Midtown Manhattan.

The attacker fled the scene without taking any of Thompson’s belongings. Police believe the victim was targeted in a pre-planned killing.

They are focusing on a surveillance image taken in a branch of Starbucks just before the shooting.

Here’s what we know about the suspect and the investigation.

• Follow live updates on the search for the suspect

The shooting took place at about 06:45 EST (11:45 GMT) in a busy part of Manhattan close to Times Square and Central Park. Thompson had been scheduled to speak at an investor conference later in the day.

According to police, the suspect – who was clad in a black face mask and light brown or cream-coloured jacket – appeared to be waiting for Thompson for five minutes outside the Hilton hotel where he was expected to speak.

Thompson, who arrived on foot, was shot in the back and leg, and was pronounced dead about half an hour later at a local hospital.

• Story in full: Police hunt gun-wielding killer of UnitedHealthcare CEO

New York Police Department (NYPD) Chief of Detectives Joseph Kenny has revealed that the suspect’s weapon appeared to jam, but that he was able to quickly fix it and keep shooting.

CCTV footage appears to show the gunman had fitted a suppressor, also known as a silencer, to his pistol, BBC Verify has established.

Video shows him fleeing the scene on foot. Officials initially said the suspect used an electric Citi Bike owned by Lyft.

But Lyft, which owns and operates Citi Bike, later said it had been told by the NYPD that one of its vehicles had not been used, according to the BBC’s US partner, CBS News.

So far, the investigation into Thompson’s killing has centred on a few clues that police are using to identify the suspect.

Police revealed the suspect was photographed at a nearby Starbucks just minutes before the shooting.

While he is masked in the image, police sources told CBS that the mask is pulled down far enough so that his eyes and part of his nose can be seen.

With that, investigators are using facial recognition software to try to find a match.

Additionally, police are testing three bullet casings and three live rounds found at the scene for DNA.

The words “deny,” “defend” and “depose” were discovered on the casings, according to US media reports.

A mobile phone was discovered in an alley along the suspect’s escape route. Police say they are “working through” the phone.

Investigators also said they would search Thompson’s room at the nearby Marriott, which is down the street from where the incident took place.

Thompson joined UnitedHealth, the biggest private insurer in the US, from accountancy firm PricewaterhouseCoopers in 2004.

He rose through the ranks and became CEO in 2021, leading the company through some very profitable years.

• Who was Brian Thompson?

Investigators have so far not identified a motive in the killing, although police did note that the assailant fled without taking any of Thompson’s belongings.

In an interview with MSNBC, Thompson’s wife said that there had “been some threats” against him earlier, although she was unable to provide details.

“I just know that he said there were some people that had been threatening him,” she said.

According to police in Thompson’s hometown of Maple Grove, Minnesota, there had previously been one suspicious incident at his home in 2018.

The incident was cleared with no criminal activity detected. No additional details were provided.

Republicans will hold a narrow majority in the US House of Representatives next year, after Democrats won the final uncalled race in California on Tuesday.

A slender win for Democratic candidate Adam Gray in California’s 13th congressional district leaves his party on 215 seats in the lower chamber of Congress, compared with the Republicans’ 220.

The trifecta of House, Senate and presidency – last achieved at the start of Donald Trump’s first term in 2017 – will give the president-elect significant power to enact his agenda on the economy, immigration and other key issues.

But with a narrow House majority Republicans could still struggle to secure enough votes for some actions.

A majority is achieved in the 435-seat chamber when a party wins 218 seats – which the Republicans surpassed.

The final congressional race to be called in the country was in California’s Central Valley – nearly a month after America went to the polls on 5 November. It is not unusual for some contests to take days or weeks to be called.

The race ended in victory for Gray over the Republican incumbent John Duarte, by a margin of fewer than 200 votes, according to the BBC’s US partner CBS News.

Gray said it showed the area was “ready for independent and accountable leadership that always puts the Valley’s people ahead of partisan politics”.

In the presidential contest, Trump beat Kamala Harris in all seven closely watched swing states – handing him a decisive advantage as he mounted a comeback unmatched by any previously defeated president in modern times.

• Republicans win House in major boost for Trump
• US election results in full
• How big was Trump’s win exactly?
• Who has joined Trump’s top team?

Trump has vowed swift action in his first 100 days in office, including the start of mass deportations of unlawful migrants in the US.

And with the next mid-term elections set for 2026, the president-elect is expected to enjoy at least two years of limited congressional oversight.

The election results also leave Democrats with less leverage to challenge policies they disagree with, though narrow margins mean Republicans in the Senate could still struggle to secure enough votes for some actions.

The House majority could be further eaten away with Trump’s selection of a number of Republican lawmakers for key jobs in his incoming administration- notable Elise Stefanik and Michael Waltz.

There is already one vacancy after the resignation of Trump ally Matt Gaetz from the House.

Gaetz left Congress after being lined up to be the next attorney general – only to withdraw after days of debate over whether a committee should release a report on sexual misconduct allegations against him. He denied wrongdoing.

• How Trump’s new recruits will be vetted
• What he can and can’t do on day one
• How undocumented migrants feel about deportations
• Can RFK Jr make America healthy again?
• The rise and fall of Matt Gaetz, in eight wild days

North America correspondent Anthony Zurcher makes sense of US politics in his twice weekly US Election Unspun newsletter. Readers in the UK can sign up here. Those outside the UK can sign up here.

The regular British army could be wiped out in as little as six months if forced to fight a war on the scale of the Ukraine conflict, a defence minister has warned.

Alistair Carns said a rate of casualties similar to that prompted by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine would lead to the army being “expended” within six to 12 months.

He said it illustrated the importance of having reserves in order to be able to fight in a “war of scale”.

Official figures show the army had 109,245 personnel on 1 October, including 25,814 volunteer reservists.

Carns, a former Royal Marines colonel who is also a reservist, said Russia was suffering losses of around 1,500 soldiers, killed or wounded, a day.

“In a war of scale – not a limited intervention, but one similar to Ukraine – our army for example on the current casualty rates would be expended, as part of a broader multinational coalition, in six months to a year,” he added.

In a speech on reserves at the Royal United Services Institute defence think tank in London, Carns, the minister for veterans and people, said: “That doesn’t mean to say we need a bigger army, but it does mean we must be able to generate depth and mass rapidly in the event of a crisis.

“The reserves are critical, absolutely central, to that process.

“Without them we cannot generate mass, we cannot meet the plethora of defence tasks and challenges that we require, and we cannot seamlessly integrate the very best experts into the heart of our armed forces.”

Speaking separately at the same think tank, the head of the armed forces said it was important to note there was only a “remote” chance that Russia would launch a “significant direct attack or invasion” on the UK, or other Nato member.

Admiral Sir Tony Radakin added that Russia “knows the response would be overwhelming, whether conventional or nuclear”.

But he added that it showed the need for nuclear deterrence to be “kept strong and strengthened,” warning that the world was entering a “third nuclear age” following the Cold War and subsequent period of disarmament.

This new age would be defined by the “almost total absence of the security architectures that went before,” and more countries having nuclear weapons.

He added that China’s increasing nuclear weapons stockpile meant the United States could face a “two-peer challenge” from Beijing and Moscow, with both countries possessing significant arsenals.

Army reservists serve in their spare time, getting paid to train outside their main jobs.

Carns said the reality of wars such as the one being fought in Ukraine was that they were “attritional in nature”.

He also said the UK needed to “catch up with Nato allies” by placing a greater emphasis on its reserves.

A Ministry of Defence spokesperson said the UK’s armed forces were “amongst the best in the world and offer a 24/7 defence of the UK, operating alongside our allies and partners to prepare for any event”.

“The Strategic Defence Review will look at the threats we face and the capabilities we need so that our Armed Forces are better ready to fight, more integrated and more innovative,” they added.

“Our Reserves are an essential and extremely valued element of the Armed Forces and the contributions they make to our resilience and our ability to call on additional personnel when required are vital.”

Earlier, the prime minister’s official spokesman said the Budget had “invested billions of pounds into defence”.

Last month, Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff Lieutenant General Sir Rob Magowan told MPs on the Defence Select Committee: “If the British Army was asked to fight tonight, it would fight tonight.

“I don’t think anybody in this room should be under any illusion that if the Russians invaded eastern Europe tonight, then we would meet them in that fight.”

Earlier on Wednesday, Foreign Secretary David Lammy urged Nato’s European members to step up their defence spending ahead of Donald Trump’s return to the White House.

The US president-elect has accused European countries of relying on American taxpayers for their security.

At a meeting of Nato’s foreign ministers in Brussels, Lammy said “the time to act is now” – although the UK government has yet to set out its own plans for increasing its spending on defence to 2.5% of national output.

He highlighted Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and its involvement in conflicts around the world, including the Middle East.

“In the United Kingdom, we are at 2.3%, heading to 2.5% as soon as we can get there, and we urge all allies across the Nato family to get serious about defence spending.

“All of our populations require us to understand the tremendous security challenges that we are facing at this time,” he added.

The northeastern Indian state of Assam has banned the consumption of beef in public places including restaurants and events.

This is an expansion to an earlier rule that restricted the sale of beef near certain religious places like temples, Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma said on Wednesday.

However, the meat can still be purchased from shops and eaten within homes or private establishments in the state.

The consumption of beef is a sensitive issue in India, as cows are revered by Hindus, who comprise 80% of the country’s population.

Several states ruled by Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) – which is also in power in Assam – have cracked down heavily on cow slaughter in recent years.

About two-thirds of India’s 28 states, many of them governed by the BJP, have partially or fully banned cattle slaughter and beef consumption (though consumption of buffalo meat is legal in some of these places).

In many parts of India, cow vigilante groups have been accused of enforcing the ban through violence, often leading to deadly attacks on Muslim meat sellers and cattle traders and Dalits (formerly untouchables), for whom beef is a staple and cheap form of protein.

In Assam, the sale and purchase of beef was banned in 2021 in areas where Hindus, Jains and Sikhs – who don’t usually eat beef – live. That law also prohibited the sale of beef near temples.

Sarma said that the new ban on public consumption will be added to that existing law.

The decision comes days after India’s main opposition party Congress claimed that Sarma had used beef to win a by-election in Samaguri, a Muslim-majority constituency – a charge denied by the BJP.

Congress legislator Rakibul Hussain had said that by “offering beef” to voters, the chief minister had “betrayed” his own party’s Hindu nationalist values.

The statements sparked a political slugfest, with Sarma on Wednesday saying he was willing to impose a complete ban on beef in the state, if that’s what the Congress wanted.

Meanwhile, other political parties have criticised the ban, saying it interfered with people’s right to eat what they want.

“If they cannot ban beef in Goa or other northeastern states, why in Assam?” said Hafiz Rafiqul Islam, a member of the All India United Democratic Front.

The sale and consumption of beef is legal in some states, including Goa and Arunachal Pradesh, which are ruled by the BJP.

Syrian rebels say they have taken control of the major city of Hama, after the military withdrew its troops amid fierce battles.

The leader of the Islamist militant group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), Abu Mohammed al-Jawlani, declared “victory” in the city and vowed there would be “no revenge”.

Earlier, a rebel commander said HTS fighters and their allies had taken over a prison and released inmates, while the military said it had redeployed troops to “preserve civilian lives and prevent urban combat”.

Hama is home to one million people and is 110km (70 miles) south of Aleppo, which the rebels captured last week after launching a surprise offensive from their stronghold in the north-west.

The rebel commander told residents of Homs, which is the next city south on the highway from Aleppo to Damascus, that “your time has come”.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR), a UK-based monitoring group, says that more than 720 people, including 111 civilians, have been killed across the country since the start of the rebel offensive eight days ago.

More than half a million people in Syria have been killed since a civil war erupted in 2011 after President Bashar al-Assad’s government cracked down violently on peaceful pro-democracy protests.

Earlier this week, the United Nations expressed alarm at the sudden escalation of the conflict and warned that the country was “grave danger of further division, deterioration, and destruction”.

President Assad has vowed to “crush” the rebels and accused Western powers of trying to redraw the map of the region, while his key allies Russia and Iran have offered their “unconditional support”.

Russian warplanes have intensified their strikes on rebel-held areas in recent days, Iran-backed militias have sent fighters to reinforce the government’s defensive lines, and Iran has said it is ready to send additional forces to Syria if asked.

Turkey, which supports the Syrian opposition but has denied reports that it is involved in the HTS-led offensive, has urged Assad to engage in a political process with the opposition to bring an end to Syria’s 13-year civil war.

Turkish-backed rebel factions have meanwhile capitalised on the government’s retreat in the north by launching a separate offensive on a pocket of territory near Aleppo that was controlled by a Kurdish-led militia alliance, the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). Turkey, which has a large restive Kurdish minority, considers the Kurds in Syria as a threat.

Before the start of the rebel offensive, the government had regained control of Syria’s main cities with the help of Russia, Iran and Iran-backed militias. However, large parts of the country remained out of its control.

The rebels’ last stronghold was in Aleppo and Idlib provinces, which border Turkey and where more than four million people were living, many of them displaced from government-held areas.

The enclave was dominated by HTS, which is designated as a terrorist organisation by the UN, US, Turkey and other countries because it was al-Qaeda’s affiliate in Syria until it formally broke ties in 2016.

A number of allied rebel factions and jihadist groups were also based there, along with Turkish-backed SNA factions and Turkish forces.

French President Emmanuel Macron will address the nation on Thursday night, a day after Prime Minister Michel Barnier was ousted in a no-confidence vote.

The presidency said on Thursday that Barnier had resigned his post, but would remain in office on a caretaker basis with his ministers until a new government was appointed.

Names for a new prime minister have been swirling, including Defence Minister Sébastien Lecornu, Interior Minister Bruno Retailleau and centrist former presidential candidate François Bayrou.

But finding a name that would not immediately be shot down by one of the large parliamentary factions could take some time, as it did in the summer, when former PM Gabriel Attal stayed on as caretaker for two months.

Barnier’s government collapsed after MPs voted overwhelmingly in support of the motion against him, just three months after he was appointed by Macron.

Wednesday night’s vote was the first time a French government had been voted down by parliament in more than 60 years.

Marine Le Pen’s far right and the left-wing New Popular Front both united to censure Barnier’s government after the former Brexit negotiator used special powers to force through his budget without a vote.

A total of 331 voted in support of the motion, far more than the 288 required for it to pass.

Barnier presented the resignation of his government after the vote, while the budget which triggered his downfall was automatically withdrawn.

As president, Macron is constitutionally unaffected by Barnier’s resignation.

But many opposition politicians are increasingly open about wanting to force him to resign and call early presidential elections – something Macron has insisted is off the cards.

The left-wing alliance New Popular Front (NFP), which won the most seats in the parliamentary elections, had previously criticised Macron’s decision to appoint centrist Barnier as prime minister over its own candidate.

Alongside the far-right National Rally (RN), it deemed Barnier’s budget – which included €60bn (£49bn) in deficit reduction – unacceptable.

Marine Le Pen, the RN leader, said the budget was “toxic for the French”.

Ahead of the vote, Barnier told the National Assembly that voting him out of office would not solve the country’s financial problems.

“We have reached a moment of truth, of responsibility,” he said, adding that “we need to look at the realities of our debt”.

“I did not present almost exclusively difficult measures because I wanted to.”

In an interview with French broadcaster TF1 on Wednesday, Le Pen said there was “no other solution” than to remove Barnier.

Asked about the French president’s prospects, she replied: “I am not asking for the resignation of Emmanuel Macron.”

Many of her allies, however, are increasingly openly hoping they can force him to resign. RN adviser Philippe Olivier told Le Monde the president was “a fallen republican monarch, advancing with his shirt open and a rope around his neck up to the next dissolution [of parliament]”.

No new parliamentary elections can be held until July, so the current deadlock in the Assembly – where no group can hope to have a working majority – is set to continue.

Bitcoin’s price has blasted through the much-anticipated threshold of $100,000, raising questions about how much higher it could go – and whether it can shake off its notorious volatility.

The world’s largest cryptocurrency rose to around $103,400 shortly after 04:00 GMT on Thursday, before falling slightly.

Dan Coatsworth, investment analyst at AJ Bell, described it as a “magic moment” for the cryptocurrency and said it had a “clear link” to Donald Trump’s election victory.

Trump took to social media to celebrate the milestone, posting “congratulations Bitcoiners” and “you’re welcome!”

The president-elect had previously pledged to make the US the “crypto capital” and “Bitcoin superpower” of the world, helping to push Bitcoin’s price higher once he was elected president.

It broke through the $100k barrier after Trump said he would nominate former Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) commissioner Paul Atkins to run the Wall Street regulator.

Mr Atkins is seen as being far more pro-cryptocurrency than the current head, Gary Gensler.

“Clearly there is anticipation that the new administration is going to be somewhat more favourable to crypto than the old administration was,” said Andrew O’Neill, digital assets expert at S&P Global.

“So for the price of Bitcoin, I think that that’s what’s driven the trend so far [and it will] likely continue into the new year,” he added.

However, Bitcoin has a history of sharp falls as well as rapid rises – and some analysts have cautioned that is unlikely to change.

“A lot of people have got rich from the cryptocurrency soaring in value this year, but this high-risk asset isn’t suitable for everyone,” said Mr Coatsworth.

“It’s volatile, unpredictable and is driven by speculation, none of which makes for a sleep-at-night investment.”

During the US presidential election campaign, Trump sought to appeal to cryptocurrency investors with a promise to sack Gary Gensler – chair of the US financial regulator the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) – on “day one” of his presidency.

Mr Gensler’s approach to the cryptocurrency sector has been decidedly less friendly than Trump’s.

He told the BBC in September it was an industry “rife with fraud and hucksters and grifters”.

Under his leadership, the SEC brought a record 46 crypto-related enforcement actions against firms in 2023.

Mr Gensler said in November he would step down on 20 January – the day of Trump’s inauguration.

The choice of Paul Atkins to replace him at the helm of the SEC has been welcomed by crypto advocates.

Mike Novogratz, founder and chief executive of US crypto firm Galaxy Digital said he hoped the “clearer regulatory path” would now accelerate the digital currency ecosystem’s entry into “the financial mainstream.”

Bitcoin has seen fewer drastic falls in value during 2024 than in previous years.

In 2022 its price fell sharply below $16,000 after crypto exchange FTX collapsed into bankruptcy.

A number of key events besides Trump’s victory in the election have helped boost investor confidence that its value will keep going up.

The SEC approved several spot Bitcoin exchange traded funds (ETFs) allowing giant investment firms like Blackrock, Fidelity and Grayscale to sell products based on the price of Bitcoin.

Some of these products have seen billions of dollars in cash inflows.

But its potential to suddenly plummet in value serves as a reminder that it is not like orthodox currencies – and investors have no protection or recourse if they lose money on Bitcoin investments.

Carol Alexander, professor of finance at Sussex University, told BBC News that fear of missing out (FOMO) among younger people will see Bitcoin’s price continue to rise.

But she added that while this could spark a rise in other cryptocurrencies, many of the younger investors investing in meme coins are losing money.

Kathleen Breitman, co-founder of another cryptocurrency – Tezos – also had a word of caution for those tempted to invest in Bitcoin.

“These are markets that tend to move on momentum so you need to be extraordinarily cautious with it,” she told the BBC.

Muhammad was the top choice for parents naming their baby boys in England and Wales in 2023, with more than 4,600 children registered with the name.

It has been among the top 10 names for baby boys since 2016, but has now overtaken the previous favourite, Noah, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS).

There is, however, a level of regional variation with Muhammad not appearing in the top 10 for three regions of England.

Other spellings of the name Mohammed and Mohammad also made the top 100 list for England and Wales. The ONS considers each spelling as a separate name, with different variations of Muhammad proving popular in previous years.

Olivia remains the most popular choice for baby girls, followed by Amelia and Isla. These top three have remain unchanged since 2022.

Hyphenated names jumped in popularity for girls last year, standing at more than 19,140 names, up from around 12,330 the year before.

New entries to the top 100 list for girls include Lilah, Raya and Hazel, while Jax, Enzo and Bodhi made it into the top 100 for boys.

The ONS said on Thursday that pop culture “continues to influence” name choices, citing singers Billie Eilish and Lana Del Rey, the Kardashian-Jenner family’s children Reign and Saint, and film stars Margot Robbie and Cillian Murphy.

Other music artist names Miley, Rihanna, Kendrick and Elton also saw an increase in 2023. That was likely due to album releases, touring, or high-profile performances by Miley Cyrus, Kendrick Lamar, Elton John, and Rihanna, the ONS said.

Days of the week have been a further source of inspiration for parents, with names such as Sunday and Wednesday rising in popularity last year. The ONS drew a possible link with the Netflix series Wednesday, which was released in late 2022.

As for the seasons, Autumn ranks 96th in the list and Summer 86th, up 10 places from 2022, but 38 places lower than in 2013.

Meanwhile, royal names were less popular in 2023 – a decline that forms part of an ongoing trend.

George, Archie, Harry and Charlotte have all become less popular in recent years, as have Elizabeth and Charles.

Data for 2022’s top baby names was released last May amid changes to resources.

Publishing dates for 2024’s most popular picks have not yet been confirmed.

A chaotic night in South Korea produced scenes most thought were consigned to the nation’s history.

One in particular has caught the attention of many: a woman confronting soldiers who were sent to block lawmakers from entering the National Assembly.

Footage of Ahn Gwi-ryeong, 35, a spokesperson for the opposition Democratic Party, grabbing the weapon of a soldier during the commotion has been shared widely online.

“I didn’t think… I just knew we had to stop this,” she told the BBC Korean Service.

Ahn made her way to the assembly building as soldiers descended on it, shortly after the president declared martial law across South Korea.

Like many in South Korea’s younger generation, the word “martial law” was foreign to her. It was last declared in 1979.

When Ahn first heard the news, she admitted “a sense of panic took over”.

• Fear, fury and triumph: Six hours that shook South Korea
• The president’s gamble backfired: What was he thinking?
• What is martial law and why was it declared?
• How two hours of martial law chaos unfolded

When martial law is declared, political activities like rallies and demonstrations are banned, strikes and labour actions are prohibited, and media and publishing activities are controlled by the authorities. Violators can be arrested or detained without a warrant.

Shortly after the declaration of martial law, opposition leader Lee Jae-myung called on lawmakers to gather in the National Assembly and hold a vote to annul the declaration.

Arriving at the assembly building just past 23:00 local time, Ahn recalled turning off office lights to avoid detection as helicopters circled overhead.

By the time she reached the main building, soldiers were engaged in a stand-off with officials, aides and citizens.

She said: “When I saw the armed soldiers… I felt like I was witnessing the regression of history.”

Ahn and her colleagues were desperate to prevent the troops from entering the main building, where the vote would be held.

They locked the revolving doors from the inside and piled furniture and other heavy objects in front of the doors.

When the military began advancing, Ahn stepped forward.

“Honestly, I was scared at first,” she said, adding: “But seeing such confrontation, I thought, ‘I can’t stay silent’.”

The assembly passed the resolution calling for the lifting of martial law at around 01:00. All 190 members who were present voted to repeal it.

At 04:26, President Yoon announced he was reversing his decision.

After the chaos subsided, Ahn slept for a short time inside the assembly building.

She continued: “I was actually a little scared to go outside the assembly in the morning because there didn’t seem to be any taxis running, and after such a storm last night, it was hard to get back to reality.”

During her conversation with the BBC, Ahn was wearing the same black turtleneck and leather jacket she had been wearing in the footage from the night before.

At times, she was overcome with emotion.

“It’s heartbreaking and frustrating that this is happening in 21st century Korea,” she said.