These were already turbulent times in Romania.

But as people here navigate the late winter ice and slush on Bucharest’s elegant streets, the abrupt departure of the Tate brothers by private jet has left a fresh trail of confusion and unanswered questions in its wake.

A country grappling with a cancelled presidential election, its future in Europe, its support for neighbouring Ukraine, widespread corruption, and collapsing faith in public institutions, is now left pondering why two controversial foreigners, facing a raft of complex but serious criminal charges, have been treated with such apparent lenience; their confiscated assets and their passports suddenly returned to them.

Was a secret deal done between Romania’s government and the Trump administration? If so, in these increasingly transactional times, what does Romania get in return? Or was this more like a pre-emptive gesture of good will towards the American president, a gift to lay at Donald Trump’s imperious feet?

Or are we searching for conspiracies when the truth is probably far more chaotic?

As foreign leaders – from Volodymyr Zelensky to Sir Keir Starmer – travel to Washington DC bearing deals and other apparent peace offerings, one might ask who could blame Romania, a staunch NATO ally navigating a host of internal and external challenges, for trying to keep an increasingly unpredictable US administration on side?

“It’s a matter of life (or death) for Romania,” said security analyst George Scutaru, describing his country’s need to shore up Western support in the face of growing pressure from the Kremlin.

Declining to comment on the Tate issue specifically, Scutaru said it was clear Moscow was seeking to undermine Romania’s democracy and that the government had good reason to seek ways to remind the Trump administration of the many advantages – commercial, diplomatic, and military – of continuing to back it.

But if the Tate brothers are part of that equation, it is already clear that many Romanians are not impressed.

This is a country already facing a strong populist backlash against an elite ruling class that is widely seen as corrupt and out of touch with the struggles of ordinary people who feel treated as second-class citizens – a mere source of cheap labour – within the European Union.

So, the sight of the Tates appearing to receive special treatment plays into the notion that Romania’s institutions are hollow and cater only to those with money.

“For me, what has happened is unacceptable. We cannot allow Romania’s image to be tarnished by impunity and defiance,” fumed Elena Lasconi, a prominent presidential candidate here, expressing deep concern that Romanian prosecutors’ sudden decision to relax the Tates’ travel restrictions was the result of “external influence.”

“It’s my personal perception that probably there is… pressure on the Romanian political system, as logically the prosecutor would have applied very strict rules to control (the Tates) and probably the United States would haven’t been a place where they would be allowed to travel (due to concerns they would not be extradited if they failed to return),” said international human rights lawyer, Silvia Tabusca.

It is beyond doubt that Andrew Tate’s lucrative brand of assertive masculinity has earned him allies in President Trump’s administration. One of his former lawyers, Paul Ingrassia, now works in the White House.

Many in the so-called “manosphere” see Tate as a persecuted hero who has just been rescued from Romania’s corrupt clutches.

There is also a more nebulous far-right alignment between some pro-Trump and pro-Tate figures in the US, far-right and allegedly pro-Russian forces in Romania, and the Kremlin itself, which stands accused of plotting to weaken Bucharest’s pro-western stance.

But the picture is not clear cut.

President Trump distanced himself from the brothers’ case on Thursday and there are signs of a broader push-back in the US, with the governor of Florida Ron DeSantis making it clear the Tates are “not welcome” in his state, amid plans to open a “preliminary inquiry” into allegations against them of human trafficking and violence against women.

Meanwhile in Bucharest, the theory that Romania’s government cut a deal with the US to release the brothers is treated with caution by some analysts.

“I think the chances (of such a deal) are fifty-fifty,” said Sorin Ionita, a political commentator, questioning the ability of Romania’s various institutions and ministries to arrange a “coherent” policy concerning the Tates.

“I’m not sure they coordinate. Did they manage to demand something in exchange (from the US)? I’m not sure,” said Ionita, bemoaning a situation almost designed to persuade Romania’s public to lose faith in state institutions, and speculating that lower level “satellite” figures in an equally chaotic Trump administration were probably behind any deal in order “to extract money from the Tate brothers.” The BBC has seen no evidence of this.

“It’s very depressing to see,” he added.

As for the question of whether the Tates will return to Romania, as their lawyer has promised, to continue their legal battles, a degree of uncertainty endures.

The fact that most of their assets have been unfrozen could be seen as weakening the Romanian authorities’ ability to compel them to come back. The Tates themselves have also questioned whether they can receive a fair trial in Romania, complaining of a “conspiracy” against them.

And while Andrew Tate pointed out on Thursday that he and his brother currently face “no active indictment” in Romania, a more accurate way of describing their situation might be to say there is currently a lull in a long and complex legal process. An initial case has been returned to prosecutors for amendments, while a second and more substantial prosecution case against them is now pending.

“In the second case, we have 34 victims that cooperate and have been identified as victims. Among them are two minors, one a 17-year-old girl that has been recruited in order to be exploited by the criminal group. And the second girl is 15-years-old, and there is a crime for sexual acts with a minor in which they are also involved,” said the lawyer, Silvia Tabusca, outlining the allegations in the second case.

The brothers also face arrest on separate and unrelated criminal charges in the UK. The Tates deny any wrongdoing in all these cases.

In the coming months, Romania faces far more pressing challenges than the fate of two foreign celebrities. Presidential elections have been rescheduled for May and a leading candidate – often accused of being a Kremlin puppet – has just been detained and is facing six criminal charges including fascism and undermining the constitutional order.

With their self-declared misogyny, extreme views, and online personas, Andrew and Tristan Tate do chime with some of the themes preoccupying and dividing society in America and far beyond.

Clearly, they remain influential figures, particularly among boys and young men. But the brothers face years of legal battles which may well push them, and their still lucrative brand, further to the periphery of the far larger dramas now reshaping our world.

US investigators are trying to establish how Oscar-winning actor Gene Hackman and his wife, classical pianist Betsy Arakawa, died after the discovery of their bodies at their home in the US state of New Mexico.

Officials said on Friday that evidence points to Hackman having been dead since 17 February – 10 days before the couples’ bodies were found.

Here is what we know so far about the death of a Hollywood legend known for such films as The French Connection and The Conversation.

The bodies of the couple and one of their dogs were found by police on Wednesday at their home in Santa Fe, New Mexico, after a maintenance worker called emergency services.

In a recording of the 911 call obtained by the BBC, the emotional caller can be heard telling a dispatcher how he found the two bodies.

Hackman, 95, was discovered in a side room near the kitchen while Arakawa, 65, was found in a bathroom, at the property on Old Sunset Trail in Hyde Park.

The couple appeared to have been “dead for quite a while”, said Sheriff Adan Mendoza.

Arakawa’s body showed signs of “decomposition”, and “mummification” in the hands and feet, a sheriff’s detective said.

Hackman’s remains “showed obvious signs of death, similar and consistent” with those on his spouse.

A German Shepherd dog owned by the couple was found dead in a bathroom closet near to Arakawa.

No cause was given in police statements immediately after the announcement of the deaths.

The authorities reported no signs of injury but deemed the deaths “suspicious enough” to investigate and did not rule out foul play.

A carbon monoxide poisoning test came out negative for both Arakawa and Hackman, the Santa Fe Sheriff’s office said on Friday.

Near Arakawa’s head was a portable heater, which the detective determined could have been brought down in the event that she had abruptly fallen to the ground.

An autopsy and toxicology tests have been requested for both Hackman and Arakawa. Authorities said it could be a few months before the results of those are released.

The local utility company found no sign of a gas leak in the area and the fire department detected no indication of a carbon monoxide leak or poisoning, according to the search warrant.

A prescription bottle and scattered pills lay on the bathroom countertop close to Arakawa’s body. Prescription pills found in the home were common medications for thyroid and high blood pressure, according to a search warrant.

Hackman was discovered wearing grey tracksuit bottoms, a blue long-sleeve T-shirt and brown slippers. Sunglasses and a walking cane lay next to his body.

The detective suspected that the actor had suffered a sudden fall.

The circumstances of their death were deemed “suspicious enough in nature to require a thorough search and investigation”, the search warrant says, because the worker who called emergency services had found the front door of the property open.

However, the detective observed no sign of forced entry into the home. Nothing appeared out of place inside.

“There was no indication of a struggle,” said Sheriff Mendoza. “There was no indication of anything that was missing from the home or disturbed, you know, that would be indication that there was a crime that had occurred.”

Two other, healthy dogs were discovered roaming the property – one inside and one out.

Authorities said Hackman’s pacemaker last registered activity on 17 February, adding that this gives them a good assumption that was his last day of life.

But police said it is unclear who died first – Hackman or Arakawa.

The two maintenance workers who found the couple, one of whom called the emergency services, say they last had contact with the couple two weeks earlier.

The two said they had sometimes conducted routine work at the property, but rarely ever saw Hackman and Arakawa.

They had communicated with them by phone and text, primarily with Arakawa.

Hackman’s daughter Leslie Anne Hackman told the Mail Online that her father had been in “very good physical condition” despite his age, and had not undergone “any major surgeries” in recent months.

“He liked to do Pilates and yoga, and he was continuing to do that several times a week,” she said. “So he was in good health.”

The couple, married in 1991, had had a “wonderful marriage”, she added.

“I give credit to his wife, Betsy, for keeping him alive,’ she said. ‘[Betsy] took very, very good care of him and was always looking out for his health.”

The relationship between Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelensky was bad enough before the shouting match in the Oval Office.

President Trump had already called him a dictator and said Ukraine started the war – which is a lie.

Now the US-Ukraine alliance nurtured by Joe Biden is in pieces.

The public breakdown also signals a major crisis looming between European members of Nato and the US.

There will be many more doubts and questions about the US commitment to European security outside Ukraine. The biggest is whether President Trump would keep the promise his predecessor Harry Truman made in 1949 to treat an attack on a Nato ally as an attack on America.

Those concerns are based on what appears to be Trump’s determination to restore a strong relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

He has put heavy pressure on Ukraine while offering Putin big concessions – that would have to be made by the Ukrainians.

The security of Ukraine is coming a poor second – and Europeans are worrying theirs is too.

President Zelensky’s refusal to make those concessions has infuriated Trump.

It’s not just the minerals deal that he refused to sign. Ukrainians believe they are in a war for national survival – and that Putin would break any promise to end the war if he is not deterred.

That’s why Zelensky asked repeatedly for American security guarantees.

The meeting ignited into a shouting match after an intervention by Vice-President JD Vance.

There are suspicions now that the public row was – in the words of one diplomatic observer – a planned political mugging: either to force Zelensky to do America’s bidding, or to precipitate a crisis that would allow them to blame him for whatever happens next.

If Trump follows the breakdown of talks with a freeze on military aid, Ukraine will fight on. The questions are how effectively, and for how long.

Pressure will redouble on its European allies to take up the slack.

Don’t insult the leaders. Don’t insult the ideology. And don’t judge.

These are the rules tour guides read out to Western tourists as they prepare to drive across the border into North Korea, arguably the most secretive and repressive country in the world.

Then there is the practical information. No phone signal, no internet, no cash machines.

“The North Koreans aren’t robots. They have opinions, goals, and a sense of humour. And in our briefing we encourage people to listen to and understand them,” says Rowan Beard, who runs Young Pioneer Tours, one of two Western companies which resumed trips to the country last week, after a five-year hiatus.

North Korea sealed its borders at the outset of the pandemic, shutting out diplomats, aid workers and travellers, and making it nearly impossible to know what was happening there.

Since then, it has further isolated itself from most of the world, relying on support from Russia and China. Many doubted whether Westerners would ever be allowed back.

But after years of cajoling and several false starts, Rowan and some other tour leaders were given the green light to restart operations. He pulled together a group of eager travellers in just five hours, desperate to not miss the opportunity. Most were vloggers and travel addicts, some wanting to tick the final country off their list, along with the odd North Korea enthusiast.

Last Thursday the tourists, from the UK, France, Germany and Australia, drove over the border from China into the remote area of Rason for a four-night trip.

Among them was 28-year-old British YouTuber Mike O’Kennedy. Even with its reputation, he was startled by the extreme level of control. As with all trips to North Korea, the tourists were escorted by local guides, who followed a strict, pre-approved schedule. It included carefully choreographed trips to a beer factory, a school, and a new, fully stocked pharmacy.

Ben Weston, one of the tour leaders from Suffolk, likened visiting North Korea to “being on a school trip”. “You can’t leave the hotel without the guides,” he said.

“A couple of times I even had to let them know when I wanted to use the bathroom,” said Mike. “I’ve never had to do that anywhere in the world.”

Despite the chaperoning, Mike was able to spot snippets of real life. “Everyone was working, it didn’t feel like anyone was just hanging out. That was kind of bleak to see.”

On his trip to the school, a group of eight-year-olds performed a dance to animations of ballistic missiles hitting targets. A video of the spectacle shows girls and boys with red neckties, singing, while explosions flare on a screen behind them.

For now, tourists are being kept well away from the capital Pyongyang. Greg Vaczi from Koryo Tours, the other tour company allowed back in, admits the current itinerary lacks the “big-hitting monuments” of Pyongyang. He suspects authorities have chosen Rason as their guinea pig because the area is relatively contained and easy to control.

Set up as a special economic zone, to trial new financial policies, it operates as a mini capitalist enclave inside an otherwise socialist state. Chinese businesspeople run joint enterprises with North Koreans, and can travel in and out fairly freely.

Joe Smith, a seasoned North Korea traveller and former writer for the specialist North Korea platform NK News, was there on his third trip. “I feel like the more times you visit the less you know. Each time you get a little peek behind the curtain, which just leaves you with more questions,” he said.

Joe’s highlight was a surprise off-agenda visit to a luxury goods market, where people were selling jeans and perfumes, along with fake Louis Vuitton handbags and Japanese washing machines, probably imported from China. Here, the tourists were not allowed to take photos – an attempt to hide this consumer bubble from the rest of the country, they suspected.

“This was the only place people weren’t expecting us,” Joe said. “It felt messy and real; a place North Koreans actually go. I loved it.”

But according to the experienced tour leaders, the group’s movements were more restricted than on previous trips, with fewer opportunities to wander the streets, pop into a barbershop or supermarket, and talk to locals.

Covid was often cited as the reason, said Greg from Koryo Tours. “On the surface they are still concerned. Our luggage was disinfected at the border, our temperatures were taken, and about 50% of people are still wearing masks.” Greg cannot work out whether the fear is genuine, or an excuse to control people.

It is thought Covid hit North Korea hard, though it is difficult to know the extent of the suffering.

Local guides repeated the government line that the virus entered the country in a balloon sent over from South Korea, and was swiftly eradicated in 90 days. But Rowan, who has been to North Korea more than 100 times, sensed that Rason had been impacted by the tough Covid regulations. A lot of Chinese businesses had closed, he said, and their workers had left.

Even Joe, the experienced North Korea traveller, commented on how dilapidated the buildings were. “Places were dimly lit and there was no heating, apart from in our hotel rooms,” he said, noting a trip to a cold, dark and deserted art gallery. “It felt like they opened the doors just for us.”

The regime’s photographs might make North Korea look clean and shiny, Joe said, but in person you realise “the roads are awful, the pavements are wobbly, and the buildings are weirdly constructed”. His hotel room was old-fashioned and filthy, he said, resembling “his grandma’s living room”. The whole window was cracked.

“They’ve had five years to fix things. North Koreans are so sensitive about what they show tourists. If this is the best they can show, I dread to think what else is out there”, he said. Most of the country is kept well hidden, with more than four in 10 people believed to be undernourished and needing help.

One of the few chances tourists in North Korea get to interact with local people is through their guides, who sometimes speak English. On these recent trips they were surprisingly well-informed, despite the regime’s intense propaganda machine and information blockade. This is probably because they speak to the Chinese businesspeople who come and go, said Greg.

They knew about Trump’s tariffs and the war in Ukraine – even that North Korean troops were involved. But when Joe showed a photo from Syria, his guide was unaware President Assad had been toppled. “I carefully explained that sometimes when people don’t like their leader, they rise up and force them out, and at first he didn’t believe me.”

Such conversations need to be delicately handled. Strict laws prevent North Koreans from speaking freely. Ask or reveal too much and the tourists might put their guide or themselves at risk.

Mike admits there were times this made him nervous. On a trip to a North Korea-Russia Friendship House, he was invited to write in the visitors’ book. “I went blank and wrote something like ‘I wish the world peace.’ Afterwards my guide told me that was an inappropriate thing to write. That made me paranoid,” he said.

“Generally, the guides did a great job of making us feel safe. There were just a couple of moments when I thought, this is bizarre.”

For Greg from Koryo Tours, these interactions bring a deeper purpose to North Korea tourism: “North Koreans get the chance to engage with foreigners. This allows them to come up with new ideas, which, in a country this closed, is so important.”

But tourism to North Korea is contentious, especially as travellers have been allowed back before aid workers and most Western diplomats, including the UK’s. Critics, including Joanna Hosaniak from the Citizens Alliance for North Korean Human Rights, argue these trips mainly benefit the regime.

“This is not like tourism in other poor countries, where local people benefit from the extra income. The vast majority of the population don’t know these tourists exist. Their money goes to the state and ultimately towards its military,” she said.

One conversation has stuck in YouTuber Mike’s head. During his trip to the school, he was surprised when a girl, after meeting him, said she hoped to visit the UK one day. “I didn’t have the heart to tell her that her chances were very, very slim,” he said.

Was it pruning or felling?

The alleged chopping of centuries-old chinar trees in Indian-administered Kashmir has sparked outrage, with locals and photos suggesting they were cut down, while the government insists it was just routine pruning. The debate has renewed focus on the endangered tree and efforts to preserve it.

The chinar is an iconic symbol of the Kashmir valley’s landscape and a major tourist draw, especially in autumn when the trees’ leaves light up in fiery hues of flaming red to a warm auburn.

The trees are native to Central Asia but were introduced to Kashmir centuries ago by Mughal emperors and princely kings. Over the years, they have come to occupy an important place in Kashmiri culture.

But rapid urbanisation, illegal logging and climate change are threatening their survival, prompting authorities to take steps to conserve them.

The Jammu and Kashmir government has been geotagging chinar trees in an effort to keep track of them and their health. The project involves attaching a QR code to each tree with information about its location, age and other physical characteristics.

“We are ‘digitally protecting’ chinar trees,” says Syed Tariq, a scientist who’s heading the project. He explains that information provided by the QR code can help locals and tourists get to known more about a tree, but it can also help counter problems like illegal or hasty cutting of them.

The project has geotagged about 29,000 chinar trees so far, with another 6,000–7,000 still left to be mapped.

Despite its heritage value, there was no proper count of these trees, says Mr Syed. While government records cite 40,000, he calls the figure debatable but is certain their numbers have declined.

This is a problem because the tree takes at least 50 years to reach maturity. Environmentalists say new plantations are facing challenges like diminishing space. Additionally, chinar trees need a cool climate to survive, but the region has been experiencing warmer summers and snowless winters of late.

But on the bright side, these trees can live for hundreds of years – the oldest chinar tree in the region is believed to be around 700 years old. A majority of the trees are at least a few centuries old and have massive trunks and sprawling canopies.

The trees received maximum patronage during the Mughal period, which stretched from the early 1500s to the mid-1800s. Many of the trees that exist in the valley were planted during this period, Mr Syed says.

The Mughal kings, who ruled many parts of erstwhile India, made Kashmir their summer getaway due to its cool climate and beautiful scenery. They also erected “pleasure gardens” – landscaped gardens famous for their symmetry and greenery – for their entertainment.

The chinar enjoyed pride of place in these gardens and the trees were usually planted along water channels to enhance the beauty of the place. Many of these gardens exist even today.

According to government literature, in the 16th Century Mughal emperor Akbar planted around 1,100 trees in one such pleasure garden near the famous Dal Lake in Srinagar, but about 400 have perished over the years due to road-widening projects and diseases caused by pests.

Emperor Jahangir, Akbar’s son, is said to have planted four chinar trees on a tiny island in Dal Lake, giving it the name Char Chinar (Four Chinars) – now a major tourist draw. Over time, two trees were lost to age and disease, until the government replaced them with transplanted mature trees in 2022.

Interestingly, the chinar is protected under the Jammu and Kashmir Preservation of Specified Trees Act, 1969, which regulates its felling and export and requires official approval even for pruning. The law remains in force despite the region losing statehood in 2019.

But environmental activist Raja Muzaffar Bhat says authorities often exploit legal loopholes to cut down chinar trees.

“Under the garb of pruning, entire trees are felled,” he says, citing a recent alleged felling in Anantnag district that sparked outrage.

“The government is geotagging trees on one side, but cutting them on the other,” he says. He adds that while authorities remove trees for urban projects, locals also fell them illegally.

Chinar trees have durable hardwood, ideal for carvings, furniture and artefacts. Locals also use them for firewood and making herbal medicine.

Government projects like geotagging are raising awareness, says Mr Bhat. He adds that Kashmiris, deeply attached to the chinar as part of their heritage, now speak out against its felling or damage.

Last week, many posted photos of the allegedly chopped trees in Anantnag on X (formerly Twitter) while opposition leaders demanded that the government launch an investigation and take action against the culprits.

“The government should protect the trees in letter and in spirit,” Mr Bhat says.

“Because without chinar, Kashmir won’t feel like home.”

Pope Francis, who has been battling pneumonia for two weeks, has had an “isolated” breathing crisis in hospital, the Vatican has said.

It led to an episode of vomiting and a “sudden worsening of his respiratory condition” on Friday following the coughing “bronchospasm”.

The 88-year-old’s lungs had to be aspirated – cleared of the vomit – and he is now receiving gas through a face mask to help him breathe.

Vatican sources say the Pope’s doctors need 24-48 hours to determine whether there has been any damage or set back to his condition. For now they are not giving any prognosis.

The Pope remains alert and “in good spirits”, the sources say.

In a statement the Vatican said: “In the early afternoon of today, after a morning spent alternating respiratory physiotherapy with prayer in the chapel, the Holy Father presented an isolated crisis of bronchospasm which, however, led to an episode of vomiting with inhalation and sudden worsening of the respiratory condition.

“The Holy Father was promptly bronchoaspirated and began non-invasive mechanical ventilation, with a good response to gas exchange.”

Vatican sources said the latest crisis happened at around 14:00 local time, but did not say how long it lasted.

This latest episode comes after a couple of days in which Vatican statements had been slightly more positive, talking of a “slight improvement” in the pontiff’s condition.

This morning he was given Communion.

In an earlier medical update this morning, the Vatican had said the pontiff was showing signs of improvement and would remain in Rome’s Gemelli Hospital due to the complex clinical picture.

The Pope was admitted to hospital on 14 February after experiencing breathing difficulties for several days.

He was first treated for bronchitis before being diagnosed with pneumonia in both lungs.

Then, on 22 February, the Vatican said that the Pope had experienced a respiratory crisis and was in a “critical” condition, but later on Sunday released an update saying that he had “not presented any further respiratory crises”.

The following day, the Pope issued a statement asking Catholics to pray for him after he was unable to deliver the traditional Angelus prayer in person for the second week running.

But, while the Vatican said the Pope’s health is improving, it added that “further days of clinical stability are necessary to resolve the prognosis”.

The pontiff is particularly susceptible to pneumonia, an infection of the lungs that can be caused by bacteria, viruses or fungi, after he contracted pleurisy – an inflammation of the lungs – as a young man and had a partial lung removal.

The leader of the Roman Catholic Church has been admitted to hospital multiple times during his 12-year tenure, including being treated for bronchitis at the same hospital in March 2023.

From Argentina, Pope Francis is the first Latin American, and first Jesuit, to lead the Roman Catholic Church.

When Luna Sofia Miranda approached Sean Baker in a strip club in New York in 2022, she tried her best to charm him.

But he “very clearly did not want to buy a lap dance,” she says.

Miranda, who was 23 at the time, started asking why he and his wife were there.

“I’m very nosy,” she says. “So I kept asking them questions and I finally got it out of them. They were making a film about strippers.”

She told them she had studied acting, and – after a successful audition – got a call on her 24th birthday, to offer her a part in the film.

That film, Anora, is now seen as one of the frontrunners heading into the Oscars on Sunday.

• Anora star: Oscar talk is ‘overwhelming and amazing’

It’s directed by Baker, and stars Mikey Madison, who is up for best actress for her role as a New York stripper.

Madison, 25, relied on real-life strippers to help her perfect the part.

When she won a Bafta film award last month, she dedicated it to the sex worker community.

“I have been able to meet some of that community through my research of the film, and that’s been one of the most incredible parts of making the film,” she told us backstage.

They “deserve respect and don’t often get it. And so I had to say something,” she added.

We’ve been speaking to the actresses, strippers and dancers in the film about their experiences of working on it – and their thoughts on the finished product.

Some praised the film as realistic, particularly in its portrayal of the rejection and exhaustion that sex workers often feel. But others said the film was “limited”.

Edie Turquet was initially unsure whether to take part in the film.

The 21-year-old, who is British and appeared in Harry Potter spin-off Fantastic Beasts as a child, now lives in New York where she’s a student and a stripper.

She got cast as a background dancer in Anora after a casting agent spotted her in the club where she was working. But Turquet says the night before filming, she debated not showing up.

“I didn’t want to be part of a bad stripper film, or anything doing a disservice to our industry, so I was apprehensive,” she told me.

“Most films about strippers are super over-aestheticised, or bad and exploitative.”

Edie points to 2020 film Zola, about a waitress who goes to Florida for a weekend of stripping for quick cash. “I found it hyperbolic, totally overglamourising the work, and it felt like it was talking down to women,” she said.

“And don’t get me started on Pretty Woman, which is infuriating, especially the idea of a street worker played by Julia Roberts. Come on.”

But when Turquet realised Anora was a Sean Baker film, she changed her mind.

“His films are based on realism, he has a fly-on-the-wall style of filmmaking, which I love,” she said. “So I was down.”

Baker’s filmmaking skills were also what attracted Lindsey Normington to the film. The actress and stripper stars as Diamond, Anora’s workplace enemy.

She says she saw him at afterparty for a film premiere, and went up to him to tell him she was a fan.

They connected on Instagram, and months later, he contacted her to tell her he might have a role for her in a new film. “I fell to my knees in my house,” Normington said.

In the film, Anora is offered a chance at a fairytale escape when she meets and falls for the son of a wealthy Russian.

Miranda, an actress and stripper who plays Lulu, Anora’s best friend, says she was tasked with helping Madison sound like a real sex worker from New York.

“I shared a PDF of language and slang terms that only strippers from New York will understand,” she said.

One of those words was “whale”, which, Miranda explains, “is a customer who is like a bottomless pit of money. He will make your night. And he won’t make you work very hard for it at all.”

Also involved in the film was Kennady Schneider, a Los Angeles-based stripper and choreographer who trained Madison to dance.

She says Madison installed a pole at her house in LA, and the pair began working on her “sexy routine”.

“She put in so much work,” Schneider, 28, said. “She was so determined.”

Miranda said a lot of the film’s themes, on heartbreak and rejection, were relatable for her.

“Sometimes I feel like this shiny toy, that people want to play with. They go, ‘wow like you’re a stripper. You’re so cool.’ And then they just cast you aside and abandon you,” she said.

“I think about the ending a lot because I feel like Anora a lot.”

Turquet agrees, calling the ending “very relatable and poignant”, adding that it accurately depicts the “exhaustion and fatigue” strippers often feel.

“The sex industry has trauma built into it. It felt so real. It’s an incredible vulnerable industry,” she said.

“You’re putting yourself in danger every time you go to work. It’s a complex and exhausting job.”

But overall, she said has mixed feelings about the film.

“What a lot of stripper films miss – and what Anora starts but doesn’t go far enough on – is the moral question around men who buy sex,” she said.

“It’s the question of consent. Most of these films shy away from answering it, or looking into it.”

She said it also frustrates her that these characters “never exist outside their profession”.

“[Anora] is a pretty limited character,” she said. “We never learn anything about her. The film takes the perspective of [male leads] Igor and Vanya, in defining who she is.”

“It’s better than any film I’ve seen about it, but ultimately it’s limited as it’s not told by a sex worker,” she added. “I can’t wait till we’re telling our own stories and hopefully this opens the door to that.”

For Normington, the film reflected “the insecurity and competition and jealousy” that she has personally experienced in clubs.

“I appreciate that it’s not attempting to be a quintessential stripper movie.”

For Schneider, meanwhile, it was the film’s portrayal of the mundane nature of the job that struck a chord.

In the film’s early scenes, we see Anora at work, talking to clients in the club.

We also see her and the other strippers on a lunch break, eating from Tupperware boxes in a back room.

“It felt really accurate,” Schneider said.

“A lot of the time in [stripper] films, you have glamorisation, with money falling from the ceiling. Those moments do happen but they’re few and far between,” she said. “It’s much more of a quiet hustle.”

When Anora came out, special screenings were held for sex workers in New York and LA.

Footage circulated on social media shows the strippers banging their high-heeled platform pleaser shoes together over their heads, to show their appreciation at the end of the screenings.

“That is the most beautiful applause I’ve ever received, I don’t know if that will ever happen again,” Madison told us.

Now, all eyes are on the Oscars.

Miranda and Normington will both be attending. “It’s kind of silly to think that I’m going to the Oscars, but [at the same time] I’m at the club arguing with a stupid man over $20,” said Miranda.

“I feel like I’m living two lives.”

She said that Madison is “spot on” to say the sex worker community doesn’t get the respect it deserves, and said she hopes that Anora’s success will change that.

“My hope is that if this film wins an Oscar, it marks the beginning of a shift in Hollywood, where sex workers are respected, as workers in their own fields, but also as entertainers,” she said.

“If this film wins an Oscar, I want to see that.”

The Cook Islands may be small but the ambitions of its leader are mighty.

A range of deals Prime Minister Mark Brown signed with China without consulting the public or New Zealand – an ally to which the Cooks is closely tied – has caused increasing irritation and concern.

The agreements are the first of their kind with a country that is not a traditional ally. They cover infrastructure, ship-building, tourism, agriculture, technology, education and, perhaps crucially, deep-sea mineral exploration.

Brown says his decisions will be based on the “long-term interests” of the Cook Islands, which are remote, resource-rich and vulnerable to climate change.

Not everyone agrees with him. The new, wide-ranging deals with Beijing have led to protests on Rarotonga – the largest Cook Island – and a vote of no confidence against Brown in parliament, which he survived earlier this week. They have also worried Australia, another powerful ally.

New Zealand said it was “blindsided” by the China deals, but Brown believes his country is independent and does not need to consult Wellington on issues he says are of no concern to them.

He has, nevertheless, tried to reassure Australia and New Zealand that the deals with China don’t replace their relationships. But the apparent snub comes at a time when the West’s grip on the Pacific seems to be loosening.

The rise of China in the Pacific isn’t new. Whether it’s bagging a security deal in the Solomon Islands or providing medical services in Tonga, China’s presence in the region has been growing. And the US and its allies have made a consistent effort to counter that.

But now there is a new dynamic at play as the Trump administration upends relationships with allies such as Ukraine and appears increasingly unpredictable.

The Cook Islands has had what’s known as a “free association” relationship with New Zealand, a former coloniser, since the 1960s – meaning Wellington helps on issues like defence and foreign affairs, and that Cook Islanders hold New Zealand citizenship.

The two countries are very close. There are around 15,000 Cook Islanders living in the Pacific island nation, but as many as 100,000 live in New Zealand and Australia. Culturally, Cook Island Māori – who make up the majority of the population – are also closely related to, but distinct from, New Zealand Māori.

The deals with China aren’t the only sign that Brown wants to pull away from New Zealand which have caused concern. He recently abandoned a proposal to introduce a Cook Islands passport following a public outcry.

“[The relationship with NZ] connects us politically and connects us to our brothers and sisters of Aotearoa [the Māori word for New Zealand] – they left our shores to sail to Aotearoa. We need to remember that,” said Cook Islander Jackie Tuara at a recent demonstration against Brown’s deals with China.

In a nation that is not used to huge displays of protest, several hundred people gathered outside parliament in Rarotonga, holding up placards that read: “Stay connected with NZ”. Others waved their New Zealand passports.

“Let us stand in partnership with countries that have the same democratic principles as we are a democratic nation, are we not?” Ms Tuara said. “We don’t want to see our land and our oceans sold to the highest bidder. Those resources are for us – for our children, for their future.”

But for all those who are opposed to Brown’s recent moves away from New Zealand, there are plenty of Cook Islanders who back him.

China specialist Philipp Ivanov, in apparent agreement with the prime minister, says that “the Pacific island nations have their own agency, their own motivations and their own capabilities”.

He believes that the recent developments in the Cook Islands are “all part of that little great game that’s going on between Australia and China and New Zealand in the Pacific. It’s a whack-a-mole kind of game.”

While the US has long been a dominant force in security and military in the region, China has tried to strengthen its ties with the small but strategic Pacific Island nations through aid, infrastructure and security deals.

In response, the likes of the US and the UK have beefed up their diplomatic presence across the region. Australia too has made it clear it will redouble its support. But it’s unclear to what extent US President Donald Trump will continue his predecessor’s commitments in the region to counter China – and Beijing is taking advantage of that.

Last week, planes flying between New Zealand and Australia were diverted after China conducted military exercises involving live fire. Both Australia and New Zealand had been trailing the three Chinese warships that were making their way down the eastern coast of Australia in what experts say is an escalation and unexpected show of power.

“It’s a pretty efficient way of testing the diplomatic response in both the Australia-China and New Zealand-China bilateral relationship, and what the US is prepared to say in defence [of its allies],” says defence analyst Euan Graham, from the Australian Strategic Policy Institute.

“It’s also making the point that in the numbers game, China will always be ahead of smaller countries with smaller navies and Australia’s navy is at a historic low.”

China’s ambassador to Australia, Xiao Qian, told national broadcaster ABC that Beijing’s actions had been appropriate and he won’t apologise for it.

Australia’s Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has been keen to emphasise that no international laws were broken and that the drills were carried out in international waters. Indeed, many have pointed out that Australia and its allies often sail warships through the South China Sea.

“I’d see it as China wanting to capitalise on the chaotic effect that Trump is having right now,” says Mihai Sora, director of the Pacific Islands programme at Australia’s Lowy Institute. “China is taking advantage of that moment to [say], look Australia, you are actually alone. Where is the United States in all of this?”

Australia’s Foreign Minister Penny Wong freely admits “we are in a permanent state of contest in our region, that is the reality”.

In speaking out about the warships last week, Australia’s government was trying to reassure the public about China’s intentions, while also wanting to tell Australians that it’s all in hand. That is not a coincidence as Australia heads towards a federal election in the coming months.

“[Opposition leader Peter] Dutton comes from this national security and home affairs background, so the government doesn’t want to give him any air to criticise Labor,” Philipp Ivanov says. “Being weak on China would be disastrous for them, given what’s going on in the US and given our own elections.”

But it also brings into focus the dilemma this part of the world faces.

“Canberra will be contesting every single move that Beijing tries to make … and it reflects the fact that Canberra and Beijing have diverging strategic interests,” says James Laurenceson, the director of Australia-China Relations Institute at the University of Technology Sydney.

But, he adds, they also have “enormous commonalities” – China is Australia’s largest trading partner – and New Zealand’s – for instance.

“So you’ve got to be able to ride both these horses at the same time.”

It’s not an easy relationship – it never has been. The bigger surprise is that of the US, a traditional ally.

Although many in the Trump administration still describe China as a grave threat, US allies are unsure what to expect from the Washington-Beijing relationship.

And now, as Trump threatens steel and aluminium tariffs and a withdrawal of foreign assistance, Australia feels more isolated than ever. The recent activity of China’s warships in the Tasman Sea serves to highlight that isolation.

“I wouldn’t think of them as military acts, so much as political acts using military hardware,” says Mr Sora of the Lowy Institute.

“I think the political act is to say, look, we can do this anytime we want. You can’t do anything about it, and the United States is not doing anything about it, because they’re busy tearing down the global system.”

Donald Trump said he planned to hit goods from China with a new 10% tariff, the latest salvo in the US president’s steadily escalating trade fights.

Imports from China already face taxes at the border of at least 10%, after a Trump tariff order that went into effect earlier this month.

China’s ministry of foreign affairs said it “strongly” expressed its “dissatisfaction and resolute opposition” to the plans.

Trump also said on Thursday he intended to move forward with threatened 25% tariffs on imports from Canada and Mexico, which are set to come into effect on 4 March.

Trump’s comments came as officials from Mexico and Canada were in Washington for discussions aimed at heading off that plan.

Trump had announced the plans for 25% tariffs on Mexico and Canada for 4 February unless the two nations increased border security.

He paused the measures for a month at the last minute after the two countries agreed to increase border funding and talk more about how to combat drug trafficking.

On social media on Thursday, Trump wrote that he did not think enough action had been taken to address the flow of fentanyl to the US.

“Drugs are still pouring into our Country from Mexico and Canada at very high and unacceptable levels,” he wrote, adding that “a large percentage” of the drugs were made in China.

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum, at a press conference from the country’s National Palace, said in response: “As we know, [Trump] has his way of communicating.”

She added: “I hope we can reach an agreement and on 4 March we can announce something else.”

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau also said his country was working hard to reach a deal, warning tariffs from the US would prompt an “immediate and extremely strong response”.

Trump’s threats against Mexico and Canada have raised widespread alarm, as the North American economy is closely connected after decades of operating under a free trade agreement.

Leaders of the two countries have previously said they would impose retaliatory tariffs on the United States if the White House went ahead with its plans.

Tariffs are a tax collected by the government and paid for by the business bringing the goods into the country.

China, Mexico and Canada are America’s top three trade partners, together accounting for more than 40% of imports into the US last year.

Economists have warned tariffs on goods from the three countries could lead to higher prices in the US on everything from iPhones to avocados.

Trump’s call for an additional 10% levy on goods from China – which he said would also go into effect on Tuesday – had not been previously announced, though during his presidential campaign he backed border taxes on Chinese products of as much as 60%.

A spokesperson for China’s ministry of foreign affairs, Lin Jian, said that Trump was using the issue of the drug fentanyl entering the US from China as an “excuse” to threaten tariffs, adding it had one of the “strictest” drug control policies in the world.

“Pressure, coercion, and threats are not the correct way to deal with China,” he said.

Liu Pengyu, spokesperson for the Chinese Embassy, had earlier said that his country was already working with the US to address the concerns about fentanyl, and had made “visual progress” in areas such as information exchange, case cooperation and online advertisement cleanup.

“Reducing domestic drug demand and strengthening law enforcement cooperation are the fundamental solutions,” he said in a statement, which warned that Trump’s tariff moves were “bound to affect and undermine future counternarcotics cooperation between the two sides”.

“The unilateral tariffs imposed by the US will not solve its own problems, nor will it benefit the two sides or the world.”

Trump’s comments, which called for drug flow to stop or be “severely limited”, seemed to set the stage for Mexico and Canada to negotiate, said trade expert Christine McDaniel, a senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Washington University.

On Thursday, as tariff talks intensified, two imprisoned alleged leaders of the violent Zetas cartel long sought by the US – Miguel Angel Trevino Morales and his brother Oscar – were extradited.

Mexican media said they were part of a larger group of drug lords sent from Mexico to the US – a major step in terms of US-Mexico security relations.

Ms McDaniel said Trump’s demands of China were less clear, raising the likelihood that those measures will come into effect.

Trump’s initial round of tariffs on China was eclipsed by his threats against Canada and Mexico. But the potential for further duties raises questions about how businesses will respond.

Ms McDaniel said she expected the hit to be felt more in China.

“It’s not costless for the US, but so far it seems more costly for China,” she said.

The impact of tariffs, if they go into effect, is expected to be felt more in the Canadian and Mexican economies, which count on the US as a key export market.

But analysts have warned that the threat of the levies, even if they are never imposed, is still likely to have a chilling effect on investment, including in the US.

China has already responded to the first round of tariffs from the US with its own tariffs on US products, including coal and agricultural machinery.

Trump has dismissed fears about damage to the American economy.

As guests sat down on the red cinema-style seats in the screening room of a plush central London hotel, nobody could have imagined that, less than a month later, the BBC would find itself forced to apologise for serious and unacceptable flaws in the documentary that was about to be shown.

In the darkness, Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone unfolded over an hour, telling in bleak and upsetting detail the story of Gaza’s children over recent months of the war.

Screenings are standard practice for media companies, primarily for outside press to review a programme ahead of broadcast.

Also in the room was BBC News CEO Deborah Turness and other senior executives from the BBC’s news and current affairs to view what one described as a “landmark” piece of filmmaking.

But after the programme went out on BBC Two, it emerged that the child narrator at the heart of the film, 13-year old Abdullah, was the son of a Hamas government official. The outcry and accusations of anti-Israel bias and lack of transparency led the BBC to pull the film from iPlayer.

Questions were asked in Parliament.

Criticism continued about the programme’s subtitling choices – including contributors using the Arabic word for “Jews” on camera, which was translated in the subtitles as “Israelis” or “Israeli army”. Some argue that the BBC covered up antisemitism. Others have claimed the subtitles are closer to what the speaker intends rather than a literal translation.

After an initial investigation, the BBC said the programme, which had been commissioned by the BBC and made by an outside production company, “fell short of our expectations”.

It launched a further review headed by the director of editorial complaints and reviews, Peter Johnston. He will look at whether editorial guidelines were broken and whether anyone should be disciplined.

It’s a reputationally damaging mess, but how could it have happened? How did the commissioners of the programme not know that the child narrator’s father was a deputy minister for agriculture in the Hamas-run government?

The BBC says it had asked the production company “a number of times” in writing during the making of the film about any connections he and his family might have with Hamas, a proscribed terrorist organisation by the US, UK and others.

In a statement on Thursday the BBC said Hoyo Films, the maker of the film, acknowledged it “never told the BBC this fact”.

But what it tell the BBC about the child?

Crucially, the BBC failed to uncover the information itself.

Embarking on a documentary about one of the most polarising and contested issues of our age was always going to be challenging.

The talented director at Hoyo, Jamie Roberts, has won an Emmy award for his film about the evacuation of Kabul. He’s award-nominated for a powerful documentary about the events of 6 January in the US. He also made a searing film for the BBC about the Ukraine war.

But he hadn’t directed a documentary set in the Middle East before. He was working with the Palestinian journalist, Yousef Hammash, whose Gaza reporting for Channel 4 has won him a Bafta and an Emmy last year.

The BBC commissioners in current affairs will have known the programme wasn’t without risk.

In circumstances like this, it’s even more difficult to understand how the failings that have driven headlines for days – and done terrible damage to the BBC’s reputation – could have occurred.

Programme-makers and commissioners have previously told me they draw up risk grids to ensure they have the answers to any criticism thrown at them about their documentaries. They check and check and check to ensure they won’t face problems after their programmes go out – or if they do, that they have the counter-argument ready.

Dorothy Byrne, Channel 4’s head of news and current affairs until 2020, told BBC Radio 4’s Media Show she would have done her own checks rather than relying on the independent company.

“If I was making this film, I wouldn’t just ask who the boy was, who his father was, who his mother was, I would ask for the entire family tree. They could easily have found out about him, it shows that due diligence was not done.

“I didn’t wait for people to inform me of things,” she added. “I asked them the right questions.”

Byrne says in her view the film isn’t “pro-Hamas”.

Watching it, I was struck by the efforts at balance. It contains voices who curse the leaders of Gaza.

One of the children followed by the documentary, 11-year old Zakaria, says he doesn’t like Hamas “because they started the war, they caused all this misery, this is wrong”. A woman says “they are causing us harm”. There’s a conversation about why taking Israeli civilians hostage is wrong.

But we also see the horrors and violence of what’s taken place in Gaza – through the eyes of children. Zakaria, who hangs around the hospital to help the paramedics rather than remaining with his family because, he says, there’s no food and water where they are, tells the camera he thinks he’s seen 5,000 dead bodies.

Renat who’s 10 and is building up a social media presence with an online cookery show, describes drones that shoot bullets. She smiles and laughs wildly on camera, as she describes, still clearly traumatised, how a bomb just exploded right next to her as she was walking outside her apartment.

As the press release put it, the documentary is an “unflinching and vivid view of life in a warzone”. It’s the kind of programme Turness said, as the BBC apologised, that her department “should be doing”.

But she added “Of course we have to get it right.”

The BBC brand is based on impartiality – on being trusted around the world. All of us in news and current affairs take fact-checking very seriously. Mistakes are sometimes made, of course. But on this occasion both the independent production company and the BBC made serious errors which threaten trust in the corporation.

Since joining the BBC as head of news in 2022, Turness has prioritised transparency to grow trust. Not informing viewers about the child narrator’s family story is the opposite of transparent.

She will have trusted the experienced BBC commissioners who oversaw the programme to do the appropriate due diligence. They will have trusted the filmmakers and the executive working with them.

This isn’t the end of the story and questions still remain. What exactly did the BBC ask about the boy and his family’s potential connections to Hamas? Hoyo Films has said it’s “co-operating fully with the BBC and Peter Johnston to help understand where mistakes have been made”.

There’s also the question about exactly how much was the “limited sum” paid for the young narrator’s work – and whether that money ended up in the hands of Hamas. Yesterday in Parliament, Lisa Nandy said she had sought assurances from the BBC that it hadn’t.

The scandal comes in a week in which the BBC already was apologising over its failure to tackle behaviour by the DJ Tim Westwood – after a separate review that cost more than £3m.

What’s happened has damaged trust in the BBC in so many ways. Those who argue the corporation is biased against Israel will feel vindicated.

Leo Pearlman, co-CEO of the major British production company Fulwell 73, told us on Radio 4 that the BBC has “gaslit the Jewish community” in the 16 months since October 7th and that this documentary parroted ‘the propaganda of Hamas”.

For others who view the BBC as having anti-Palestinian bias, the decision to pull the documentary and apologise will confirm their beliefs. Artists For Palestine, which includes Gary Lineker, Anita Rani, Riz Ahmed and Miriam Margolyes, says the claims about the identity of the child’s father are “misleading” and that to conflate his “civil service role” with terrorism is “factually incorrect”.

The International Centre of Justice for Palestinians has lodged a formal complaint against the BBC for taking down the documentary and “suppressing the testimony of Palestinians”. It says the deputy minister for agriculture’s role involves “food production relating to crops, fishing and livestock”.

What’s unfolded since the programme’s broadcast is unlikely to change minds on any side.

The losers in all this are the young citizens of Gaza. The stories of the children in this film – and the suffering they have endured – aren’t now being seen.

Hoyo Films said it believes “this remains an important story to tell, and that our contributors – who have no say in the war – should have their voices heard”.

The BBC has made clear it has no plans to broadcast the programme again in its current form or return it to iPlayer.

Ukraine’s president had been hoping to leave the White House on Friday after positive talks with Donald Trump, capped with the signing of a minerals deal giving the US a real stake in his country’s future, if not an outright security guarantee.

Instead Volodymyr Zelensky faced an extraordinary dressing down in front of the world’s media, after President Trump and his Vice-President JD Vance demanded that he show more gratitude for years of US support.

The Ukrainian president pushed back at suggestions from his more powerful partners that he should work harder to agree a ceasefire with Vladimir Putin. They responded that he was being “disrespectful”.

Zelensky was eventually told to leave the White House early before he and Trump could even take the stage for a scheduled news conference.

And the minerals deal, which had been trailed and praised by both sides this week, was left unsigned. “Come back when you’re ready for peace,” Trump wrote on social media shortly before Zelensky’s car pulled away.

There were several major flashpoints in the meeting. Here are four of the most fiery – and the politics and feeling that lies behind them.

While there was half an hour of cordial talks and formalities at the start, tensions began to boil over in the Oval Office when Vance said the “path to peace and the path to prosperity is maybe engaging in diplomacy”.

“That’s what President Trump is doing,” he said.

Zelensky interjected, referencing Russia’s aggression in the years before its full-scale invasion three years ago including a failed ceasefire in 2019. “Nobody stopped him,” he said of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

“What kind of diplomacy, JD, are you talking about? What do you mean?” he said.

The exchange then became visibly tense, with Vance replying: “the kind that will end the destruction of your country.”

The vice-president then accused Zelensky of being disrespectful and “litigating” the situation in front of the American media.

It was Vance’s defence of Trump’s approach to ending the war – by opening communications with Putin and pushing for a quick ceasefire – that first escalated tensions with the Ukrainian leader.

After Vance challenged the Ukrainian president over problems he’s had with the military and conscription, Zelensky replied: “During the war, everybody has problems, even you. But you have a nice ocean and don’t feel [it] now, but you will feel it in the future.”

That comment rankled Trump and drew him into the clash that up until this point had been limited to Zelensky and the vice-president.

Here was the Ukrainian leader suggesting Trump had failed to grasp the moral hazard of dealing with the war’s aggressor.

Zelensky’s message cut to the heart of what critics say is Trump’s fundamental miscalculation in dealing with Russia. That by ending Moscow’s isolation and seeking a quick ceasefire he risks emboldening Putin, weakening Europe and leaving Ukraine open to being devoured.

• Follow live reaction and analysis
• What it was like in the room during shouting match
• A timeline of Trump and Zelensky’s fraying relationship
• Starmer speaks to Trump and Zelensky following row

Trump tends to characterise the war as a kind of binary conflict between two sides who should both take their share of burden or blame for the fighting and its causes.

But Zelensky was trying to warn of catastrophic consequences of this thinking. This was the Ukrainian leader directly telling Trump in the Oval Office: Appease Russia, and the war will come to you.

It triggered Trump’s biggest backlash. “Don’t tell us what we’re going to feel. You’re in no position to dictate that,” he said, his voice getting louder.

“You don’t have the cards right now,” he told him. “You’re gambling with millions of lives.”

This exchange may win Zelensky plaudits among those who wanted to see him to stand up to Trump; but this moment could also decide an era of war and peace in Europe.

At one point later in the conversation, Zelensky said: “From the very beginning of the war, we have been alone and we are thankful.”

This angered Trump, who has repeatedly framed the war as a drain on American taxpayers.

“You haven’t been alone,” he said. “You haven’t been alone. We gave you – through this stupid president – $350bn,” Trump said, a reference to Biden.

Vance then asked whether Zelensky had thanked the US during the meeting and accused him of campaigning “for the opposition” – the Democrats – during the US election last year.

The comment was a reference to a visit Zelensky made to a munitions factory in Scranton, Pennsylvania – Joe Biden’s hometown – just weeks before Americans headed to the polls in the November election.

Republicans were outraged at the visit, accusing Zelensky of turning the tour into a partisan campaign event on Kamala Harris’s behalf in a battleground state.

Here was all the bitter division of America’s own polarised internal politics pouring into the room at a critical moment for future of global security.

“Please, you think that if you will speak very loudly about the war,” Zelensky began saying, only for Trump to cut him off.

“He’s not speaking loudly,” Trump shot back, visibly irritated. “Your country’s in big trouble.”

“You’re not winning, you’re not winning this,” Trump said. “You have a damn good chance of coming out OK because of us.”

“It’s going to be a very hard thing to do business like this,” said Trump. “It’s going to be a tough deal to make because the attitudes have to change.”

The president and vice-president reprimanded Zelensky, appearing most angered by what they perceived as his “attitude”.

“Just say thank you,” Vance demanded at one point.

Zelensky’s responses – which were to fact check the two far more powerful men and argue his corner – seemed driven by the existential nature of this moment.

He has spent three years defending his country from invasion, while also trying to hold together a society and its political leadership that Putin has tried to drive apart.

But out of the main camera shot was another sight in the room. Zelensky’s ambassador to Washington, Oksana Markarova, who was spotted with her head in her hands as the arguments escalated.

It is an image that sums up the diplomatic position for Zelensky and his relationship with – until now at least – his superpower sponsor in trying to repel Russia.

Standing up to Trump like he did on Friday could, ultimately, mean losing to Putin.

The day began with the same cordial routine the White House reserves for visiting foreign dignitaries.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was welcomed by US President Donald Trump at the door of the West Wing with an honour guard, and the leaders shook hands politely.

We were in the Oval Office as part of Ukrainian media pool, witnessing the well-rehearsed formalities and about half an hour of polite talk.

Zelensky presented Trump with the championship belt of Ukrainian boxer Oleksandr Usyk.

Trump complimented Zelensky’s clothing.

So far, so diplomatic.

But minutes later, what erupted was unprecedented to say the least. The genial tone devolved into acrimony and chaos. Voices were raised, eyes rolled, aspersions cast – and all in front of the world’s TV cameras.

The US president and vice-president berated the visiting leader, accusing Zelensky of not being grateful enough for US support that has sustained Ukraine’s war effort.

Tensions flared when Vice-President JD Vance told Zelensky that the war had to be ended through diplomacy.

What kind of diplomacy, Zelensky replied.

Talking over the Ukrainian president, Vance told the visiting leader it was “disrespectful” for him to come to the Oval Office and make his case in front of the American media and demanded that he thank Trump for his leadership.

Journalists in the room watched with gaping mouths as an extraordinary exchange followed.

“You’ve done enough talking. You’re not winning this,” Trump told him at one point. “You gotta be thankful. You don’t have the cards.”

“I’m not playing cards,” Zelensky replied. “I’m very serious, Mr President. I’m the president in a war.”

“You’re gambling with World War Three,” Trump responded. “And what you’re doing is very disrespectful to the country, this country, that’s backed you far more than a lot of people said they should have.”

Vance retorted: “Have you said ‘thank you’ once this entire meeting? No.”

Ukraine’s ambassador to the US watched with her head in her hands.

The atmosphere had shifted entirely – and all out in the open.

Our American colleagues remarked that they had never seen anything like it. “A scene like this was simply unimaginable in the White House,” one told me.

As reporters exited the Oval Office, many stood still in a state of shock. In the White House briefing room, where the exchange was replayed shortly afterwards, the rest of the media who hadn’t been in the room watched in disbelief.

Confusion ensued. There were immediate questions about whether the planned news conference would go ahead – or if the much-anticipated deal between the US and Ukraine over mineral resources would even be signed.

Minutes later, Trump wrote on Truth Social that Zelensky could “come back when he is ready for peace”.

The news conference and deal-signing ceremony – set to take place in the East Room of the White House – was officially cancelled.

Soon after Zelensky strode out and into a waiting SUV, as his ambassador trailed behind him.

They pulled away as the world was only beginning to digest an extraordinary moment.

Despite the full-blown argument, there may still be a minerals deal sooner or later.

But one thing is certain: this visit by Zelensky will be remembered for entirely different reasons.

The world saw first-hand how negotiations between the US and Ukraine are unfolding: they are difficult, emotional, and tense.

It was clear that this was a tough negotiation for both parties.

The gift of Ukrainian boxer Oleksandr Usyk’s belt certainly didn’t save the situation. And after this bout at the White House, the real question now is what this means for the war in Ukraine – and Zelensky’s own future.

Follow the twists and turns of Trump’s second presidential term with North America correspondent Anthony Zurcher’s weekly US Politics Unspun newsletter. Readers in the UK can sign up here. Those outside the UK can sign up here.

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has spoken to US President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky after a meeting between the two leaders in Washington descended into a row about US support for Ukraine.

Zelensky was welcomed to the White House by Trump, but the cordial talks ended in a shouting match in front of the media in the Oval Office as Trump told his Ukrainian counterpart to be more thankful for US aid and accused him of “gambling with World War Three”.

A statement from No 10 on Friday night confirmed the prime minister had spoken with the US and Ukrainian presidents and that he retained “unwavering support for Ukraine”.

Zelensky is due in the UK on Sunday as Sir Keir hosts a summit of European leaders to discuss an end to the war between Ukraine and Russia.

• Follow live updates
• Chris Mason: Colossal stakes for Starmer’s summit on Ukraine
• Trump accuses Zelensky of ‘gambling with World War Three’

A No 10 spokesperson said: “The prime minister has tonight spoken to both President Trump and President Zelensky.

“He retains unwavering support for Ukraine, and is doing all he can to find a path forward to a lasting peace based on sovereignty and security for Ukraine.

“The prime minister looks forward to hosting international leaders on Sunday including President Zelensky.”

The Oval Office spat prompted words of support for Zelensky from key European allies, including France and Germany.

In the heated clash at the White House, both Trump and Zelensky interrupted each other repeatedly during what was supposed to be a prelude to the two leaders signing a minerals deal.

US Vice President JD Vance, sat alongside others in the room, was also involved.

A press conference scheduled to take place later in the day was cancelled, and Zelensky was asked to leave the White House before the minerals agreement could be signed.

In a later interview with Fox News, Zelensky said the public spat “was not good” – but the relationship between him and Trump could be salvaged.

Sir Keir had met with Trump in the Oval Office on Thursday, and the pair agreed to begin work on a new US-UK trade deal.

The prime minister also came bearing a letter from King Charles III inviting Trump for a second state visit.

There had been speculation that Sir Keir had also gone into the meeting to seek a US Security “backstop” in a European peace plan for the war in Ukraine. However, the US president stopped short of confirming such a commitment.

Trump had previously criticised Sir Keir and French President Emmanuel Macron, whom he met on Monday, of having “done nothing” to seek an end to the war in Ukraine.

Reaction to Friday’s meeting between Trump and Zelensky appeared to largely fall along partisan lines among US politicians, with Republicans praising Trump and Democrats criticising him.

French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk were among the European leaders who expressed solidarity with Zelensky.

Friedrich Merz, who is expected to become Germany’s next chancellor, wrote that he stood with Ukraine “in good and testing times”, adding: “We must never confuse aggressor and victim in this terrible war.”

In a statement, Conservative party leader Kemi Badenoch said “respectable diplomacy is essential for peace”, adding that a “divided West only benefits Russia”.

Lib Dem leader Sir Ed Davey suggested Trump and Vance were “bullying the brave true patriot Zelensky into accepting a deal that effectively hands victory to Russia”.

The leader of the SNP at Westminster leader Stephen Flynn said the offer to Mr Trump of a second state visit should be revoked.

In Ukraine, there was broad appreciation for Zelensky holding his ground over what many Ukrainians see as an existential war.

“Trump’s administration was so arrogant,” one man in Kyiv told the BBC. “When you look at Zelensky’s face, you understand that the discussion behind closed doors was not so polite.”

Russia, meanwhile, said Trump and Vance had acted with restraint. A foreign ministry spokeswoman said it was a miracle the pair had not hit Zelensky.

Volodymyr Zelensky and Donald Trump had a heated exchange over their differing views on ending the war in Ukraine during a news conference at the White House on Friday.

The US president accused his Ukrainian counterpart of being “disrespectful” and “gambling with World War Three” during the at-times testy meeting.

Zelensky, at times frustrated with the tone of the comments from Trump and his Vice-President JD Vance, attempted to rebut the claims they made, and said there could be “no compromise” with Russia’s Vladimir Putin.

But the Oval Office meeting was not the first time the two men have exchanged barbs.

Here is a look back at what the two have said to, and about, one another, and how their public relationship has developed over the years.

21 April 2019: On the day Zelensky is elected president of Ukraine, Trump, still in his first term, calls Zelensky to congratulate him. Trump says it was an “incredible election” and adds that “you will do a great job”.

2019: Allies of Trump begin stoking allegations that Joe Biden, then Democratic frontrunner for president, lobbied Ukraine to dismiss its top prosecutor to stymie an investigation into energy firm Burisma, of which his son, Hunter, sat on the board. The allegations were later found to be fabricated, and the prosecutor was removed from office for corruption.

25 July 2019: In a phone conversation that would become the basis for Trump’s first impeachment, Trump asks Zelensky to “get to the bottom” of the allegations. Zelensky says the evidence would reviewed later that year.

29 September 2020: In the first presidential debate between Trump and Biden, Trump alludes to the allegations, saying: “Once you became vice-president, [Hunter] made a fortune in Ukraine and China and Moscow and various other places.”

24 February 2022: Russia begins its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, which Trump describes as “appalling”. He adds that Zelensky is “brave” for remaining in Kyiv, and claims the invasion “would never have happened” if he had been elected in 2020.

5 March 2023: “Before I even arrive at the Oval Office, I will have the disastrous war between Russia and Ukraine settled,” Trump tells a conservative conference. “And it will take me no longer than one day.”

May 2024: Zelensky’s term expires but he remains in office, as scheduled elections in Ukraine do not go ahead because the nation remains under martial law. He previously said that “now is not the time for elections”.

22 September 2024: Zelensky tells the New Yorker magazine: “My feeling is that Trump doesn’t really know how to stop the war, even if he might think he knows how.” He adds that “many” leaders have thought they could, but have been unable to.

25 September 2024: On the campaign trail, Trump accuses Zelensky of “making little nasty aspersions toward your favourite president, me”, adding: “Any deal, even the worst deal, would have been better than what we have right now.”

27 September 2024: Zelensky and Trump meet in New York. Zelensky says they have a “common view that the war has to be stopped and [Russian President Vladimir] Putin can’t win”, while Trump says he will resolve the war “very quickly”.

6 November 2024: Trump is re-elected US president. Zelensky is among the first world leaders to call to congratulate him, writing shortly after that he looked forward to a “strong” US under Trump’s “decisive leadership”.

22 January 2025: “It’s time to MAKE A DEAL,” Trump writes on Truth Social. “We can do it the easy way or the hard way.” He adds that without a deal, he will be forced to place further economic restrictions on Russia.

23 January 2025: Trump tells the World Economic Forum that Zelensky “wants to make a deal” but Putin “might not”.

15 February 2025: Zelensky writes that he has begun working with Trump’s team, adding: “The world is looking up to America as the power that has the ability to not only stop the war but also help ensure the reliability of peace afterward.”

18 February 2025: US-Russia talks about ending the war begin in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Zelensky tells reporters that the talks took place “behind Ukraine’s back”, adding: “Once again, decisions about Ukraine are being made without Ukraine.”

18 February 2025: After the talks, Trump says he was “disappointed” by Ukraine’s reaction and appeared to blame Ukraine for starting the war, adding that the country “could have made a deal” earlier.

19 February 2025: Zelensky says the US president is caught in a Russian “disinformation space”. He adds: “We are standing strong on our own two feet. I am counting on… the unity of Europe and the pragmatism of America.”

19 February 2025: Trump accuses Zelensky of talking the US into spending $350bn (£277bn), and of claiming that half of that money was now missing. Trump calls Zelensky a “dictator” who has “done a terrible job”.

23 February 2025: Zelensky tells a forum that he isn’t offended by Trump calling him a “dictator”. He says: “If I were a dictator, I’d be offended. But I take it. Well, okay, good.”

25 February 2025: Ukraine’s Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal says a major minerals deal with the US has been agreed. The same day, Trump says he is expecting Zelensky in Washington to sign the deal later that week.

26 February 2025: At a cabinet meeting, Trump says the presence of US workers extracting rare earth metals in Ukraine would provide “automatic security”. Zelensky says the success of the deal, formally backed by his government that evening, would depend on the outcome of his meeting with Trump.

27 February 2025: Asked by the BBC whether he sticks by his claim that Zelensky is a “dictator”, Trump replies: “Did I say that? I can’t believe I said that. Next question.” He also calls Zelensky “very brave”.

27 February 2025: After Trump’s talks with UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer at the White House, the US president tells reporters he predicts a “very good meeting” with Zelensky on Friday.

28 February 2025: Zelenksy arrives in Washington to discuss an agreement on sharing Ukraine’s mineral resources.

28 February 2025: In a tense public meeting in the Oval Office, Trump accuses Zelensky of being “disrespectful” to the US – something the Ukrainian leader rejects – adding: “Your people are very brave, but you’re either going to make a deal or we’re out. And if we’re out, you’ll fight it out.”

28 February 2025: Zelensky says of the war: “You have nice ocean and don’t feel now. But you will feel it in the future.” Trump responds: “Don’t tell us what we’re going to feel. You’re in no position to dictate what we’re going to feel.”

28 February 2025: Trump ends the meeting by saying Zelensky is not being “very thankful” and that “this is going to make great television”.

• You can read more of their exchange here

28 February 2025: Trump writes on social media: “It’s amazing what comes out through emotion, and I have determined that President Zelensky is not ready for peace if America is involved, because he feels our involvement gives him a big advantage in negotiations. I don’t want advantage, I want PEACE.”

Donald Trump appears to have more confidence in the capabilities of Britain’s armed forces than some of his own generals – or, for that matter, many of Britain’s retired military top brass.

When asked at his news conference with the UK prime minister about US security guarantees for Ukraine, Trump said: “The British have incredible soldiers, incredible military and they can take care of themselves.”

However, the US president did leave the question hanging in the air as to whether the UK military could take on Russia.

In public, senior US military officers are quick to praise the professionalism of Britain’s armed forces. But in private, they’re often highly critical of recent cuts to their size, especially to the British Army, which now has just over 70,000 regular troops.

“Too small” is what one very senior US general said in a private briefing on a visit to the UK.

According to the International Institute of Strategic Studies, Russia’s military expenditure is now higher than Europe’s total defence spending, in terms of purchasing parity power. It’s increased by 41% and is now the equivalent of 6.7% of GDP. In contrast, the UK will be spending just 2.5% by 2027.

President Trump’s comments underscore the reality that he’s not contemplating putting American troops on the ground in Ukraine to police any ceasefire. Any US presence will be economic, to exploit mining interests.

He suggests that that in itself might be a deterrent to Russia attacking again. But even his administration thinks there must be some hard power too – provided by others. It’ll be up to European nations to do that. The question is not just whether Europe has the will: does it have the numbers too?

The short answer is no. That is why Sir Keir Starmer has been pressing for additional US security guarantees from the world’s most powerful military.

Britain is not alone in cutting its armed forces in response to the end of the Cold War. That trend in Europe is slowly being reversed, with more nations increasing defence spending.

But Europe, on its own, would not be able to provide a force of 100-200,000 international troops, which Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky suggests would be needed to deter Russia from attacking again.

Instead, Western officials have said they’re thinking of a force of up to 30,000 troops. European jets and warships would help monitor Ukraine’s airspace and shipping lanes.

That force would be focused on providing “reassurance” at key sites – Ukraine’s cities, ports and nuclear power stations. They would not be placed anywhere near the current front lines in Eastern Ukraine. European fighter jets and warships would also monitor Ukraine’s air space and shipping lanes.

But these same Western officials acknowledge that this would not be enough, hence the calls for a US “backstop” – “to have the confidence that whatever forces are deployed will not be challenged by Russia” and to “give the prime minister confidence that he can deploy British forces safely”.

Officials believe that, at the very least, the US could provide oversight to any European forces with a “command and control element” and US fighter jets ready to respond from its airbases in Poland and Romania. Europe cannot match American space-based surveillance or intelligence-gathering capabilities.

It could also agree to continuing to supply Ukraine with weapons.

While Europe has recently overtaken the US in terms of the proportion of Western weapons supplied to Ukraine, one Western source said the US had provided “the cream” – such as long range missiles and air defence systems.

European nations also do not have the necessary enablers to conduct large-scale military operations on their own. The supply of Western weapons to Ukraine has been dependent on US logistics.

Nato’s bombing campaign over Libya in 2011 also highlighted deficiencies – with European nations supposedly taking the lead, but still dependent on US support. Allies relied on US refuelling tankers and US targeting.

But Sir Keir Starmer appears to have left Washington without any guarantees of US military support. Speaking to the BBC this morning, UK Health Secretary Wes Streeting suggested that Donald Trump’s re-commitment to Nato’s Article 5 – whereby an attack on one ally would be interpreted as an attack on all – might be enough.

But the US Defence Secretary, Pete Hegseth, has previously stated that any international troops sent to Ukraine will be neither a Nato force nor covered by its treaty. At present, there is no such Nato-style security guarantee.

Europe’s strength of will is being tested. The prime minister, who’s convening a meeting of leaders this weekend, will soon find out whether warm words from Donald Trump are enough to convince others to join the UK in putting boots on the ground.

France is the only other major European power that so far appears to be willing to do the same. Some Northern European nations – Denmark, Sweden and the Baltic states – are willing to consider a commitment, but again would like US security guarantees. Spain, Italy and Germany are so far opposed.

Sir Keir may still believe there’s room for negotiation, that the US might still be willing to back a European force. But as for Donald Trump’s question – would Britain be able to take on Russia’s military? Even though Russian forces have been weakened, the answer is no.

Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky met US President Trump in Washington on Friday to sign an agreement that would give the US access to its deposits of rare earth minerals.

But after Zelensky left early following a fiery exchange with Trump and Vice-President JD Vance, the White House announced that the deal had not been signed.

Zelensky previously said he hoped the “preliminary” agreement with the US would “lead to further deals”, but confirmed no US security guarantees had yet been agreed – something he had been pushing for.

Trump had said a deal would help US taxpayers “get their money back” for aid sent to Ukraine throughout the war, but said the responsibility of Kyiv’s security should fall to Europe.

On Wednesday, Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal said Ukraine and the US had finalised a version of the agreement. It was published on Friday morning.

The preliminary agreement envisages that an “investment fund” will be set up for Ukraine’s reconstruction.

Shmyhal said Kyiv and Washington would manage the fund on “equal terms”.

According to the deal, Ukraine will contribute 50% of future proceeds from state-owned mineral resources, oil and gas to the fund, and the fund will then invest “to promote the safety, security and prosperity of Ukraine”.

Meanwhile, the agreement says the US government will, subject to US law, “maintain a long-term financial commitment to the development of a stable and economically prosperous Ukraine”.

Zelensky acknowledged the fund, but told the BBC on Wednesday it was “too early to talk about money”.

The agreement states that the US will own the maximum amount of the fund allowed under US law.

Disagreement over the terms of a minerals deal formed part of what appears to be a deepening rift between Trump and Zelensky.

The Ukrainian president rejected an initial request from the US for $500bn (£395bn) in mineral wealth, but media reports say this demand has now been dropped.

“The US administration started with a deal that challenged Ukraine’s sovereignty, then pushed an exploitative one that would bankrupt the country,” Tymofiy Mylovanov, a former minister and head of Kyiv school of economics, told the BBC.

“Now, they’ve shifted to a reasonable deal with co-ownership and no direct claims on past aid. That could actually benefit Ukraine.”

On Tuesday, Trump said the US had given Ukraine between $300bn (£237bn) and $350bn (£276bn) in aid, and that he wanted to “get that money back” through a deal.

But German think tank the Kiel Institute estimates the US has sent $119bn in aid to Ukraine.

Zelensky has been pushing for a deal to include a firm security guarantee from the US.

But on Wednesday, he said no such guarantee had been made.

“I wanted to have a sentence on security guarantees for Ukraine, and it’s important that it’s there,” the Ukrainian leader explained.

Asked by the BBC if he would be prepared to walk away from the agreement if Trump did not offer the guarantees he wanted, Zelensky said: “I want to find a Nato path or something similar.

“If we don’t get security guarantees, we won’t have a ceasefire, nothing will work, nothing.”

Despite this, the published agreement says the US supports “Ukraine’s efforts to obtain security guarantees to build lasting peace”.

He said Ukraine would not sign the deal until Zelensky and Trump “agree on security guarantees” and decide on how to “tie this preliminary agreement” to a US security guarantee.

Trump said on Wednesday that the US would not provide security guarantees “beyond… very much”, adding that responsibility for this would now fall to Europe.

But he added that the presence of US workers on Ukrainian soil would provide “automatic security”.

The prospect of a minerals deal was first proposed by Zelensky last year as a way to offer the US a tangible reason to continue supporting Ukraine.

Trump said on Tuesday that Ukraine would get “the right to fight on” in return for access to its minerals and suggested the US would continue to supply equipment and ammunition “until we have a deal with Russia”.

The US president has also said Russia is open to accepting European peacekeepers in Ukraine, but Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said the Kremlin would not consider this as an option.

Trump had said the two would sign the deal at Friday’s meeting at the White House.

Ukrainian PM Shmyhal said the US and Ukraine had prepared a final version of the agreement, though Zelensky aide Mykhaylo Podolyak said that only a framework agreement was due to be signed.

But nothing at all was signed during the visit, which instead saw Trump and Zelensky descend into a heated exchange in the Oval Office.

At one point, a furious Trump said Zelensky was not grateful enough for the US’s support during the war, and that he was “gambling with World War Three”.

He said Zelensky had to “make a deal or we’re out”, adding: “You don’t have the cards.”

Zelensky said there should be “no compromises” with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Not long after – and well ahead of schedule – the Ukrainian president was seen leaving the White House.

The White House then announced that the deal had not been agreed – and said Trump had decided to call off the signing ceremony himself.

The US president wrote on his Truth Social platform that Zelensky had “disrespected the US in its cherished Oval Office”. He added: “He can come back when he is ready for peace.”

It is now unclear when the deal might be signed, if at all.

Kyiv estimates that about 5% of the world’s “critical raw materials” are in Ukraine.

This includes some 19 million tonnes of proven reserves of graphite, which the Ukrainian Geological Survey state agency says makes the nation “one of the top five leading countries” for the supply of the mineral. Graphite is used to make batteries for electric vehicles.

Ukraine also has significant deposits of titanium and lithium. It says it has substantial amounts of the world’s rare earth metals – a group of 17 elements that are used to produce weapons, wind turbines, electronics and other products vital in the modern world – but these claims are disputed.

Also, some of the country’s mineral deposits have been seized by Russia. According to Yulia Svyrydenko, Ukraine’s economy minister, resources worth $350bn (£277bn) remain in occupied territories today.

There are warnings too that a deal allowing the US access to Ukraine’s vast mineral wealth cannot happen unless the country addresses its problem with unexploded mines.

A quarter of Ukraine’s landmass is estimated to be contaminated with landmines, mainly concentrated in the war-torn east of the country.

Another issue is that it will be some time before anyone sees any material benefits from the deal.

“These resources aren’t in a port or warehouse; they must be developed,” says Mylovanov. “In that sense if the US invests, it will benefit everyone.”

• What minerals does Ukraine have?

Vladimir Putin has not yet addressed reports that the terms of a deal between the US and Ukraine have been agreed.

But on Monday evening he told state TV he was ready to “offer” resources to American partners in joint projects, including mining in Russia’s “new territories” – a reference to parts of eastern Ukraine that Russia has occupied since launching a full-scale invasion three years ago.

Putin said a potential US-Ukraine deal on rare minerals was not a concern and that Russia “undoubtedly have, I want to emphasise, significantly more resources of this kind than Ukraine”.

“As for the new territories, it’s the same. We are ready to attract foreign partners to the so-called new, to our historical territories, which have returned to the Russian Federation,” he added.

Commenting on Zelensky’s visit to Washington, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Tuesday: “Whether it will be [to sign] the aforementioned agreement or something else, we’ll see. There have been no official statements on this matter yet.”

When Japanese journalist Shiori Ito decided to speak up about her rape allegations, she knew she would do so in the face of a society that prefers silence.

“I’m scared…but all I want to do is to talk about the truth,” she says, in the opening scene of her Oscar-nominated documentary Black Box Diaries.

Shiori became the face of Japan’s MeToo movement after she accused a prominent journalist, Noriyuki Yamaguchi, of rape. He denies the charges.

Her acclaimed directorial debut, based on her memoir of the same name, is a retelling of her quest for justice, after authorities found insufficient evidence to pursue criminal charges.

But there is one country where the documentary has still not been aired: Japan – where it has run into huge controversy.

Shiori’s former lawyers have accused her of including audio and video footage that she did not have permission to use, which, they maintain, has violated trust and put her sources at risk.

She defends what she did as necessary for “public good”.

It’s a startling turn in a story that gripped Japan when it first broke. Then 28 years old, Shiori had chosen to ignore her family’s request to remain silent about the alleged rape. And after her public accusation did not result in a criminal case, she filed a civil lawsuit against Mr Yamaguchi – and won $30,000 (£22,917) in damages.

Shiori told the BBC making the film involved “re-living her trauma”.

“It took me four years [to make the film] because, emotionally, I was struggling.”

She was an intern at Reuters news agency in 2015, when she claims Mr Yamaguchi invited her to discuss a job opportunity. At the time, he was the Washington bureau chief for a major Japanese media firm, Tokyo Broadcasting System.

Shiori claims she was raped following a dinner in Tokyo with Mr Yamaguchi, who has always denied the allegations.

CCTV footage of an intoxicated Shiori being dragged from a taxi and into a hotel forms part of the more than 400 hours of footage which she has edited for the documentary.

Shiori, who directed and wrote Black Box Diaries, describes the editing process as “really challenging”.

“It was like hardcore exposure therapy,” she says.

But when the film was released, the CCTV footage included in the documentary became a source of friction between the director and the team of lawyers who had helped her win her civil case.

The lawyers stated her use of CCTV footage was unauthorised – and that Shiori had violated a pledge not to use it outside of court proceedings. .

Last week, her former lawyers – led by Yoko Nishihiro – held a press conference, in which she said Shiori’s use of the footage posed challenges for other sexual assault cases.

“If the fact that the evidence from the trial has been made public is known, we will be unable to obtain cooperation in future cases,” Ms Nishihiro said.

Ms Nishihiro claimed Shiori also used unauthorised recordings in the film, which the lawyer only discovered following the screening of the film last July.

The documentary included audio of a police detective who eventually acted as a whistleblower in relation to the investigation process, as well as video of a taxi driver who had provided testimony about the night of the alleged rape.

Both the detective and the taxi driver, the lawyers have argued, were identifiable in the film – and neither had given their consent to be featured.

“I’ve been trying so hard to protect her for eight-and-half years, and I feel like I’ve been completely torn apart,” Ms Nishihiro said.

“I want her to explain and be held accountable.”

Shiori has previously acknowledged that she did not have the hotel’s permission to use the CCTV footage, but has argued that it provided “the only visual evidence” of the night she claims she was sexually assaulted.

She said including audio of the police detective was necessary because of “the cover-up of the investigation”, and has insisted she was releasing the video “for the public good”.

“We are standing in different points of view,” she said, referring to her fall-out with her former lawyers.

“For me, [it’s for the] public good. For them, it’s ‘do not break any rules’.”

There has been no official explanation as to why the film has not yet been distributed. According to Shiori, “Japan is still not ready to talk about [it]”.

However, it remains unclear how far the lack of distribution might also be due to legal hurdles.

In her most recent statement last week, Shiori apologised and said she would re-edit parts of the documentary to make sure individuals could not be identified. She said a redacted version would be screened at a later stage.

“There are moments I wish I didn’t have to put in [the documentary]. There are moments I’m not proud of – but I wanted to put all of it, and to show we are also human,” she told the BBC.

“No-one is perfect.”

In the nine years since the assault, Shiori’s fight against Japan’s justice system has been well-chronicled in the media – and is something she says she wanted to detail in her documentary.

She was met with a wave of backlash when she went public in 2017, receiving hate mail and online abuse.

“People were telling me you’re not crying enough… you’re not wearing proper clothes… you’re too strong.”

Some criticised the way she was dressed at the press conference where she first accused Yamaguchi – they said her shirt had been buttoned too low down. Shiori said she left Japan for a few months, fearing for her safety.

Shiori’s case was followed by other high-profile cases. In 2023, former soldier Rina Gonoi also went public with her story, accusing three ex-soldiers of sexually assaulting her. This was the year Japan passed landmark laws to redefine rape from “forcible sexual intercourse” to “non-consensual sexual intercourse” and raised the age of consent from 13 to 16.

Gonoi eventually won her case but Shiori says it is proof that speaking up against sexual violence comes at a price, adding: “Is it worth going through this as a survivor seeking justice? It shouldn’t be this way. You have to sacrifice a lot.”

For now it’s unclear if her film will ever be screened in Japan, but she says that its homecoming would be her ultimate prize.

“This is my love letter to Japan. I really wish one day I can screen my film, and my family can also watch it,” she added.

“That’s what I really hope for… more than winning an Oscar.”

A pungent smell of detergent and rotten food hits me as we walk through this enormous high-security prison. Inmates press themselves up against the bars to look at us. There are no smiles, only expressionless stares.

A man with a tattoo that swirls across his face shouts, “Where you from, ma’am?”

“England.”

“Hope you enjoy Estelle,” he says.

“Do you?” I ask.

“A lot better than where I was before.”

Welcome to the Estelle Supermax Penitentiary in Huntsville, Texas.

Concrete watchtowers punctuate the perimeter of this vast space – equivalent in size to almost 3,000 football pitches – and a sign with an image of a red-maned lion and the words greets staff and visitors as they enter.

The UK government is looking to Estelle prison for ideas – for ways to reduce reoffending and to bring down prisoner numbers in our already overcrowded jails. There’s a scheme here they’d like to emulate, which gives inmates the chance to shorten their sentences by having a job while they’re inside.

Looking to this prison for inspiration might seem a curious choice to many, given Texas executes more people than any other US state. But ministers say by implementing schemes similar to ones used here, UK prisoners will be incentivised to gain qualifications – giving them more chance of employment once released.

Just one in five offenders in England and Wales has a job six weeks after being released from custody, the latest stats show. According to the Ministry of Justice, people who are still unemployed six weeks after being released are twice as likely to reoffend as those in employment.

No prison in the UK has as many inmates as they do at Estelle. More than 3,000 men in white jail-suits are currently locked up here – from murderers and rapists, to those doing time for lesser crimes like shoplifting and fraud. Two inmates are on death row.

Jimmy Delgado is 52 and serving three life sentences for first-degree murder. He’s already been inside for 25 years – 13 spent in solitary confinement. He’s a large man with muscular shoulders and smiles broadly when we meet in the prison chapel, softly shaking my hand. He tells me he first ended up in prison aged just 16, after carrying out a robbery.

He’s remorseful for his crimes and says this prison – together with his faith in Jesus – has helped turn his life around by giving him purpose. He now works as a counsellor, supporting offenders who are struggling to cope with life in prison.

“I’m here for taking a life – and I’m here to save multiple lives,” he says. “If I can change the dynamic of family life for all these guys that are here then I’ve done my job – even if I never get out of prison.”

Delgado may never be released, but inmates having jobs in prison is one of the reasons why Estelle Supermax Penitentiary is appealing to the UK government.

The “good time credit” scheme used here gives inmates the opportunity to reduce their time behind bars by participating in courses and studying for qualifications, taking up jobs, and behaving well.

Credits earned are then added to the number of days the prisoner has already spent in jail, allowing them to reach their parole eligibility date sooner – when a panel decides if they’re suitable for early release. This process depends on the classification of their crime and an assessment by the parole board on their overall rehabilitation.

Off the long corridor that runs through the main prison building, inmates are quietly working in a small barbers. Kevin Smith is inside for minor offences. He is meticulously cutting a member of staff’s hair with a pair of clippers, and says the good time credit scheme has made him feel positive about his time in prison.

“They helped me see that if I do the right thing and make the right decisions, I can do better in life,” he says. “I receive good time by working here, and I can get out earlier with the good time that I received – it works.”

The rates of those returning to prison within three years of release have fallen to 20.3% in Texas – a fraction of those in the rest of the United States (68%).

The BBC came to Estelle to see their credit scheme in action with UK justice secretary Shabana Mahmood.

“The Texans had a system similar to ours – on the point of collapse, running out of prison places in 2007,” Ms Mahmood says. “They’ve now got a sustainable prison population – but most importantly, they’ve been able to massively cut the rates of reoffending here. They’ve got a rate of crime now that they haven’t seen since the 1960s.”

She believes the Texan credit system is effective – helping prisoners get out of prison early – and stay out. “It does help prisoners turn their backs on a life of crime.”

The Texas prison population is the highest of any state in the US, with 134,668 people in custody in the autumn of 2024 – although over the last couple of decades, since reforms were implemented, that number has reduced by nearly 20%. However, some experts say the good time credit programme is not a magic bullet.

“The incentivisation scheme has little to do with the reforms that helped bring Texas’s prison population down in 2007,” says Michele Deitch, a criminal justice policy lecturer at the University of Texas. “And by itself it will do little to address the UK’s very serious overcrowding problem.”

What would make a real difference, she says, would be diverting more people from incarceration in the first place: “To shorten sentences, to reduce the use of recalls to prison, and to invest more heavily in rehabilitative programs in prison and in programs and services in the community.”

As well as incentivisation, the UK government is also considering the use of “diversion programmes” – where offenders are sent on rehabilitation courses rather than to jail. This can apply to people with addiction issues or mental health problems. It’s what they do here in Texas to reduce the burden on the courts and attempt to sort the root cause of the offence.

More people have been put to death in Texas than anywhere else in the US. Since the Supreme Court reinstated capital punishment in 1976, 593 prisoners have been executed. There are 176 people currently on death row – so it might seem strange the UK government could take a leaf out of their book.

Even so, the justice secretary believes there is still much the UK can learn from what happens at Estelle.

“I don’t think that the fact that they have the death penalty here means that we shouldn’t be learning lessons from strategies that they’ve introduced that really work,” Ms Mahmood says.

It’s a plan with “huge potential in the UK” according to Nick Hardwick, a former chief inspector of prisons, who believes it will make prisons safer and more productive.

“It will help ensure prisoners are doing what is necessary to reduce the risk they will reoffend and create more victims,” he says.

But not everyone agrees with incentivising convicted criminals to work towards an early release from prison.

Samantha Nicholls’ son was murdered in 2018. Twenty-two year old Joe Pooley was thrown into a river in Ipswich and held under the water. Three people were jailed for his murder in 2021. Joe’s mother believes inmates should never be released before their sentence is complete.

“Prison is a punishment – you should do your time,” she says. “It needs to be a deterrent – you’re there because you did something wrong.”

It’s clear the UK needs to find solutions to cut prison overcrowding – and find them fast. Even the recent prisoner early release scheme will barely keep pace with more offenders being jailed. New prison buildings will take years to come on stream. But does this Texan prison have the answers?

The challenge for ministers and the criminal justice system is how to stop the revolving doors on the UK’s prisons – the reoffending and lack of prospects facing those who are released which draws them back into crime.

Sign up for our Politics Essential newsletter to read top political analysis, gain insight from across the UK and stay up to speed with the big moments.

It’ll be delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

Don’t insult the leaders. Don’t insult the ideology. And don’t judge.

These are the rules tour guides read out to Western tourists as they prepare to drive across the border into North Korea, arguably the most secretive and repressive country in the world.

Then there is the practical information. No phone signal, no internet, no cash machines.

“The North Koreans aren’t robots. They have opinions, goals, and a sense of humour. And in our briefing we encourage people to listen to and understand them,” says Rowan Beard, who runs Young Pioneer Tours, one of two Western companies which resumed trips to the country last week, after a five-year hiatus.

North Korea sealed its borders at the outset of the pandemic, shutting out diplomats, aid workers and travellers, and making it nearly impossible to know what was happening there.

Since then, it has further isolated itself from most of the world, relying on support from Russia and China. Many doubted whether Westerners would ever be allowed back.

But after years of cajoling and several false starts, Rowan and some other tour leaders were given the green light to restart operations. He pulled together a group of eager travellers in just five hours, desperate to not miss the opportunity. Most were vloggers and travel addicts, some wanting to tick the final country off their list, along with the odd North Korea enthusiast.

Last Thursday the tourists, from the UK, France, Germany and Australia, drove over the border from China into the remote area of Rason for a four-night trip.

Among them was 28-year-old British YouTuber Mike O’Kennedy. Even with its reputation, he was startled by the extreme level of control. As with all trips to North Korea, the tourists were escorted by local guides, who followed a strict, pre-approved schedule. It included carefully choreographed trips to a beer factory, a school, and a new, fully stocked pharmacy.

Ben Weston, one of the tour leaders from Suffolk, likened visiting North Korea to “being on a school trip”. “You can’t leave the hotel without the guides,” he said.

“A couple of times I even had to let them know when I wanted to use the bathroom,” said Mike. “I’ve never had to do that anywhere in the world.”

Despite the chaperoning, Mike was able to spot snippets of real life. “Everyone was working, it didn’t feel like anyone was just hanging out. That was kind of bleak to see.”

On his trip to the school, a group of eight-year-olds performed a dance to animations of ballistic missiles hitting targets. A video of the spectacle shows girls and boys with red neckties, singing, while explosions flare on a screen behind them.

For now, tourists are being kept well away from the capital Pyongyang. Greg Vaczi from Koryo Tours, the other tour company allowed back in, admits the current itinerary lacks the “big-hitting monuments” of Pyongyang. He suspects authorities have chosen Rason as their guinea pig because the area is relatively contained and easy to control.

Set up as a special economic zone, to trial new financial policies, it operates as a mini capitalist enclave inside an otherwise socialist state. Chinese businesspeople run joint enterprises with North Koreans, and can travel in and out fairly freely.

Joe Smith, a seasoned North Korea traveller and former writer for the specialist North Korea platform NK News, was there on his third trip. “I feel like the more times you visit the less you know. Each time you get a little peek behind the curtain, which just leaves you with more questions,” he said.

Joe’s highlight was a surprise off-agenda visit to a luxury goods market, where people were selling jeans and perfumes, along with fake Louis Vuitton handbags and Japanese washing machines, probably imported from China. Here, the tourists were not allowed to take photos – an attempt to hide this consumer bubble from the rest of the country, they suspected.

“This was the only place people weren’t expecting us,” Joe said. “It felt messy and real; a place North Koreans actually go. I loved it.”

But according to the experienced tour leaders, the group’s movements were more restricted than on previous trips, with fewer opportunities to wander the streets, pop into a barbershop or supermarket, and talk to locals.

Covid was often cited as the reason, said Greg from Koryo Tours. “On the surface they are still concerned. Our luggage was disinfected at the border, our temperatures were taken, and about 50% of people are still wearing masks.” Greg cannot work out whether the fear is genuine, or an excuse to control people.

It is thought Covid hit North Korea hard, though it is difficult to know the extent of the suffering.

Local guides repeated the government line that the virus entered the country in a balloon sent over from South Korea, and was swiftly eradicated in 90 days. But Rowan, who has been to North Korea more than 100 times, sensed that Rason had been impacted by the tough Covid regulations. A lot of Chinese businesses had closed, he said, and their workers had left.

Even Joe, the experienced North Korea traveller, commented on how dilapidated the buildings were. “Places were dimly lit and there was no heating, apart from in our hotel rooms,” he said, noting a trip to a cold, dark and deserted art gallery. “It felt like they opened the doors just for us.”

The regime’s photographs might make North Korea look clean and shiny, Joe said, but in person you realise “the roads are awful, the pavements are wobbly, and the buildings are weirdly constructed”. His hotel room was old-fashioned and filthy, he said, resembling “his grandma’s living room”. The whole window was cracked.

“They’ve had five years to fix things. North Koreans are so sensitive about what they show tourists. If this is the best they can show, I dread to think what else is out there”, he said. Most of the country is kept well hidden, with more than four in 10 people believed to be undernourished and needing help.

One of the few chances tourists in North Korea get to interact with local people is through their guides, who sometimes speak English. On these recent trips they were surprisingly well-informed, despite the regime’s intense propaganda machine and information blockade. This is probably because they speak to the Chinese businesspeople who come and go, said Greg.

They knew about Trump’s tariffs and the war in Ukraine – even that North Korean troops were involved. But when Joe showed a photo from Syria, his guide was unaware President Assad had been toppled. “I carefully explained that sometimes when people don’t like their leader, they rise up and force them out, and at first he didn’t believe me.”

Such conversations need to be delicately handled. Strict laws prevent North Koreans from speaking freely. Ask or reveal too much and the tourists might put their guide or themselves at risk.

Mike admits there were times this made him nervous. On a trip to a North Korea-Russia Friendship House, he was invited to write in the visitors’ book. “I went blank and wrote something like ‘I wish the world peace.’ Afterwards my guide told me that was an inappropriate thing to write. That made me paranoid,” he said.

“Generally, the guides did a great job of making us feel safe. There were just a couple of moments when I thought, this is bizarre.”

For Greg from Koryo Tours, these interactions bring a deeper purpose to North Korea tourism: “North Koreans get the chance to engage with foreigners. This allows them to come up with new ideas, which, in a country this closed, is so important.”

But tourism to North Korea is contentious, especially as travellers have been allowed back before aid workers and most Western diplomats, including the UK’s. Critics, including Joanna Hosaniak from the Citizens Alliance for North Korean Human Rights, argue these trips mainly benefit the regime.

“This is not like tourism in other poor countries, where local people benefit from the extra income. The vast majority of the population don’t know these tourists exist. Their money goes to the state and ultimately towards its military,” she said.

One conversation has stuck in YouTuber Mike’s head. During his trip to the school, he was surprised when a girl, after meeting him, said she hoped to visit the UK one day. “I didn’t have the heart to tell her that her chances were very, very slim,” he said.

Was it pruning or felling?

The alleged chopping of centuries-old chinar trees in Indian-administered Kashmir has sparked outrage, with locals and photos suggesting they were cut down, while the government insists it was just routine pruning. The debate has renewed focus on the endangered tree and efforts to preserve it.

The chinar is an iconic symbol of the Kashmir valley’s landscape and a major tourist draw, especially in autumn when the trees’ leaves light up in fiery hues of flaming red to a warm auburn.

The trees are native to Central Asia but were introduced to Kashmir centuries ago by Mughal emperors and princely kings. Over the years, they have come to occupy an important place in Kashmiri culture.

But rapid urbanisation, illegal logging and climate change are threatening their survival, prompting authorities to take steps to conserve them.

The Jammu and Kashmir government has been geotagging chinar trees in an effort to keep track of them and their health. The project involves attaching a QR code to each tree with information about its location, age and other physical characteristics.

“We are ‘digitally protecting’ chinar trees,” says Syed Tariq, a scientist who’s heading the project. He explains that information provided by the QR code can help locals and tourists get to known more about a tree, but it can also help counter problems like illegal or hasty cutting of them.

The project has geotagged about 29,000 chinar trees so far, with another 6,000–7,000 still left to be mapped.

Despite its heritage value, there was no proper count of these trees, says Mr Syed. While government records cite 40,000, he calls the figure debatable but is certain their numbers have declined.

This is a problem because the tree takes at least 50 years to reach maturity. Environmentalists say new plantations are facing challenges like diminishing space. Additionally, chinar trees need a cool climate to survive, but the region has been experiencing warmer summers and snowless winters of late.

But on the bright side, these trees can live for hundreds of years – the oldest chinar tree in the region is believed to be around 700 years old. A majority of the trees are at least a few centuries old and have massive trunks and sprawling canopies.

The trees received maximum patronage during the Mughal period, which stretched from the early 1500s to the mid-1800s. Many of the trees that exist in the valley were planted during this period, Mr Syed says.

The Mughal kings, who ruled many parts of erstwhile India, made Kashmir their summer getaway due to its cool climate and beautiful scenery. They also erected “pleasure gardens” – landscaped gardens famous for their symmetry and greenery – for their entertainment.

The chinar enjoyed pride of place in these gardens and the trees were usually planted along water channels to enhance the beauty of the place. Many of these gardens exist even today.

According to government literature, in the 16th Century Mughal emperor Akbar planted around 1,100 trees in one such pleasure garden near the famous Dal Lake in Srinagar, but about 400 have perished over the years due to road-widening projects and diseases caused by pests.

Emperor Jahangir, Akbar’s son, is said to have planted four chinar trees on a tiny island in Dal Lake, giving it the name Char Chinar (Four Chinars) – now a major tourist draw. Over time, two trees were lost to age and disease, until the government replaced them with transplanted mature trees in 2022.

Interestingly, the chinar is protected under the Jammu and Kashmir Preservation of Specified Trees Act, 1969, which regulates its felling and export and requires official approval even for pruning. The law remains in force despite the region losing statehood in 2019.

But environmental activist Raja Muzaffar Bhat says authorities often exploit legal loopholes to cut down chinar trees.

“Under the garb of pruning, entire trees are felled,” he says, citing a recent alleged felling in Anantnag district that sparked outrage.

“The government is geotagging trees on one side, but cutting them on the other,” he says. He adds that while authorities remove trees for urban projects, locals also fell them illegally.

Chinar trees have durable hardwood, ideal for carvings, furniture and artefacts. Locals also use them for firewood and making herbal medicine.

Government projects like geotagging are raising awareness, says Mr Bhat. He adds that Kashmiris, deeply attached to the chinar as part of their heritage, now speak out against its felling or damage.

Last week, many posted photos of the allegedly chopped trees in Anantnag on X (formerly Twitter) while opposition leaders demanded that the government launch an investigation and take action against the culprits.

“The government should protect the trees in letter and in spirit,” Mr Bhat says.

“Because without chinar, Kashmir won’t feel like home.”

US president Donald Trump has been invited to meet King Charles in Scotland to discuss an unprecedented second state visit to the UK.

An official letter from the monarch, delivered by Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer on Thursday, offered a meeting at either Dumfries House in Ayrshire or Balmoral Castle, a favourite retreat of the Royal Family since the days of Queen Victoria.

King Charles’s mother, the late Queen Elizabeth, met 13 US presidents during her 70 years on the throne but only one ever stayed with her at Balmoral.

Dwight D Eisenhower, who was often affectionately known by the nickname Ike, was a five-star general who had worked closely with Princess Elizabeth’s father – King George VI – during World War 2 and became a friend of the family.

After the war, in1946, the general had visited Balmoral and when he became president the young Queen made her first state visit to the US, staying with Eisenhower in private quarters at the White House in 1957.

She enjoyed it so much she invited the president to stay with her at her favourite Scottish sanctuary.

Reports from the time describe an informal and friendly meeting during which the Queen served drop scones at a lakeside picnic.

She even sent the president the recipe because he had liked them so much.

King Charles, who was 10 years old when his mother hosted Eisenhower in 1959, has now extended a rare invitation to the current US president to meet him in Scotland.

Like his mother, the King is seeking to play a major role in facilitating the US and UK’s “special” diplomatic relationship.

In his letter to President Trump, the King suggested meeting at either Dumfries House, which he has owned since 2007, or Balmoral, which is only about 58 miles (93km) from the Trump International golf resort at Menie in Aberdeenshire.

The president is due to open a new course named after his mother – who was born and brought up on the Isle of Lewis – this summer.

President Trump said it would be an “honour” to return to the UK, which he called a “fantastic” country.

The only US president the late queen did not meet during her reign was Lyndon Johnson.

However, despite her regular visits from the US head of state, she sought to keep Balmoral as place where the affairs of state did not usually intrude.

A New York Times front page article covering President Eisenhower’s visit in 1959 remarked on the “informality” that governed his overnight stay.

It says that he was the first American head of state to be honoured at the castle, which had been bought by Queen Victoria more than a century before.

According to its report, Queen Elizabeth was seen “pacing casually” with her sister Princess Margaret on the road by the gatehouse to the castle when the president drove up with Prince Philip just before noon.

The Queen’s husband had greeted the US president at Dyce Airport in Aberdeen and the American flag was flown from the Queen’s car as it drove the 55-mile route to the castle.

According to the newspaper, school children were lining the route and workmen “lifted their caps and touched their forelocks in salute” as the president drove by.

A BBC report from the time said people along the route were waving flags and banners proclaiming “We like Ike!”.

When the president arrived at Balmoral, the Queen shook his hand and a lone bagpiper sounded the “Royal Salute”.

Eisenhower, who was 68 at the time, was said to have “fallen easily into an unhurried pace” as the 33-year-old Queen led him towards the castle.

The rest of his visit was away from public view but newspaper reports from the time said he had a tour of the estate and picnic lunch on the shore of Loch Muick.

They later exchanged gifts and paid a visit to the Queen Mother’s home at nearby Birkhall, which is now a favourite place for King Charles to stay.

Months after the visit, in January 1960, a letter for President Eisenhower arrived at the White House in Washington.

Written on official Buckingham Palace letterhead and signed “Elizabeth R”, the handwritten note contained a recipe for drop scones (scotch pancakes).

It read: “Dear Mr President, seeing a picture of you in today’s newspaper standing in front of a barbecue grilling quail reminded me that I had never sent you the recipe for the drop scones, which I provided you at Balmoral.

“Now, I hasten to do so, and I hope you will find them successful.”

The Queen continued: “”Though the quantities are for 16 people, when there are fewer I generally put in less flour and milk, but use the other ingredients as stated.

“I’ve also tried using golden syrup or treacle instead of only sugar, and I think that can be very good too.

“I think the mixture needs a great deal of beating while making and shouldn’t stand about too long before cooking.”

It remains to be seen what recipes King Charles might share with President Trump when they meet.

Ingredients (for 16 people)

4 teacups flour*

4 tablespoons caster sugar

2 teacups milk

2 whole eggs

2 teaspoons bicarbonate soda

3 teaspoons cream of tartar

2 tablespoons melted butter

Beat eggs, sugar, and about half the milk together.

Add flour and mix well together, adding remainder of milk as required – also bicarbonate and cream of tartar.

Fold in the melted butter.

Although the queen does not provide the instruction, the pancakes are then cooked on a hot griddle.

*1 teacup = 3/4 cup or 150g

Ukraine’s president had been hoping to leave the White House on Friday after positive talks with Donald Trump, capped with the signing of a minerals deal giving the US a real stake in his country’s future, if not an outright security guarantee.

Instead Volodymyr Zelensky faced an extraordinary dressing down in front of the world’s media, after President Trump and his Vice-President JD Vance demanded that he show more gratitude for years of US support.

The Ukrainian president pushed back at suggestions from his more powerful partners that he should work harder to agree a ceasefire with Vladimir Putin. They responded that he was being “disrespectful”.

Zelensky was eventually told to leave the White House early before he and Trump could even take the stage for a scheduled news conference.

And the minerals deal, which had been trailed and praised by both sides this week, was left unsigned. “Come back when you’re ready for peace,” Trump wrote on social media shortly before Zelensky’s car pulled away.

There were several major flashpoints in the meeting. Here are four of the most fiery – and the politics and feeling that lies behind them.

While there was half an hour of cordial talks and formalities at the start, tensions began to boil over in the Oval Office when Vance said the “path to peace and the path to prosperity is maybe engaging in diplomacy”.

“That’s what President Trump is doing,” he said.

Zelensky interjected, referencing Russia’s aggression in the years before its full-scale invasion three years ago including a failed ceasefire in 2019. “Nobody stopped him,” he said of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

“What kind of diplomacy, JD, are you talking about? What do you mean?” he said.

The exchange then became visibly tense, with Vance replying: “the kind that will end the destruction of your country.”

The vice-president then accused Zelensky of being disrespectful and “litigating” the situation in front of the American media.

It was Vance’s defence of Trump’s approach to ending the war – by opening communications with Putin and pushing for a quick ceasefire – that first escalated tensions with the Ukrainian leader.

After Vance challenged the Ukrainian president over problems he’s had with the military and conscription, Zelensky replied: “During the war, everybody has problems, even you. But you have a nice ocean and don’t feel [it] now, but you will feel it in the future.”

That comment rankled Trump and drew him into the clash that up until this point had been limited to Zelensky and the vice-president.

Here was the Ukrainian leader suggesting Trump had failed to grasp the moral hazard of dealing with the war’s aggressor.

Zelensky’s message cut to the heart of what critics say is Trump’s fundamental miscalculation in dealing with Russia. That by ending Moscow’s isolation and seeking a quick ceasefire he risks emboldening Putin, weakening Europe and leaving Ukraine open to being devoured.

• Follow live reaction and analysis
• What it was like in the room during shouting match
• A timeline of Trump and Zelensky’s fraying relationship
• Starmer speaks to Trump and Zelensky following row

Trump tends to characterise the war as a kind of binary conflict between two sides who should both take their share of burden or blame for the fighting and its causes.

But Zelensky was trying to warn of catastrophic consequences of this thinking. This was the Ukrainian leader directly telling Trump in the Oval Office: Appease Russia, and the war will come to you.

It triggered Trump’s biggest backlash. “Don’t tell us what we’re going to feel. You’re in no position to dictate that,” he said, his voice getting louder.

“You don’t have the cards right now,” he told him. “You’re gambling with millions of lives.”

This exchange may win Zelensky plaudits among those who wanted to see him to stand up to Trump; but this moment could also decide an era of war and peace in Europe.

At one point later in the conversation, Zelensky said: “From the very beginning of the war, we have been alone and we are thankful.”

This angered Trump, who has repeatedly framed the war as a drain on American taxpayers.

“You haven’t been alone,” he said. “You haven’t been alone. We gave you – through this stupid president – $350bn,” Trump said, a reference to Biden.

Vance then asked whether Zelensky had thanked the US during the meeting and accused him of campaigning “for the opposition” – the Democrats – during the US election last year.

The comment was a reference to a visit Zelensky made to a munitions factory in Scranton, Pennsylvania – Joe Biden’s hometown – just weeks before Americans headed to the polls in the November election.

Republicans were outraged at the visit, accusing Zelensky of turning the tour into a partisan campaign event on Kamala Harris’s behalf in a battleground state.

Here was all the bitter division of America’s own polarised internal politics pouring into the room at a critical moment for future of global security.

“Please, you think that if you will speak very loudly about the war,” Zelensky began saying, only for Trump to cut him off.

“He’s not speaking loudly,” Trump shot back, visibly irritated. “Your country’s in big trouble.”

“You’re not winning, you’re not winning this,” Trump said. “You have a damn good chance of coming out OK because of us.”

“It’s going to be a very hard thing to do business like this,” said Trump. “It’s going to be a tough deal to make because the attitudes have to change.”

The president and vice-president reprimanded Zelensky, appearing most angered by what they perceived as his “attitude”.

“Just say thank you,” Vance demanded at one point.

Zelensky’s responses – which were to fact check the two far more powerful men and argue his corner – seemed driven by the existential nature of this moment.

He has spent three years defending his country from invasion, while also trying to hold together a society and its political leadership that Putin has tried to drive apart.

But out of the main camera shot was another sight in the room. Zelensky’s ambassador to Washington, Oksana Markarova, who was spotted with her head in her hands as the arguments escalated.

It is an image that sums up the diplomatic position for Zelensky and his relationship with – until now at least – his superpower sponsor in trying to repel Russia.

Standing up to Trump like he did on Friday could, ultimately, mean losing to Putin.

The relationship between Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelensky was bad enough before the shouting match in the Oval Office.

President Trump had already called him a dictator and said Ukraine started the war – which is a lie.

Now the US-Ukraine alliance nurtured by Joe Biden is in pieces.

The public breakdown also signals a major crisis looming between European members of Nato and the US.

There will be many more doubts and questions about the US commitment to European security outside Ukraine. The biggest is whether President Trump would keep the promise his predecessor Harry Truman made in 1949 to treat an attack on a Nato ally as an attack on America.

Those concerns are based on what appears to be Trump’s determination to restore a strong relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

He has put heavy pressure on Ukraine while offering Putin big concessions – that would have to be made by the Ukrainians.

The security of Ukraine is coming a poor second – and Europeans are worrying theirs is too.

President Zelensky’s refusal to make those concessions has infuriated Trump.

It’s not just the minerals deal that he refused to sign. Ukrainians believe they are in a war for national survival – and that Putin would break any promise to end the war if he is not deterred.

That’s why Zelensky asked repeatedly for American security guarantees.

The meeting ignited into a shouting match after an intervention by Vice-President JD Vance.

There are suspicions now that the public row was – in the words of one diplomatic observer – a planned political mugging: either to force Zelensky to do America’s bidding, or to precipitate a crisis that would allow them to blame him for whatever happens next.

If Trump follows the breakdown of talks with a freeze on military aid, Ukraine will fight on. The questions are how effectively, and for how long.

Pressure will redouble on its European allies to take up the slack.

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has spoken to US President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky after a meeting between the two leaders in Washington descended into a row about US support for Ukraine.

Zelensky was welcomed to the White House by Trump, but the cordial talks ended in a shouting match in front of the media in the Oval Office as Trump told his Ukrainian counterpart to be more thankful for US aid and accused him of “gambling with World War Three”.

A statement from No 10 on Friday night confirmed the prime minister had spoken with the US and Ukrainian presidents and that he retained “unwavering support for Ukraine”.

Zelensky is due in the UK on Sunday as Sir Keir hosts a summit of European leaders to discuss an end to the war between Ukraine and Russia.

• Follow live updates
• Chris Mason: Colossal stakes for Starmer’s summit on Ukraine
• Trump accuses Zelensky of ‘gambling with World War Three’

A No 10 spokesperson said: “The prime minister has tonight spoken to both President Trump and President Zelensky.

“He retains unwavering support for Ukraine, and is doing all he can to find a path forward to a lasting peace based on sovereignty and security for Ukraine.

“The prime minister looks forward to hosting international leaders on Sunday including President Zelensky.”

The Oval Office spat prompted words of support for Zelensky from key European allies, including France and Germany.

In the heated clash at the White House, both Trump and Zelensky interrupted each other repeatedly during what was supposed to be a prelude to the two leaders signing a minerals deal.

US Vice President JD Vance, sat alongside others in the room, was also involved.

A press conference scheduled to take place later in the day was cancelled, and Zelensky was asked to leave the White House before the minerals agreement could be signed.

In a later interview with Fox News, Zelensky said the public spat “was not good” – but the relationship between him and Trump could be salvaged.

Sir Keir had met with Trump in the Oval Office on Thursday, and the pair agreed to begin work on a new US-UK trade deal.

The prime minister also came bearing a letter from King Charles III inviting Trump for a second state visit.

There had been speculation that Sir Keir had also gone into the meeting to seek a US Security “backstop” in a European peace plan for the war in Ukraine. However, the US president stopped short of confirming such a commitment.

Trump had previously criticised Sir Keir and French President Emmanuel Macron, whom he met on Monday, of having “done nothing” to seek an end to the war in Ukraine.

Reaction to Friday’s meeting between Trump and Zelensky appeared to largely fall along partisan lines among US politicians, with Republicans praising Trump and Democrats criticising him.

French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk were among the European leaders who expressed solidarity with Zelensky.

Friedrich Merz, who is expected to become Germany’s next chancellor, wrote that he stood with Ukraine “in good and testing times”, adding: “We must never confuse aggressor and victim in this terrible war.”

In a statement, Conservative party leader Kemi Badenoch said “respectable diplomacy is essential for peace”, adding that a “divided West only benefits Russia”.

Lib Dem leader Sir Ed Davey suggested Trump and Vance were “bullying the brave true patriot Zelensky into accepting a deal that effectively hands victory to Russia”.

The leader of the SNP at Westminster leader Stephen Flynn said the offer to Mr Trump of a second state visit should be revoked.

In Ukraine, there was broad appreciation for Zelensky holding his ground over what many Ukrainians see as an existential war.

“Trump’s administration was so arrogant,” one man in Kyiv told the BBC. “When you look at Zelensky’s face, you understand that the discussion behind closed doors was not so polite.”

Russia, meanwhile, said Trump and Vance had acted with restraint. A foreign ministry spokeswoman said it was a miracle the pair had not hit Zelensky.

The day began with the same cordial routine the White House reserves for visiting foreign dignitaries.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was welcomed by US President Donald Trump at the door of the West Wing with an honour guard, and the leaders shook hands politely.

We were in the Oval Office as part of Ukrainian media pool, witnessing the well-rehearsed formalities and about half an hour of polite talk.

Zelensky presented Trump with the championship belt of Ukrainian boxer Oleksandr Usyk.

Trump complimented Zelensky’s clothing.

So far, so diplomatic.

But minutes later, what erupted was unprecedented to say the least. The genial tone devolved into acrimony and chaos. Voices were raised, eyes rolled, aspersions cast – and all in front of the world’s TV cameras.

The US president and vice-president berated the visiting leader, accusing Zelensky of not being grateful enough for US support that has sustained Ukraine’s war effort.

Tensions flared when Vice-President JD Vance told Zelensky that the war had to be ended through diplomacy.

What kind of diplomacy, Zelensky replied.

Talking over the Ukrainian president, Vance told the visiting leader it was “disrespectful” for him to come to the Oval Office and make his case in front of the American media and demanded that he thank Trump for his leadership.

Journalists in the room watched with gaping mouths as an extraordinary exchange followed.

“You’ve done enough talking. You’re not winning this,” Trump told him at one point. “You gotta be thankful. You don’t have the cards.”

“I’m not playing cards,” Zelensky replied. “I’m very serious, Mr President. I’m the president in a war.”

“You’re gambling with World War Three,” Trump responded. “And what you’re doing is very disrespectful to the country, this country, that’s backed you far more than a lot of people said they should have.”

Vance retorted: “Have you said ‘thank you’ once this entire meeting? No.”

Ukraine’s ambassador to the US watched with her head in her hands.

The atmosphere had shifted entirely – and all out in the open.

Our American colleagues remarked that they had never seen anything like it. “A scene like this was simply unimaginable in the White House,” one told me.

As reporters exited the Oval Office, many stood still in a state of shock. In the White House briefing room, where the exchange was replayed shortly afterwards, the rest of the media who hadn’t been in the room watched in disbelief.

Confusion ensued. There were immediate questions about whether the planned news conference would go ahead – or if the much-anticipated deal between the US and Ukraine over mineral resources would even be signed.

Minutes later, Trump wrote on Truth Social that Zelensky could “come back when he is ready for peace”.

The news conference and deal-signing ceremony – set to take place in the East Room of the White House – was officially cancelled.

Soon after Zelensky strode out and into a waiting SUV, as his ambassador trailed behind him.

They pulled away as the world was only beginning to digest an extraordinary moment.

Despite the full-blown argument, there may still be a minerals deal sooner or later.

But one thing is certain: this visit by Zelensky will be remembered for entirely different reasons.

The world saw first-hand how negotiations between the US and Ukraine are unfolding: they are difficult, emotional, and tense.

It was clear that this was a tough negotiation for both parties.

The gift of Ukrainian boxer Oleksandr Usyk’s belt certainly didn’t save the situation. And after this bout at the White House, the real question now is what this means for the war in Ukraine – and Zelensky’s own future.

Follow the twists and turns of Trump’s second presidential term with North America correspondent Anthony Zurcher’s weekly US Politics Unspun newsletter. Readers in the UK can sign up here. Those outside the UK can sign up here.

US investigators are trying to establish how Oscar-winning actor Gene Hackman and his wife, classical pianist Betsy Arakawa, died after the discovery of their bodies at their home in the US state of New Mexico.

Officials said on Friday that evidence points to Hackman having been dead since 17 February – 10 days before the couples’ bodies were found.

Here is what we know so far about the death of a Hollywood legend known for such films as The French Connection and The Conversation.

The bodies of the couple and one of their dogs were found by police on Wednesday at their home in Santa Fe, New Mexico, after a maintenance worker called emergency services.

In a recording of the 911 call obtained by the BBC, the emotional caller can be heard telling a dispatcher how he found the two bodies.

Hackman, 95, was discovered in a side room near the kitchen while Arakawa, 65, was found in a bathroom, at the property on Old Sunset Trail in Hyde Park.

The couple appeared to have been “dead for quite a while”, said Sheriff Adan Mendoza.

Arakawa’s body showed signs of “decomposition”, and “mummification” in the hands and feet, a sheriff’s detective said.

Hackman’s remains “showed obvious signs of death, similar and consistent” with those on his spouse.

A German Shepherd dog owned by the couple was found dead in a bathroom closet near to Arakawa.

No cause was given in police statements immediately after the announcement of the deaths.

The authorities reported no signs of injury but deemed the deaths “suspicious enough” to investigate and did not rule out foul play.

A carbon monoxide poisoning test came out negative for both Arakawa and Hackman, the Santa Fe Sheriff’s office said on Friday.

Near Arakawa’s head was a portable heater, which the detective determined could have been brought down in the event that she had abruptly fallen to the ground.

An autopsy and toxicology tests have been requested for both Hackman and Arakawa. Authorities said it could be a few months before the results of those are released.

The local utility company found no sign of a gas leak in the area and the fire department detected no indication of a carbon monoxide leak or poisoning, according to the search warrant.

A prescription bottle and scattered pills lay on the bathroom countertop close to Arakawa’s body. Prescription pills found in the home were common medications for thyroid and high blood pressure, according to a search warrant.

Hackman was discovered wearing grey tracksuit bottoms, a blue long-sleeve T-shirt and brown slippers. Sunglasses and a walking cane lay next to his body.

The detective suspected that the actor had suffered a sudden fall.

The circumstances of their death were deemed “suspicious enough in nature to require a thorough search and investigation”, the search warrant says, because the worker who called emergency services had found the front door of the property open.

However, the detective observed no sign of forced entry into the home. Nothing appeared out of place inside.

“There was no indication of a struggle,” said Sheriff Mendoza. “There was no indication of anything that was missing from the home or disturbed, you know, that would be indication that there was a crime that had occurred.”

Two other, healthy dogs were discovered roaming the property – one inside and one out.

Authorities said Hackman’s pacemaker last registered activity on 17 February, adding that this gives them a good assumption that was his last day of life.

But police said it is unclear who died first – Hackman or Arakawa.

The two maintenance workers who found the couple, one of whom called the emergency services, say they last had contact with the couple two weeks earlier.

The two said they had sometimes conducted routine work at the property, but rarely ever saw Hackman and Arakawa.

They had communicated with them by phone and text, primarily with Arakawa.

Hackman’s daughter Leslie Anne Hackman told the Mail Online that her father had been in “very good physical condition” despite his age, and had not undergone “any major surgeries” in recent months.

“He liked to do Pilates and yoga, and he was continuing to do that several times a week,” she said. “So he was in good health.”

The couple, married in 1991, had had a “wonderful marriage”, she added.

“I give credit to his wife, Betsy, for keeping him alive,’ she said. ‘[Betsy] took very, very good care of him and was always looking out for his health.”

Don’t insult the leaders. Don’t insult the ideology. And don’t judge.

These are the rules tour guides read out to Western tourists as they prepare to drive across the border into North Korea, arguably the most secretive and repressive country in the world.

Then there is the practical information. No phone signal, no internet, no cash machines.

“The North Koreans aren’t robots. They have opinions, goals, and a sense of humour. And in our briefing we encourage people to listen to and understand them,” says Rowan Beard, who runs Young Pioneer Tours, one of two Western companies which resumed trips to the country last week, after a five-year hiatus.

North Korea sealed its borders at the outset of the pandemic, shutting out diplomats, aid workers and travellers, and making it nearly impossible to know what was happening there.

Since then, it has further isolated itself from most of the world, relying on support from Russia and China. Many doubted whether Westerners would ever be allowed back.

But after years of cajoling and several false starts, Rowan and some other tour leaders were given the green light to restart operations. He pulled together a group of eager travellers in just five hours, desperate to not miss the opportunity. Most were vloggers and travel addicts, some wanting to tick the final country off their list, along with the odd North Korea enthusiast.

Last Thursday the tourists, from the UK, France, Germany and Australia, drove over the border from China into the remote area of Rason for a four-night trip.

Among them was 28-year-old British YouTuber Mike O’Kennedy. Even with its reputation, he was startled by the extreme level of control. As with all trips to North Korea, the tourists were escorted by local guides, who followed a strict, pre-approved schedule. It included carefully choreographed trips to a beer factory, a school, and a new, fully stocked pharmacy.

Ben Weston, one of the tour leaders from Suffolk, likened visiting North Korea to “being on a school trip”. “You can’t leave the hotel without the guides,” he said.

“A couple of times I even had to let them know when I wanted to use the bathroom,” said Mike. “I’ve never had to do that anywhere in the world.”

Despite the chaperoning, Mike was able to spot snippets of real life. “Everyone was working, it didn’t feel like anyone was just hanging out. That was kind of bleak to see.”

On his trip to the school, a group of eight-year-olds performed a dance to animations of ballistic missiles hitting targets. A video of the spectacle shows girls and boys with red neckties, singing, while explosions flare on a screen behind them.

For now, tourists are being kept well away from the capital Pyongyang. Greg Vaczi from Koryo Tours, the other tour company allowed back in, admits the current itinerary lacks the “big-hitting monuments” of Pyongyang. He suspects authorities have chosen Rason as their guinea pig because the area is relatively contained and easy to control.

Set up as a special economic zone, to trial new financial policies, it operates as a mini capitalist enclave inside an otherwise socialist state. Chinese businesspeople run joint enterprises with North Koreans, and can travel in and out fairly freely.

Joe Smith, a seasoned North Korea traveller and former writer for the specialist North Korea platform NK News, was there on his third trip. “I feel like the more times you visit the less you know. Each time you get a little peek behind the curtain, which just leaves you with more questions,” he said.

Joe’s highlight was a surprise off-agenda visit to a luxury goods market, where people were selling jeans and perfumes, along with fake Louis Vuitton handbags and Japanese washing machines, probably imported from China. Here, the tourists were not allowed to take photos – an attempt to hide this consumer bubble from the rest of the country, they suspected.

“This was the only place people weren’t expecting us,” Joe said. “It felt messy and real; a place North Koreans actually go. I loved it.”

But according to the experienced tour leaders, the group’s movements were more restricted than on previous trips, with fewer opportunities to wander the streets, pop into a barbershop or supermarket, and talk to locals.

Covid was often cited as the reason, said Greg from Koryo Tours. “On the surface they are still concerned. Our luggage was disinfected at the border, our temperatures were taken, and about 50% of people are still wearing masks.” Greg cannot work out whether the fear is genuine, or an excuse to control people.

It is thought Covid hit North Korea hard, though it is difficult to know the extent of the suffering.

Local guides repeated the government line that the virus entered the country in a balloon sent over from South Korea, and was swiftly eradicated in 90 days. But Rowan, who has been to North Korea more than 100 times, sensed that Rason had been impacted by the tough Covid regulations. A lot of Chinese businesses had closed, he said, and their workers had left.

Even Joe, the experienced North Korea traveller, commented on how dilapidated the buildings were. “Places were dimly lit and there was no heating, apart from in our hotel rooms,” he said, noting a trip to a cold, dark and deserted art gallery. “It felt like they opened the doors just for us.”

The regime’s photographs might make North Korea look clean and shiny, Joe said, but in person you realise “the roads are awful, the pavements are wobbly, and the buildings are weirdly constructed”. His hotel room was old-fashioned and filthy, he said, resembling “his grandma’s living room”. The whole window was cracked.

“They’ve had five years to fix things. North Koreans are so sensitive about what they show tourists. If this is the best they can show, I dread to think what else is out there”, he said. Most of the country is kept well hidden, with more than four in 10 people believed to be undernourished and needing help.

One of the few chances tourists in North Korea get to interact with local people is through their guides, who sometimes speak English. On these recent trips they were surprisingly well-informed, despite the regime’s intense propaganda machine and information blockade. This is probably because they speak to the Chinese businesspeople who come and go, said Greg.

They knew about Trump’s tariffs and the war in Ukraine – even that North Korean troops were involved. But when Joe showed a photo from Syria, his guide was unaware President Assad had been toppled. “I carefully explained that sometimes when people don’t like their leader, they rise up and force them out, and at first he didn’t believe me.”

Such conversations need to be delicately handled. Strict laws prevent North Koreans from speaking freely. Ask or reveal too much and the tourists might put their guide or themselves at risk.

Mike admits there were times this made him nervous. On a trip to a North Korea-Russia Friendship House, he was invited to write in the visitors’ book. “I went blank and wrote something like ‘I wish the world peace.’ Afterwards my guide told me that was an inappropriate thing to write. That made me paranoid,” he said.

“Generally, the guides did a great job of making us feel safe. There were just a couple of moments when I thought, this is bizarre.”

For Greg from Koryo Tours, these interactions bring a deeper purpose to North Korea tourism: “North Koreans get the chance to engage with foreigners. This allows them to come up with new ideas, which, in a country this closed, is so important.”

But tourism to North Korea is contentious, especially as travellers have been allowed back before aid workers and most Western diplomats, including the UK’s. Critics, including Joanna Hosaniak from the Citizens Alliance for North Korean Human Rights, argue these trips mainly benefit the regime.

“This is not like tourism in other poor countries, where local people benefit from the extra income. The vast majority of the population don’t know these tourists exist. Their money goes to the state and ultimately towards its military,” she said.

One conversation has stuck in YouTuber Mike’s head. During his trip to the school, he was surprised when a girl, after meeting him, said she hoped to visit the UK one day. “I didn’t have the heart to tell her that her chances were very, very slim,” he said.

Donald Trump has clashed with Volodymyr Zelensky in a furious exchange at the White House, with the US president telling his Ukrainian counterpart to make a deal with Russia “or we are out”.

The pair interrupted each other repeatedly in front of the media during what was supposed to be a prelude to the two leaders signing a minerals deal.

After relations first became strained over Trump’s handling of Ukraine peace talks with Russia, the minerals agreement was supposed to be a stepping stone towards further security ties between the countries.

But Zelensky was told by the Americans to leave before the deal could be signed.

At one point, Trump told Zelensky he was not thankful enough for US military and political support, and that he was “gambling with World War Three”.

Zelensky had earlier argued there should be “no compromises” with Russian President Vladimir Putin – but Trump said Kyiv would have to make concessions to reach a peace deal with Russia.

Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, and currently controls around 20% of Ukrainian territory.

• Follow updates as Zelensky leaves White House early
• Analysis: Trump-Zelensky row signals major crisis for Nato
• Timeline of Trump and Zelensky’s fraying relationship
• Can Europe deter Russia in Ukraine without US military?
• Watch in full: Angry exchange between Trump and Zelensky

The meeting to discuss the US-Ukraine deal, which involved access to Ukrainian oil, gas and rare minerals, came after the new US president appeared to blame Zelensky for the war and chided him for not starting peace talks with Russia earlier.

His tone had softened in recent days, with Trump saying he had “a lot of respect” for the Ukrainian leader.

But Friday’s conversation soured after the US Vice-President JD Vance – who was sat alongside other politicians in the room – told Zelensky that the war had to be ended through diplomacy.

Zelensky responded by asking “what kind of diplomacy?”, referencing a previous ceasefire deal in 2019, agreed three years before Russia’s full-scale invasion when Moscow was supporting and arming separatist fighters in Ukraine’s east.

The vice-president then accused Zelensky of being disrespectful and “litigating” the situation in front of the media.

From there, the discussion escalated quickly, as Trump and Vance accused Ukraine’s president of being ungrateful for three years of US support during the war with Russia, with Trump saying Zelensky was in no position to tell the US how it should feel.

Not long after the meeting – and well ahead of the pre-planned schedule – Zelensky was seen leaving the White House in his official vehicle.

Trump took to Truth Social, the social media platform he owns, to say “Zelensky disrespected the US in its cherished Oval Office”.

“I have determined that President Zelensky is not ready for Peace if America is involved, because he feels our involvement gives him a big advantage in negotiations,” the Republican president continued. “I don’t want advantage, I want PEACE.”

Zelensky also posted on social media, thanking the president and the US four times.

In a later interview with Fox News, Zelensky said the public spat “was not good” – but the relationship between him and Trump could be salvaged.

“Because the relations are more than just two presidents,” he said, adding that it was also about “strong relations between our two people.”

Reaction to the White House meeting among US politicians appeared to fall along partisan lines, with Republicans praising Trump and Democrats criticising him.

Republican Senator Lindsey Graham – once a staunch supporter of Ukraine – told reporters: “What I saw in the Oval Office was disrespectful and I don’t know if we can ever do business with Zelensky again.”

He said Zelensky “either needs to resign and send somebody over that we can do business with, or he needs to change”.

Democratic House minority leader Hakeem Jeffries described Zelensky’s treatment as “appalling”, adding that it “will only serve to further embolden Vladimir Putin”.

In Ukraine, there was broadly appreciation for Zelensky holding his ground over what is, for them, an existential war.

“Trump’s administration was so arrogant,” one man in Kyiv told the BBC. “When you look at Zelensky’s face, you understand that the discussion behind the closed doors was not so polite.

“They are so rude, they don’t respect the people of Ukraine. They even don’t hide it.”

The Oval Office spat also prompted words of support for Zelensky from key European allies, including France.

A spokeswoman for UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer – who has cast himself as a mediator between the US and Europe as the Trump administration adopts a more isolationist approach to the continent – said he had spoken to both leaders.

She said Sir Keir “retains unwavering support for Ukraine, and is doing all he can to find a path forward to a lasting peace”.

Friedrich Merz, who is expected to become Germany’s next chancellor, wrote that he stood with Ukraine “in good and testing times”, adding: “We must never confuse aggressor and victim in this terrible war.”

EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said that “today, it became clear that the free world needs a new leader. It’s up to us, Europeans, to take this challenge”.

Russia, meanwhile, said Trump and Vance had acted with restraint. A foreign ministry spokeswoman said it was a miracle the pair hadn’t hit Zelensky.

In the immediate hours after those astonishing exchanges between Presidents Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelensky in the White House, European leaders, one after another, offered their public support for Ukraine.

But the prime minister remained silent.

Then, as I dashed into the studio for the BBC News at Ten, my phone went.

I had been sent a statement from No 10: Sir Keir Starmer had spoken to them both and the prime minister “retains unwavering support for Ukraine and is doing all he can to find a path forward to a lasting peace”.

Friday afternoon in the White House had not only entirely upended in the most spectacular fashion the relationship between two allies – America and Ukraine – but the diplomacy of recent days too, with the visits of President Emmanuel Macron of France and then the prime minister to the White House.

Just 24 hours before Volodymyr Zelensky’s visit to the Oval Office, I had stood there in the same room witnessing Trump and Sir Keir’s warmth and bonhomie: what a contrast to what was to come next.

Sir Keir, like Emmanuel Macron before him, had sought to ingratiate himself with the wildly unpredictable American president, convinced that was the pragmatic course of action.

Now the prime minister confronts a situation where two of the UK’s allies are at loggerheads in the most public and angry way.

Sources are tight-lipped about the precise nature of the two phone calls Sir Keir made on Friday night, very aware of the acute sensitivities of this delicate situation.

But the UK’s diplomatic efforts in recent weeks at least allowed those calls to be possible, allowing the UK to attempt to act as a bridge between both Kyiv and Washington, and Washington and Europe.

It comes, though, at some political cost. The government’s domestic critics such as the Scottish National Party argue that the invitation for Donald Trump to come to the UK on a second state visit should be rescinded.

• Follow live updates

Sunday’s summit of European leaders in London, hosted by the prime minister and attended by President Zelensky, was already shaping up to be crucial. It has now taken on further importance.

To give you a sense of that, Trade Minister Douglas Alexander told BBC Radio 4’s Any Questions that not only were the scenes in the Oval Office “deeply troubling and sobering” but demonstrated “in the starkest possible terms” the extent to which “the world we’ve all experienced for the last 80 years” had changed, adding we that were in “uncharted waters”.

He also called President Zelensky the “bravest political leader in Europe since Winston Churchill”.

And the European Union’s top diplomat, Kaja Kallas, said that it had “become clear that the free world needs a new leader. It is up to us, Europeans, to take this challenge.”

But that is the crux of this. Is Europe capable of that?

At the heart of the UK and others’ request of America is that the White House provides a security guarantee to Ukraine under any peace deal.

The UK wants that to amount to air cover. This would be a big ask of any president at any time, with the danger of conflict escalating with Russia.

But it is a colossal ask of a president who has made it abundantly clear he has no appetite whatsoever for American foreign military adventures.

Which brings us to this weekend and President Zelensky joining his European allies in the UK.

There is a colossal amount at stake.

Donald Trump appears to have more confidence in the capabilities of Britain’s armed forces than some of his own generals – or, for that matter, many of Britain’s retired military top brass.

When asked at his news conference with the UK prime minister about US security guarantees for Ukraine, Trump said: “The British have incredible soldiers, incredible military and they can take care of themselves.”

However, the US president did leave the question hanging in the air as to whether the UK military could take on Russia.

In public, senior US military officers are quick to praise the professionalism of Britain’s armed forces. But in private, they’re often highly critical of recent cuts to their size, especially to the British Army, which now has just over 70,000 regular troops.

“Too small” is what one very senior US general said in a private briefing on a visit to the UK.

According to the International Institute of Strategic Studies, Russia’s military expenditure is now higher than Europe’s total defence spending, in terms of purchasing parity power. It’s increased by 41% and is now the equivalent of 6.7% of GDP. In contrast, the UK will be spending just 2.5% by 2027.

President Trump’s comments underscore the reality that he’s not contemplating putting American troops on the ground in Ukraine to police any ceasefire. Any US presence will be economic, to exploit mining interests.

He suggests that that in itself might be a deterrent to Russia attacking again. But even his administration thinks there must be some hard power too – provided by others. It’ll be up to European nations to do that. The question is not just whether Europe has the will: does it have the numbers too?

The short answer is no. That is why Sir Keir Starmer has been pressing for additional US security guarantees from the world’s most powerful military.

Britain is not alone in cutting its armed forces in response to the end of the Cold War. That trend in Europe is slowly being reversed, with more nations increasing defence spending.

But Europe, on its own, would not be able to provide a force of 100-200,000 international troops, which Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky suggests would be needed to deter Russia from attacking again.

Instead, Western officials have said they’re thinking of a force of up to 30,000 troops. European jets and warships would help monitor Ukraine’s airspace and shipping lanes.

That force would be focused on providing “reassurance” at key sites – Ukraine’s cities, ports and nuclear power stations. They would not be placed anywhere near the current front lines in Eastern Ukraine. European fighter jets and warships would also monitor Ukraine’s air space and shipping lanes.

But these same Western officials acknowledge that this would not be enough, hence the calls for a US “backstop” – “to have the confidence that whatever forces are deployed will not be challenged by Russia” and to “give the prime minister confidence that he can deploy British forces safely”.

Officials believe that, at the very least, the US could provide oversight to any European forces with a “command and control element” and US fighter jets ready to respond from its airbases in Poland and Romania. Europe cannot match American space-based surveillance or intelligence-gathering capabilities.

It could also agree to continuing to supply Ukraine with weapons.

While Europe has recently overtaken the US in terms of the proportion of Western weapons supplied to Ukraine, one Western source said the US had provided “the cream” – such as long range missiles and air defence systems.

European nations also do not have the necessary enablers to conduct large-scale military operations on their own. The supply of Western weapons to Ukraine has been dependent on US logistics.

Nato’s bombing campaign over Libya in 2011 also highlighted deficiencies – with European nations supposedly taking the lead, but still dependent on US support. Allies relied on US refuelling tankers and US targeting.

But Sir Keir Starmer appears to have left Washington without any guarantees of US military support. Speaking to the BBC this morning, UK Health Secretary Wes Streeting suggested that Donald Trump’s re-commitment to Nato’s Article 5 – whereby an attack on one ally would be interpreted as an attack on all – might be enough.

But the US Defence Secretary, Pete Hegseth, has previously stated that any international troops sent to Ukraine will be neither a Nato force nor covered by its treaty. At present, there is no such Nato-style security guarantee.

Europe’s strength of will is being tested. The prime minister, who’s convening a meeting of leaders this weekend, will soon find out whether warm words from Donald Trump are enough to convince others to join the UK in putting boots on the ground.

France is the only other major European power that so far appears to be willing to do the same. Some Northern European nations – Denmark, Sweden and the Baltic states – are willing to consider a commitment, but again would like US security guarantees. Spain, Italy and Germany are so far opposed.

Sir Keir may still believe there’s room for negotiation, that the US might still be willing to back a European force. But as for Donald Trump’s question – would Britain be able to take on Russia’s military? Even though Russian forces have been weakened, the answer is no.

When Luna Sofia Miranda approached Sean Baker in a strip club in New York in 2022, she tried her best to charm him.

But he “very clearly did not want to buy a lap dance,” she says.

Miranda, who was 23 at the time, started asking why he and his wife were there.

“I’m very nosy,” she says. “So I kept asking them questions and I finally got it out of them. They were making a film about strippers.”

She told them she had studied acting, and – after a successful audition – got a call on her 24th birthday, to offer her a part in the film.

That film, Anora, is now seen as one of the frontrunners heading into the Oscars on Sunday.

• Anora star: Oscar talk is ‘overwhelming and amazing’

It’s directed by Baker, and stars Mikey Madison, who is up for best actress for her role as a New York stripper.

Madison, 25, relied on real-life strippers to help her perfect the part.

When she won a Bafta film award last month, she dedicated it to the sex worker community.

“I have been able to meet some of that community through my research of the film, and that’s been one of the most incredible parts of making the film,” she told us backstage.

They “deserve respect and don’t often get it. And so I had to say something,” she added.

We’ve been speaking to the actresses, strippers and dancers in the film about their experiences of working on it – and their thoughts on the finished product.

Some praised the film as realistic, particularly in its portrayal of the rejection and exhaustion that sex workers often feel. But others said the film was “limited”.

Edie Turquet was initially unsure whether to take part in the film.

The 21-year-old, who is British and appeared in Harry Potter spin-off Fantastic Beasts as a child, now lives in New York where she’s a student and a stripper.

She got cast as a background dancer in Anora after a casting agent spotted her in the club where she was working. But Turquet says the night before filming, she debated not showing up.

“I didn’t want to be part of a bad stripper film, or anything doing a disservice to our industry, so I was apprehensive,” she told me.

“Most films about strippers are super over-aestheticised, or bad and exploitative.”

Edie points to 2020 film Zola, about a waitress who goes to Florida for a weekend of stripping for quick cash. “I found it hyperbolic, totally overglamourising the work, and it felt like it was talking down to women,” she said.

“And don’t get me started on Pretty Woman, which is infuriating, especially the idea of a street worker played by Julia Roberts. Come on.”

But when Turquet realised Anora was a Sean Baker film, she changed her mind.

“His films are based on realism, he has a fly-on-the-wall style of filmmaking, which I love,” she said. “So I was down.”

Baker’s filmmaking skills were also what attracted Lindsey Normington to the film. The actress and stripper stars as Diamond, Anora’s workplace enemy.

She says she saw him at afterparty for a film premiere, and went up to him to tell him she was a fan.

They connected on Instagram, and months later, he contacted her to tell her he might have a role for her in a new film. “I fell to my knees in my house,” Normington said.

In the film, Anora is offered a chance at a fairytale escape when she meets and falls for the son of a wealthy Russian.

Miranda, an actress and stripper who plays Lulu, Anora’s best friend, says she was tasked with helping Madison sound like a real sex worker from New York.

“I shared a PDF of language and slang terms that only strippers from New York will understand,” she said.

One of those words was “whale”, which, Miranda explains, “is a customer who is like a bottomless pit of money. He will make your night. And he won’t make you work very hard for it at all.”

Also involved in the film was Kennady Schneider, a Los Angeles-based stripper and choreographer who trained Madison to dance.

She says Madison installed a pole at her house in LA, and the pair began working on her “sexy routine”.

“She put in so much work,” Schneider, 28, said. “She was so determined.”

Miranda said a lot of the film’s themes, on heartbreak and rejection, were relatable for her.

“Sometimes I feel like this shiny toy, that people want to play with. They go, ‘wow like you’re a stripper. You’re so cool.’ And then they just cast you aside and abandon you,” she said.

“I think about the ending a lot because I feel like Anora a lot.”

Turquet agrees, calling the ending “very relatable and poignant”, adding that it accurately depicts the “exhaustion and fatigue” strippers often feel.

“The sex industry has trauma built into it. It felt so real. It’s an incredible vulnerable industry,” she said.

“You’re putting yourself in danger every time you go to work. It’s a complex and exhausting job.”

But overall, she said has mixed feelings about the film.

“What a lot of stripper films miss – and what Anora starts but doesn’t go far enough on – is the moral question around men who buy sex,” she said.

“It’s the question of consent. Most of these films shy away from answering it, or looking into it.”

She said it also frustrates her that these characters “never exist outside their profession”.

“[Anora] is a pretty limited character,” she said. “We never learn anything about her. The film takes the perspective of [male leads] Igor and Vanya, in defining who she is.”

“It’s better than any film I’ve seen about it, but ultimately it’s limited as it’s not told by a sex worker,” she added. “I can’t wait till we’re telling our own stories and hopefully this opens the door to that.”

For Normington, the film reflected “the insecurity and competition and jealousy” that she has personally experienced in clubs.

“I appreciate that it’s not attempting to be a quintessential stripper movie.”

For Schneider, meanwhile, it was the film’s portrayal of the mundane nature of the job that struck a chord.

In the film’s early scenes, we see Anora at work, talking to clients in the club.

We also see her and the other strippers on a lunch break, eating from Tupperware boxes in a back room.

“It felt really accurate,” Schneider said.

“A lot of the time in [stripper] films, you have glamorisation, with money falling from the ceiling. Those moments do happen but they’re few and far between,” she said. “It’s much more of a quiet hustle.”

When Anora came out, special screenings were held for sex workers in New York and LA.

Footage circulated on social media shows the strippers banging their high-heeled platform pleaser shoes together over their heads, to show their appreciation at the end of the screenings.

“That is the most beautiful applause I’ve ever received, I don’t know if that will ever happen again,” Madison told us.

Now, all eyes are on the Oscars.

Miranda and Normington will both be attending. “It’s kind of silly to think that I’m going to the Oscars, but [at the same time] I’m at the club arguing with a stupid man over $20,” said Miranda.

“I feel like I’m living two lives.”

She said that Madison is “spot on” to say the sex worker community doesn’t get the respect it deserves, and said she hopes that Anora’s success will change that.

“My hope is that if this film wins an Oscar, it marks the beginning of a shift in Hollywood, where sex workers are respected, as workers in their own fields, but also as entertainers,” she said.

“If this film wins an Oscar, I want to see that.”

A selection of news photographs from around the world.

The US government’s sudden decision to axe funding for HIV programmes is a “wake-up call” for South Africa, the country’s health minister has told the BBC.

Dr Aaron Motsoaledi, responding to US termination notices issued late on Wednesday, said the cuts could lead to deaths, but he had instructed state-funded clinics to ensure no patient went without life-saving drugs.

There is chaos as many affected organisations scramble to find alternative help for some 900,000 HIV patients by the end of the day.

“Instead of a careful handover, we’re being pushed off a cliff,” said Kate Rees from the Anova Health Institute, one of the biggest recipients of special US funding to counter the spread of HIV.

These cuts to the US’s HIV programme, known as the US President’s Emergency Plan for Aids Relief (Pepfar), are part of wider cost-cutting drive to reduce American government spending.

Pepfar was launched in 2003 by then US President George W Bush and its funding is distributed via the US government’s main overseas aid agency USAID.

It has been regarded as a ground-breaking scheme that has enabled some of the world’s poorest people to access anti-retroviral drugs (ARVs) and has saved more than 25 million lives worldwide.

A 90-day freeze on US foreign aid payments instituted by President Donald Trump on his first day in office last month has already upended the global aid system.

In reaction to the raft of cuts, the head of the Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (Africa CDC) issued a stark warning on Friday.

“I have to say that the world is playing with fire,” Dr Jean Kaseya told the BBC.

“I want to send a clear message to our partners from the US, the UK and all other Western countries that please don’t come to blame Africa when there will be a pandemic coming from Africa because you decided to stop funding critical programme.”

• What’s really driving Trump’s fury with South Africa?
• What is USAID and why is Trump poised to ‘close it down’?

South Africa is one of the biggest beneficiaries of Pepfar, which contributes about 17% to its HIV/Aids programme, in which about 5.5 million people out of eight million people living with HIV receive ARVs.

Like all such US-funded organisations in South Africa, the Anova Health Institute was notified overnight on Wednesday about the decision by US President Donald Trump’s administration to terminate tens of billions of dollars of aid contracts.

Dr Rees described the announcement as one of the “worst days” of her career, especially as there had been plans afoot to reduce the dependency of HIV programmes on donor aid.

This was to take place over the next five years, making it easier for the country’s health department to take over, she said.

Health experts say Pepfar funding was also helping with research for a cure for HIV, and that the cuts would set that work back years.

The Desmond Tutu Health Foundation projects the US’s move could result in as many as half a million deaths.

South Africa’s leading Aids lobby group, the Treatment Action Campaign (TAC), warned the country could see a return to when HIV patients struggled to access necessary services for their treatment.

“We can’t afford to die, we can’t afford to go back to those years where we were suffering with access to services, especially for people living with HIV treatment,” said TAC chair Sibongile Tshabalala.

She was speaking during a digital news conference on Thursday, in which representatives from organisations that work with HIV patients described the chaos and despair caused by the termination of the funding.

Ms Tshabalala, who has HIV, became emotional as she questioned how she and others like her would survive in the wake of the funding cuts.

Dr Motsoaledi said he did not want South Africa, which has the largest ARV programme in the world, to be dependent on aid.

“It’s only that you remember the era when Pepfar started, when people offer your money, you couldn’t reject it. But I believe it was something that we should not have allowed to flourish,” the health minister told the BBC.

Services affected by the US cuts include community testing and tracing, as well as specialist clinics that help pregnant mothers from passing the virus to their unborn children.

Ms Tshabalala told the BBC the TAC had received a “chunk” of their funding from Pepfar and a smaller grant from the US CDC and the South African National Aids Council (Sanac).

While the CDC funding was due to end at the end of March, giving the TAC some breathing room, Pepfar’s abrupt termination had immediately resulted in the loss of 101 jobs from a total of 189 staff members, she said.

“We have people living and affected by HIV who are hired to go do monitoring services at the clinic level.”

HIV became prevalent in South Africa by the late 1990s, but it was only in 2004 that the government, dragged to court over its “Aids denialism”, began providing ARVs.

Ms Tshabalala, who tested positive in 2000, said she had gone “through a lot [in] those first six years after being diagnosed with HIV”.

The latest development reminded her of that time of struggle, she said.

“Not because there is nothing that can be done but because somebody, somewhere decided that you are not human enough to receive treatment.”

• ‘My wife fears sex, I fear death’ – impacts of the USAID freeze
• Is it checkmate for South Africa after Trump threats?
• Why South Africa’s health insurance is causing ructions

Three people have died in Reunion after Cyclone Garance swept through the French Indian Ocean territory with gusts of up to 234km/h (145mph).

The tropical cyclone left more than 180,000 homes without power and 170,000 without running water after making landfall on Friday morning.

The remote island’s entire population – including emergency services and police – were ordered to stay indoors as the maximum alert level was imposed.

Heavy storm rains were expected to continue on Friday evening, with Prime Minister Francois Bayrou warning on X that the cyclone remained a threat.

The “brutal and violent” conditions were worse than Cyclone Belal, which killed four people on the island in January 2024, Prefect Patrice Latron said.

Garance made landfall in the north of Reunion at 10:00 local time (06:00 GMT), before sweeping south and exiting the island by late afternoon, according to weather agency Meteo France.

Local authorities reduced the alert level by midday to allow emergency services and police to leave their shelters.

The top wind speed of 234km/h had not been recorded on the island since Cyclone Hollanda in February 1994.

Vincent Clain, 45, a resident of the island’s northern coast, told news agency AFP: “This is the first time I’ve seen a cyclone this powerful, and also the first time I’ve been afraid.”

Some 100 troops and firefighters were on standby to be dispatched from the French territory of Mayotte nearly 1,500km (930 miles) away when conditions eased, as well as 100 from mainland France.

Meanwhile, a 55-year-old man went missing in nearby Mauritius on Wednesday after going swimming in rough seas.

France’s Interior Minister Bruno Retailleau said Friday that Garance was of a “rare intensity”, while Defence Minister Sebastien Lecornu said armed forces stood ready to provide assistance.

A freight train carrying the highly toxic chemical benzene has derailed in the Czech Republic, sparking a huge fire.

Several tankers and a locomotive were ablaze, with firefighters from several regions and a mobile chemical laboratory deployed to the area, according to local media. A massive cloud of dense black smoke was visible for several kilometres.

Railway officials say nobody was injured in the incident, which occurred near Hustopeče nad Bečvou, 50km (31 miles) south-west of the Polish border, on Friday.

Benzene, which is a cancer-causing substance for humans, is an element present in aircraft fuel.

The train “split apart” and subsequently derailed, according to initial reports. A nearby electric substation also caught fire, killing power to the nearby town of Hustopeče.

Flames up to 20m high were visible when the fire broke out, one eyewitness told the Lidove Noviny newspaper.

Dramatic drone footage from the scene, released by the Czech fire service, shows several badly charred and destroyed tankers – some still burning as thick black smoke spews into the sky.

Firefighters used heavy foam to prevent the fire spreading further, while other tankers were hosed down to prevent more explosions.

A helicopter was also deployed, as well as a special chemical monitoring mobile lab. It took several hours to bring the fire under control, officials said.

The fire affected around 15 of the 17 benzene tanks the train had been transporting, a fire department spokesperson told local media.

“The substance should be the same in all tankers, the amount will be specified, but it is approximately 60 tonnes in one tanker. However, this does not mean that everything will burn out or leak,” Lucie Balážová said.

The fire service later said the estimated cost of the damage the fire had caused was 125 million Czech koruna (£4.1m).

Locals have been told to stay indoors and not open windows or doors. Officials say air quality “has not yet exceeded” any pollution limits, according to Czech news website iDNES.

Police say they will investigate the cause of the derailment.

Benzene is a colourless or light-yellow liquid with a sweet smell that can evaporate very quickly. It is used in common substances like plastic, resin, nylon and some forms of dyes, pesticides or detergents. It is very flammable.

Exposure to benzene through breathing or ingestion can cause symptoms like drowsiness, dizziness, tremors, vomiting or sleeplessness.

Very high levels of exposure can lead to unconsciousness or death, according to the CDC. Long-term exposure of a year or more could cause issues with blood, bone marrow or the immune system.

At least 25 arrests have been made during a worldwide operation against child abuse images generated by artificial intelligence (AI), the European Union’s law enforcement organisation Europol has said.

The suspects were part of a criminal group whose members engaged in distributing fully AI-generated images of minors, according to the agency.

The operation is one of the first involving such child sexual abuse material (CSAM), Europol said. The lack of national legislation against these crimes made it “exceptionally challenging for investigators”, it added.

Arrests were made simultaneously on Wednesday 26 February during Operation Cumberland, led by Danish law enforcement, a statement said.

Authorities from at least 18 other countries have been involved and the operation is still continuing, with more arrests expected in the next few weeks, Europol said.

In addition to the arrests, so far 272 suspects have been identified, 33 house searches have been conducted and 173 electronic devices have been seized, according to the agency.

It also said the main suspect was a Danish national who was arrested in November 2024.

The statement said he “ran an online platform where he distributed the AI-generated material he produced”.

After making a “symbolic online payment”, users from around the world were able to get a password that allowed them to “access the platform and watch children being abused”.

The agency said online child sexual exploitation was one of the top priorities for the European Union’s law enforcement organisations, which were dealing with “an ever-growing volume of illegal content”.

Europol added that even in cases when the content was fully artificial and there was no real victim depicted, such as with Operation Cumberland, “AI-generated CSAM still contributes to the objectification and sexualisation of children”.

Europol’s executive director Catherine De Bolle said: “These artificially generated images are so easily created that they can be produced by individuals with criminal intent, even without substantial technical knowledge.”

She warned law enforcement would need to develop “new investigative methods and tools” to address the emerging challenges.

The Internet Watch Foundation (IWF) warns that more sexual abuse AI images of children are being produced and becoming more prevalent on the open web.

In research last year the charity found that over a one-month period, 3,512 AI child sexual abuse and exploitation images were discovered on one dark website. Compared with a month in the previous year, the number of the most severe category images (Category A) had risen by 10%.

Experts say AI child sexual abuse material can often look incredibly realistic, making it difficult to tell the real from the fake.