Russia launched a devastating attack on Ukraine on Saturday, killing at least 14 people and injuring dozens more, hours after Donald Trump defended Vladimir Putin and said the Kremlin leader was “doing what anybody would do”.

Two ballistic missiles hit the centre of Dobropillia in the eastern Donetsk region. Fire engulfed a five-storey apartment building. As emergency services arrived, Russia launched another strike on the same area. Eleven civilians were killed, with five children among the 30 injured.

Writing on social media, Volodymyr Zelenskyy condemned the “vile and inhuman intimidation tactic often used by the Russians”. Three people also died and seven injured in a drone attack in the city of Bohodukhiv, in the Kharkiv region.

Russia’s relentless bombardment of Ukrainian cities has intensified after a torrid week in which Trump has pulled the plug on intelligence sharing with Ukraine and halted the supply of US weapons.

These hostile moves mean the alarm system that warns Ukrainian civilians of incoming enemy missiles is less effective. Asked if Putin was taking advantage of US aid pauses, Trump on Friday acknowledged Ukraine was experiencing a “tremendous pounding”.

He suggested, however, that “anyone in Putin’s position” would do the same. Before a meeting on Tuesday between US and Ukrainian representatives in Saudi Arabia, Trump said he was “finding it easier” to deal with Moscow than with Kyiv.

European leaders suggested the US president was complicit in the latest devastation.

The Polish prime minister, Donald Tusk, said there had been “another tragic night in Ukraine”, with “more bombs, more aggression and more victims”. Without mentioning Trump directly, he said: “This is what happens when someone appeases barbarians.”

The EU’s foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, said the “relentless” Russian missiles demonstrated that Putin had no interest in peace. “We must step up our military support. Otherwise, even more Ukrainian civilians will pay the highest price,” she said.

Zelenskyy has been seeking to repair relations with Trump after their acrimonious White House meeting last month. Ukraine’s president has sketched out a peace plan – beginning with a truce on land and sea – and said he is ready to sign a favourable minerals deal with the US.

So far, however, Trump has piled pressure on Ukraine while making no demands of Russia. Zelenskyy said Saturday’s strike showed Moscow’s objectives had not changed. He called for an increase in sanctions against Russia to “collapse” its war economy.

Russia’s latest strike transformed the centre of Dobropillia into a sprawling ruin. The apartment block was a gutted mess. There were burnt-out cars and vans and smouldering debris. Rescuers swept up glass and twisted pieces of metal. Video from the strike showed a terrifying explosion.

Irina Kostenko, 59, spent the night cowering in her hallway with her husband. When she left the apartment building on Saturday, she saw a neighbour “lying dead on the ground, covered with a blanket”. “It was shocking, I don’t have the words to describe it,” she told the AFP news agency.

Meanwhile, Russia has exploited the US intelligence and weapons freeze to launch a series of bold attacks. North Korean and Russian troops have broken through Ukraine’s defences in Russia’s Kursk region, where Ukrainian units have for seven months occupied a parcel of territory.

There were unconfirmed reports on Saturday that Ukrainian forces had managed to stabilise the situation and avoid encirclement, at least for now. A hundred Russian soldiers crept through a gas pipeline in a raid on the Kyiv-held Russian town of Sudzha, Ukrainskaya Pravda newspaper reported.

Ukraine’s hold on territory in Kursk is increasingly precarious. Soldiers told the Observer two supply roads with the Ukrainian city of Sumy were open, but came under constant attack from Russian drones and artillery.

Serhiy Sternenko, a prominent Ukrainian activist, described the logistics situation there as “rapidly deteriorating and already critical”. “Logistics routes to Sudzha are under full enemy fire control,” he posted on X.

According to Kremlin bloggers, Russian combat groups advanced several kilometres across the border into Ukraine’s Sumy region. Russia also said it had retaken three villages in neighbouring Kharkiv oblast.

Britain’s ability to rely on the US to maintain the UK’s nuclear arsenal is now in doubt, experts have warned, but working with European states to replace it will be costly and take time.

An existing debate about the future of Trident – Britain’s ageing submarine-launched nuclear missile system – has taken a dramatic new turn in recent weeks amid fears Donald Trump could pull out of Nato.

A range of concerns had already loomed over the £3bn-a-year programme, not least around its efficiency and effectiveness after a second embarrassing failed test launch last year.

Costs have also been a longstanding challenge but replacing Vanguard submarines on time has been prioritised over coming in under budget.

Downing Street sought to play down concerns earlier this week after diplomatic figures including the former British ambassador to the US Sir David Manning floated the scenario of an end to Anglo-US nuclear cooperation.

However, calls for Britain to make alternative plans have been joined by the former UK foreign secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind, who initiated talks in the 90s between the UK and France on nuclear weapons cooperation.

“It really is necessary for Britain and France to work more closely together because if American reliability ever came into question, then Europe could be defenceless in the face of Russian aggression,” he said.

“The contribution by America must now be to some degree in doubt, not today or tomorrow, but over the next few years and certainly as long as Trump and people like him are in control in Washington.”

A No 10 spokesperson insisted this week that Keir Starmer viewed the US as a reliable ally, saying: “The UK’s nuclear deterrent is completely operationally independent.”

Yet the UK is – unlike France – highly intertwined with the US when it comes to maintaining its nuclear weapons, which are designed, manufactured and maintained in the US under a deal rooted in a 1958 agreement. Britain had 50 missiles left as of 2008 after purchases from a US stockpile, according to research by the University of Bradford.

“Britain likes to call its nuclear posture independent, but it, of course, is absolutely not,” said Hans Kristensen, who monitors the status of nuclear forces for the Federation of American Scientists, a US thinktank.

“It may be that Britain can fire weapons independently of the US, but below that, the entire infrastructure covering missile compartments on submarines, the missiles themselves, all are supplied by the Americans.”

Defence analysts are emphasising the need to plan for a scenario where a transatlantic relationship fractures to the extent that the US declines to give the UK missiles.

Dr Marion Messmer, a senior research fellow at Chatham House and an expert on nuclear weapons policy, said: “It would be a big risk if it wasn’t being planned for, but it’s something the UK government can’t be too public about, as it wouldn’t want to give the Trump administration or Russia any ideas.”

Developing a replacement for Trident or adapting it for use without the US would be “hugely complicated” and costly, she emphasised, but added that ideas being floated included looking at ways for Britain to launch nuclear weapons by air rather than at sea.

“You wouldn’t necessarily be able to take the warheads which the UK uses for submarine launches and fit them for air launch. You would very likely need to develop a whole second warhead. That would require everything from new assembly facilities and workforce planning, but it could be a worthwhile investment for Britain,” she said.

“You could hope that France – the most obvious contender for Britain to work with – has a delivery vehicle similar to Trident that could easily be adapted, but it would require the French government and the French nuclear enterprise being willing to share those designs with the UK.”

Other factors are also coming in to play, including an openness by France’s president, Emmanuel Macron, to talks on extending its nuclear umbrella over the rest of Europe, and comments by Germany’s likely next chancellor, Friedrich Merz, that it could pay towards French and British nuclear costs.

Calvin Bailey, a Labour MP on parliament’s defence committee and a former RAF officer, said it was “difficult to conceive” of the US not wanting to maintain its relationship with the UK, stressing that this had been strengthened by the Aukus alliance between Australia, Britain and the US.

But he added: “We now also have to look at how we as Europeans ensure and guarantee our own safety and security. We’re showing leadership on this with the French, who are the most obvious partners for us.”

Marco Rubio, the US secretary of state, looked on as Donald Trump demanded more gratitude from the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and accused the embattled leader of “gambling with world war three”.

“You right now are not in a very good position,” Trump chided Zelenskyy during their confrontation in the Oval Office last week.

Throughout the heated exchange, Rubio, who previously ran for president as a staunch Russia hawk, sat silently on a yellow sofa. The image of a sullen Rubio quickly went viral online, with one social media user dubbing him “the corpse on the couch”. One user wondered whether Rubio was “recognizing in real time that he is on the wrong side of history”, while another suggested he was “realizing he sold his soul to the dumbest people on the planet”.

The dynamic even caught the attention of Saturday Night Live, which featured a dour Rubio, played by Marcello Hernández, in its opening sketch last weekend.

“Oh man, look at Rubio over there, fully dissociating,” James Austin Johnson, impersonating Trump, said. “He looks like Homer Simpson disappearing into that hedge.”

It was a stunning display from the man who once attacked Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, as “a gangster”, “a thug” and “a war criminal”. Rubio’s ascension to the top of the state department has seemingly forced him to embrace Trump’s “America first” agenda and abandon his long-documented support of Ukraine.

Here are eight of Rubio’s past comments on Russia and Ukraine to show just how much his position has changed:

March 2014: ‘We have to help the Ukrainian people’

After winning one of Florida’s Senate seats in 2010, Rubio became an outspoken advocate of Ukraine, particularly in the wake of Russia annexing Crimea in 2014.

“I think the first and most important thing we need to do is, we have to help the Ukrainian people and the interim government in Ukraine to protect its nation’s sovereignty,” Rubio said in a Senate floor speech.

Rubio reminded fellow senators that Ukraine had agreed in 1994 to give up its nuclear arsenal in exchange for a guarantee of its security from the US, the UK and Russia, warning that a refusal to defend Kyiv could prompt other vulnerable countries to reconsider nuclearization.

“I think the message this is sending to many nations around the world is, perhaps we can no longer count on the security promises made by the free world,” Rubio said. “This has implications around the world.”

October 2015: ‘[Putin] will be treated for what he is – a gangster and a thug’

After launching his presidential campaign in 2015, Rubio pitched himself as the strongest candidate on foreign policy and promised he would go toe to toe with Putin once he entered the White House.

“As soon as I take office, I will move quickly to increase pressure on Moscow,” Rubio said at a campaign stop in Iowa. “Under my administration, there will be no pleadings for meetings with Vladimir Putin. He will be treated for what he is – a gangster and a thug.”

January 2017: ‘Is Vladimir Putin a war criminal?’

After Trump defeated Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election, he nominated Rex Tillerson, the former CEO of ExxonMobil, as secretary of state. During Tillerson’s confirmation hearing, Rubio grilled the nominee on his opinion of Putin, making it clear that he would not embrace Trump’s more conciliatory approach to Russia.

“Is Vladimir Putin a war criminal?” Rubio asked Tillerson.

“I would not use that term,” Tillerson replied.

“It should not be hard to say that Vladimir Putin is a war criminal,” Rubio said, “And I find it discouraging your inability to cite that, which I think is globally accepted.”

March 2022: ‘We will support [Ukrainians] as long as they are willing to fight’

After Russia began its wide-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Rubio called on the Biden administration to deliver a forceful message about its support for Kyiv.

“No matter what, there always has to be a real, legitimate Ukrainian state that we have a relationship with,” Rubio told MSNBC. “And I don’t know why we can’t begin to openly say we will support them as long as they are willing to fight, even if it’s only an insurgency.”

He also praised the sanctions issued against Russia since the invasion, saying, “I think what’s happened over the last week is really unprecedented. The Russian economy is headed toward collapse.”

May 2024: Rubio attacks ‘tyrant Vladimir Putin, who once again stole an election’

After Trump secured the Republican nomination for the second time in 2024, Rubio appeared to somewhat shift his views on foreign policy. In February 2024, he opposed a foreign aid package that included Ukraine funding because he said the US must secure its southern border before approving more money for Kyiv.

Despite that shift, Rubio still displayed a willingness to call out Putin’s strongman tactics, such as when he issued a “correction” to a Reuters social media post about the Russian president’s most recent swearing-in ceremony last May.

“Tyrant Vladimir Putin, who once again stole an election, uses his ‘inauguration ceremony’ as propaganda,” Rubio said in response to the post. “Another example of an authoritarian dictator masquerading as a democratically elected leader.”

January 2025: ‘There will have to be concessions made by the Russian Federation, but also by the Ukrainians’

After Trump announced Rubio as his secretary of state nominee in November, the cabinet pick moved quickly to embrace the president-elect’s “America first” worldview. During his confirmation hearing in January, Rubio emphasized that Ukraine must accept “concessions” to bring about an end to the war.

“There will have to be concessions made by the Russian Federation, but also by the Ukrainians and the United States,” Rubio said.

Rubio, who once vowed to make Putin and his “cronies” feel the heat of “US financial pressure”, also predicted that “sanctions and the release of sanctions” would “have to be part of this conversation in terms of bringing about a … resolution”.

February 2025: ‘I think [Zelenskyy] should apologize for wasting our time’

Despite appearing visibly uncomfortable during Trump’s confrontation with Zelenskyy last week, Rubio defended the president’s behavior and chastised the Ukrainian leader hours after the disastrous meeting.

“There was no need for [Zelenskyy] to go in there and become antagonistic,” Rubio told CNN. “I think he should apologize for wasting our time for a meeting that was gonna end the way it did.”

When the CNN host Kaitlan Collins reminded Rubio that he once attacked Putin as a “war criminal”, he told her, “At this moment as secretary of state, my job working for the president is to deliver peace, to end this conflict and end this war … I think we should be very proud and happy that we have a president whose prime objective is not to get into wars but to prevent wars and to get out of wars.”

March 2025: ‘It’s a proxy war between nuclear powers’

Rubio further embraced Russia’s view on the war on Wednesday, when he told Fox News, “It’s been very clear from the beginning that Trump views this as a protracted, stalemated conflict. And frankly, it’s a proxy war between nuclear powers – the United States, helping Ukraine, and Russia – and it needs to come to an end.”

A spokesperson for the Kremlin, Dmitry Peskov, wholeheartedly agreed with Rubio’s assessment, saying, “It is absolutely in line with the position that our president and foreign minister have repeatedly expressed.”

Poland’s prime minister, Donald Tusk, has said his government is working on a plan to prepare large-scale military training for every adult male in response to the changing security situation in Europe.

He said there was a need for an army of 500,000 soldiers, which would include reservists.

“We will try to have a model ready by the end of this year, so that every adult male in Poland is trained in the event of war, so that this reserve is really comparable and adequate to potential threats,” Tusk said in a major speech on security to the country’s Sejm, the lower house of parliament, on Friday.

Last year, the Polish government said the military encompassed about 200,000 soldiers and was to grow to 220,000 this year with the objective of increasing it to about 300,000.

But security fears have grown far more dramatic in recent weeks, as Russia continues to pound Ukraine with missiles and drones, and as the Trump administration has withdrawn military and intelligence support for Ukraine while putting its commitments to Nato in question.

“Today we are talking about the need for a half-million army in Poland,” Tusk said.

After his speech, he told reporters he was not considering a return of universal military service, but rather a reserve system based on the model in Switzerland. In that country, every man is obliged to serve in the military or an alternative civilian service while women can volunteer if they choose.

Tusk also suggested on Friday the country should explore nuclear “possibilities”. “We must be aware that Poland must reach for the most modern possibilities, also related to nuclear weapons and modern unconventional weapons,” he said.

And he backed withdrawing from a landmark treaty prohibiting the use of anti-personnel landmines, the Ottawa convention, as well as potentially from the Dublin convention, which bans the use of cluster munitions.

At least two other Nato countries, Finland and Lithuania – both also bordering Russia – have also in the past months mulled exiting the Ottawa convention.

“Let’s face it: it’s not something nice, nothing pleasant. We know that very well,” Tusk said. “The problem is that in our environment, those we may be afraid of, or those who are at war, they all have it.”

Poland, with a population of 38 million people, is located along Nato’s eastern flank and is deeply concerned by the war in Ukraine. There are fears that if Ukraine is defeated, Russia will turn its imperial ambitions next to countries like Poland, which Moscow controlled during the 19th century and during the cold war.

Jaroslaw Kaczyński, the head of Poland’s largest opposition party, the conservative Law and Justice, said a mental shift in society would also be needed in addition to the military training of men. “We will have a return to the chivalric ethos and to the fact that men should also be soldiers – that is, be able to expose themselves even to death,” Kaczyński said.

Concern has grown in Poland and across most of Europe as President Donald Trump has signalled the dramatic shifting of the US position to one that includes support for Russia’s position – even though on Friday he issued a stern warning to Russia after it attacked Ukrainian energy facilities with dozens of missiles and drones.

“If Ukraine loses the war or if it accepts the terms of peace, armistice or capitulation in such a way that weakens its sovereignty and makes it easier for [Russian president Vladimir] Putin to gain control over Ukraine, then, without a doubt – and we can all agree on that – Poland will find itself in a much more difficult geopolitical situation,” Tusk said.

Also on Friday, President Andrzej Duda said he was submitting an amendment to the Polish constitution for consideration which would oblige the country to spend at least 4% of its gross domestic product each year on defence.

Poland already spends a higher proportion of GDP on defence than any other Nato member, including the US. Last year Poland’s defence spending reached 4.1% of GDP, according to Nato estimates, and it plans to hit 4.7% this year.

But Duda said he wanted to take advantage of the consensus on the political scene in Poland today on the matter to enshrine it in the highest law.

Trump has suggested the US might abandon its commitments to the alliance if member countries don’t meet defence spending targets.

Associated Press, Reuters and Agence France-Presse contributed to this report

When it comes to the issues on the table – schools, healthcare, independence – Tuesday’s election is “not that exceptional”, says Greenlandic politician Aaja Chemnitz Larsen. And yet, it will potentially be the most consequential in the Arctic island’s history.

What makes this general election unlike any other, says the Inuit Ataqatigiit member of the Danish parliament, is the global spotlight on it. “What we’re seeing is influence from the US, Denmark and other places, it is not the same as other elections.”

Donald Trump’s fixation with acquiring Greenland “one way or the other” , as he told Congress to laughs last week, means the US – and as a result, the world – is watching Greenland’s election like never before. Denmark, which ruled the now autonomous territory as a colony until 1953 and continues to control its foreign and security policy, is also paying unprecedented attention for fear of losing a crucial part of its kingdom.

Even before Trump’s inauguration in January, he was aggressively mooting a renewed version of his first-term idea of “buying” Greenland – which his administration sees as a valuable asset for its strategic location and its considerable natural resources – this time with threats of military action and tariffs if Denmark did not comply. This came after a whistlestop private visit to the capital, Nuuk, by his son, Donald Trump Jr, which despite being a private trip was broadcast across the world on social media by his entourage.

Among an electorate where little polling takes place, analysts are reluctant to predict whether the ­coalition led by Greenlandic prime minister Múte Egede, of Inuit Ataqatigiit (the ruling democratic socialist pro-independence party) will remain in power. Naleraq, Greenland’s largest opposition party, has been gaining traction with its prominent voice for independence and openness to collaborating with the US.

Society feels more divided during this election, says Chemnitz Larsen, and for the first time politicians have security with them while out campaigning. There is also public anger about a documentary by Danish broadcaster DR that claimed Denmark earned the equivalent of up to 400bn Danish kroner (£45bn), from a Greenlandic cryolite mine between 1854 and 1987. Some critics have claimed the amount is inaccurate because it did not include costs, but in Greenland the documentary has been cited as an example of colonial injustice. According to a poll for Greenlandic newspaper Sermitsiaq, more than a third of voters say its findings will influence their vote.

This comes on top of other recent revelations over alleged mistreatment of Greenlanders by the state of Denmark. These include an IUD scandal in which 4,500 women and girls were allegedly fitted with contraception without their knowledge or consent between 1966 and 1970. Egede recently labelled the scandal genocide. And the Danish government recently did a U-turn on the use of controversial “parenting competency” tests on Greenlandic families which have led to the separation of many Inuit children from their parents.

With a voting public of only about 40,000 – Greenland’s total population is 57,000 – the margins are small.

Unlike the reaction in Copenhagen, which went into crisis mode over Trump’s apparent threats, Trump’s interest in Greenland was seen by many in Nuuk with bemusement and a hope that it could be leveraged to negotiate a better deal with Denmark or to secure a quicker route to independence.

Rasmus Leander Nielsen, head of Nasiffik, the University of Greenland’s centre for foreign and security policy, said it is an election of everyday politics colliding with geopolitical questions over Trump. “You have those two narratives kind of clashing.”

He added: “We see different dynamics going in different directions but also it’s very unpredictable what’s going to happen.”

What he is sure of is that while there may be a referendum on independence in the next election cycle, it is unlikely that Greenland will achieve independence in the next four years. “It could take a decade or longer.” Like Brexit, he said, even if Greenland voted yes in a referendum, there would still need to be lengthy discussions and negotiations.

Among the more likely scenarios, he believes, is that Greenland will try to renegotiate its relationship with Denmark within the kingdom. “Now with heightened tensions, Greenland has pretty good cards in its hands and could make the argument that they need to do something different from the status quo.”

Greenlandic politician Aki-Matilda Høegh-Dam said time is of the essence when it comes to Greenland’s voice on the global stage, which she believes will not wait for Greenland to make up its mind on independence. Høegh-Dam, who left the social democratic Siumut party, which she represented in the Danish parliament, to run for Naleraq for Inatsisartut, the Greenlandic parliament, said: “I hope people will vote in people who are excellent in foreign policy because with major interest from the outside world it’s more important now.”

Interest from outside Greenland has been unprecedented, she said. “We have never seen so much international media interested in participating in our election campaigning.”

There has also been considerable foreign interest in the business world.

Drew Horn, a member of the first Trump administration and chief executive of Washington DC-based mineral investment company GreenMet, said there are “tens of billions” of dollars ready to be invested in Greenland immediately.

Tom Dans, Trump’s former Arctic commissioner and an investor, said while there is not a “quick buck” to be made – mining, he says, is a long-term business – it is an “exciting time” for Greenland. “It’s really frontier in the true sense of things,” he said.

Dans added: “We talk about outer space and trips to Mars and then when you realise Nuuk is a three-hour flight from New York City, or thereabouts, it gets interesting.”

A reporter for the Associated Press who watched as South Carolina executed a convicted murderer by firing squad has described the experience, saying that the experience of witnessing the killing was now “etched” in his mind.

Jeffrey Collins, who has witnessed executions in South Carolina for the news agency for 21 years and has now seen 11 people killed using three different methods, wrote a short essay about the experience.

He witnessed three volunteers from the prison service shoot Brad Sigmon dead on Friday evening. Sigmon was the oldest person to be executed in the state’s history and his death was part of a series of rapid killings the state has pursued in the last six months as it revives capital punishment.

After a 13-year pause, South Carolina now directs men on death row to choose their method of death – electric chair, lethal injection or firing squad. The development has been widely condemned by human rights activists and anti-death penalty groups.

Sigmon, who was convicted of the 2001 murders of his ex-girlfriend’s parents, David and Gladys Larke, chose to be shot to death due to unclear information about drugs used in legal injections and fears they could take a long time to work.

“As a journalist you want to ready yourself for an assignment. You research a case. You read about the subject,’” Collins wrote.

“In the two weeks since I knew how Sigmon was going to die, I read up on firing squads and the damage that can be done by the bullets. I looked at the autopsy photos of the last man shot to death by the state, in Utah in 2010.

“I also pored over the transcript of his trial, including how prosecutors said it took less than two minutes for Sigmon to strike his ex-girlfriend’s parents nine times each in the head with a baseball bat, going back and forth between them in different rooms of their Greenville County home in 2001 until they were dead,” he added.

Collins then went on to detail the firing squad and experience of witnessing it.

“It’s impossible to know what to expect when you’ve never seen someone shot at close range right in front of you,” he said.

“The firing squad is certainly faster – and more violent – than lethal injection. It’s a lot more tense, too. My heart started pounding a little after Sigmon’s lawyer read his final statement. The hood was put over Sigmon’s head, and an employee opened the black pull shade that shielded where the three prison system volunteer shooters were.”

“About two minutes later, they fired. There was no warning or countdown. The abrupt crack of the rifles startled me. And the white target with the red bullseye that had been on his chest, standing out against his black prison jumpsuit, disappeared instantly as Sigmon’s whole body flinched,” he wrote.

“A jagged red spot about the size of a small fist appeared where Sigmon was shot. His chest moved two or three times. Outside of the rifle crack, there was no sound.

“A doctor came out in less than a minute, and his examination took about a minute more. Sigmon was declared dead at 6:08 p.m.

“Then we left through the same door we came in,” he added.

Sigmon’s lawyers have said it was “barbaric” to make the men on death row choose the method of their death and argued the state was obliged to provide more information about lethal injection drugs. His last words included a plea for an end to the death penalty.

His last words, shared by his attorneys, read in part: “I want my closing statement to be one of love and a calling to my fellow Christians to help us end the death penalty. An eye for an eye was used as justification to the jury for seeking the death penalty. At that time, I was too ignorant to know how wrong that was.”

Collins’ essay also detailed the impact of witnessing the shooting.

“I won’t forget the crack of the rifles Friday and that target disappearing. Also etched in my mind: Sigmon talking or mouthing toward his lawyer, trying to let him know he was OK before the hood went on,” he wrote.

Three suspects are at large after a mass shooting at the opening night of a pub in Toronto that left a dozen people injured, Canadian police say.

The shooting at the Piper Arms pub near Scarborough town centre in eastern Toronto happened at 22:39pm on Friday local time (03:39 GMT).

Authorities initially said that six of the 12 people injured, aged from their 20s to mid-50s, had non-life threatening gunshot wounds. Toronto paramedics, however, told Canada’s CP24 Media it was a “dynamic situation” and that some injuries were critical.

Police said the three suspects were male, with one of them wearing a black balaclava seen fleeing the scene in a silver car. They said they are using all resources available to find and arrest those responsible.

The suspects “walked into the bar. They produced their guns, and they opened fire indiscriminately on the people sitting inside the bar”, according to Supt Paul MacIntyre of Toronto’s organised crime enforcement branch.

“I’m happy to report by the grace of God that there’s been no fatalities… extremely lucky.

“The motive for this shooting right now remains unclear. We’re chasing down all leads.

“I can tell you this was a brazen and reckless act of violence that’s really shaken our community and the city itself.

“It looks like we had a mass-casualty shooting inside a pub. When you walk in, it’s kind of eerie. The drinks are still on the table. The food is still on the table.”

When asked if the shooting may be connected to the recent tow truck-related shootings, he said: “We’re open to that, but we’re not sure yet.”

Toronto’s mayor, Olivia Chow, wrote on X: “I am deeply troubled to hear reports of a shooting at a pub in Scarborough.

“This is an early and ongoing investigation – police will provide further details. My thoughts are with the victims and their families.”

Armed police and several ambulances and fire engines were on the scene as the pursuit of the suspects continued into the early hours.

Canada has a significantly lower rate of firearm homicides than the US at 0.6 per 100,000 people, compared with 4.5 per 100,000, according to 2021 data from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation.

Two men have been arrested in India in connection with the alleged rape of an Israeli and a local woman.

The Israeli woman and her homestay operator were said to be stargazing with three male travellers in Koppal town in southern Karnataka state on Thursday night.

Police said three men on a motorbike approached them and asked for money. After an argument, the men pushed the male travellers into a nearby canal before sexually assaulting the two women.

Ram L Arasiddi, a local police official, said one of travellers had drowned and his body was recovered on Saturday. The other two men swam to safety, he said.

Koppal is about 217 miles (350 kilometres) from Bengaluru. Arasiddi said police had set up a special investigation team that arrested two of the suspects on Saturday. They were being investigated on suspicion of attempted murder, gang-rape and robbery, he said.

Sexual assaults on women have become a prominent issue in India, where police recorded 31,516 rape cases in 2022, a 20% increase from 2021, according to the National Crime Records Bureau. The real figure is believed to be much higher given the stigma surrounding sexual violence and victims’ lack of faith in police.

Rape and sexual violence have been under the spotlight since the 2012 gang-rape and killing of a 23-year-old student on a Delhi bus. The attack galvanised huge protests and inspired lawmakers to set up fast-track courts dedicated to rape cases and stiffen penalties.

The rape law was amended in 2013, criminalising stalking and voyeurism and lowering the age at which a person can be tried as an adult from 18 to 16. The government approved the death penalty in 2018 for people convicted of raping children under age 12.

High-profile cases involving foreign visitors have drawn international attention to the issue. Last year, in a video that was later deleted, a Spanish tourist said his wife had been raped in northern India, while an Indian-American woman said she had been raped at a hotel in Delhi. A British tourist was raped in front of her partner in Goa in 2022.

Two men have been arrested in India in connection with the alleged rape of an Israeli and a local woman.

The Israeli woman and her homestay operator were said to be stargazing with three male travellers in Koppal town in southern Karnataka state on Thursday night.

Police said three men on a motorbike approached them and asked for money. After an argument, the men pushed the male travellers into a nearby canal before sexually assaulting the two women.

Ram L Arasiddi, a local police official, said one of travellers had drowned and his body was recovered on Saturday. The other two men swam to safety, he said.

Koppal is about 217 miles (350 kilometres) from Bengaluru. Arasiddi said police had set up a special investigation team that arrested two of the suspects on Saturday. They were being investigated on suspicion of attempted murder, gang-rape and robbery, he said.

Sexual assaults on women have become a prominent issue in India, where police recorded 31,516 rape cases in 2022, a 20% increase from 2021, according to the National Crime Records Bureau. The real figure is believed to be much higher given the stigma surrounding sexual violence and victims’ lack of faith in police.

Rape and sexual violence have been under the spotlight since the 2012 gang-rape and killing of a 23-year-old student on a Delhi bus. The attack galvanised huge protests and inspired lawmakers to set up fast-track courts dedicated to rape cases and stiffen penalties.

The rape law was amended in 2013, criminalising stalking and voyeurism and lowering the age at which a person can be tried as an adult from 18 to 16. The government approved the death penalty in 2018 for people convicted of raping children under age 12.

High-profile cases involving foreign visitors have drawn international attention to the issue. Last year, in a video that was later deleted, a Spanish tourist said his wife had been raped in northern India, while an Indian-American woman said she had been raped at a hotel in Delhi. A British tourist was raped in front of her partner in Goa in 2022.

One in 15 Americans has witnessed a mass shooting, a new study shows, revealing the depth and impact of the epidemic of gun violence that has washed over the US in recent decades.

The study found that about 7% of US adults have been present at the scene of a mass shooting in their lifetime, and more than 2% have been injured during one, according to new a report from the University of Colorado Boulder.

“This study confirms that mass shootings are not isolated tragedies, but rather a reality that reaches a substantial portion of the population, with profound physical and psychological consequences,” senior author David Pyrooz, a professor of sociology and criminologist in the Institute for Behavioral Science at UC Boulder, told Phys.org. “They also highlight the need for interventions and support for the most affected groups.”

Since 2014, there have been nearly 5,000 mass shootings documented nationwide, with more than 500 occurring annually since 2020, according to the Gun Violence Archive.

The university team defined “mass shooting” as a gun-related crime in which four or more people were shot in a public space.

The University of Colorado researchers defined “physically present” as “in the immediate vicinity of where the shooting occurred at the time it occurred, such that bullets were fired in your direction, you could see the shooter, or you could hear the gunfire”.

Respondents were asked: “Have you personally ever been physically present on the scene of a mass shooting in your lifetime?”

In the survey of 10,000 people just under 7% of respondents answered yes and 2.18 % of respondents said they had been injured, which not only includes having been shot, but also struck by shrapnel or trampled by people fleeing the scene or suffering other injuries as they sought to escape.

“Our findings highlight the substantial reach of mass shootings in US society. This widespread exposure underscores the need for comprehensive public health strategies to address the broad and enduring impacts of mass shooting exposure,” researchers wrote in the paper.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (LDS) in the US has been rocked by a slew of sexual abuse allegations launched against it in California in the latest scandal to hit the organization that is better known as the Mormon church.

A three-year look-back legal window that allows adult survivors of sexual assault to file claims in California has produced almost 100 allegations of childhood sexual abuse by Mormon leaders.

The claims, in keeping with similar allegations against the Catholic church, the Church of Scientology, the Boy Scouts of America and other hierarchical institutions in the US, have a consistent theme: alleging that officials used their power to groom, manipulate and abuse children, and that senior leaders of the institution that either knew or should have known about the abuse did not act to halt it.

In the most recent claims against the Utah-based church, five plaintiffs allege they were abused in San Diego county, including three who say they were sexually assaulted by the top spiritual leaders of their congregations.

Several allege they disclosed the abuse to other church leaders. A female plaintiff alleged that the leaders “acted to protect” the abusers and the church “handled the repeated allegations internally as a ‘matter of sin’ and not one leader reported any matter to police”.

A woman from Escondido alleged that she was sexually assaulted from 1961 to at least 1978 by two male family members, including a bishop and a “home teacher” assigned to deliver spiritual lessons.

Another claim filed on behalf of the estate of woman alleges repeatedly abused by two LDS home teachers beginning in 1961. A man alleges he was abused between five and nine times over a two-month span in 1978 by his bishop, when he was 14. He alleges he later disclosed the abuse to the bishop of a different area but was “ignored and disregarded plaintiff”.

Another claims he was assaulted by a bishop in 1995 and reported the abuse to his father, who in turn reported it to an LDS official who warned him “that he needed to support his son’s abuser or risk being excommunicated from the church”.

A fifth claimant claims he was abused, at age 16, during private lessons by a bishop who told him, the lawsuit alleged, that “if he kept quiet, he would go to heaven, but if he told of the abuse, he would go to hell”.

Michael Carney, a Los Angeles attorney with Slater Slater Schulman, told the San Diego Tribune that the LDS church is unique because of “how much power and influence the church has over people’s lives”.

A church spokesperson said that “abuse of a child or any other individual is inexcusable. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believes this, teaches this, and dedicates tremendous resources and efforts to prevent, report and address abuse” and outlined steps related to abuse LDS church leaders and members are instructed to follow: stop the abuse, help victims receive care and comply with whatever reporting is required by law.

But the spokesperson also noted that the cases were filed by a single contingency law firm, “which has aggressively marketed for clients” and many are decades old and some potential witnesses have died.

“The church takes these claims seriously and is carefully investigating each case individually,” the spokesperson added. “Early investigation has revealed multiple discrepancies in many of the claims.”

The lawsuits against the LDS church have become so numerous, and with so many common threads, that attorneys want to consolidate the actions into a single multi-district litigation in the central district of California.

One focus of the litigation against the church involves claims that an LDS “help line” was used to suppress reports of abuse and shield abusers, not to help victims. The LDS church’s general handbook directs church leaders to “not involve themselves in civil or criminal cases for members in their units without first consulting with Church legal counsel”.

“Institutions are more concerned about their public appearance because that translates into monetary donations,” said Mitchell Garabedian, an attorney known for representing sexual abuse claims against the Catholic church. “History has taught us that first and foremost institutions protect themselves and not the child.”

But the success of claims against individuals and institutions is not as legally sure-footed as it was at the onset of the #MeToo movement seven years ago. Earlier this week, Jay-Z filed a lawsuit against attorneys Tony Buzbee and David Fortney and their Jane Doe client over a lawsuit claiming sexual abuse that that was subsequently dropped.

Jay-Z – also known as Shawn Carter – proposed three causes of action to an Alabama court: malicious prosecution, abuse of process and civil conspiracy against all three defendants, as well as defamation against the Jane Doe, claiming the allegations of rape against him were knowingly “false” and “malicious”.

Next month, movie mogul Harvey Weinstein, 72, faces retrial in New York on rape charges after his earlier convictions five years ago for the third-degree rape of one woman and a first-degree criminal sex act against another woman were tossed on appeal.

According to Wendy Murphy, a former sex crimes prosecutor and director of the Women’s and Children’s Advocacy Project in Boston, it’s harder to prove liability in claims against institutions because the plaintiff needs to show that a high-level officer had knowledge and failed to take action. With institutions that are in some ways structured around secrecy, claims of offenses in cases dating back decades can be especially difficult to establish.

“The capacity to structure secrecy so that they can somehow avoid being held accountable by the way they create their power structures also means they have to accept the consequences that a lot of bad stuff is going to happen,” Murphy said.

Despite efforts to weaken liability standards, Murphy said, deference to the sanctity of religious organizations provides “unbelievable natural insulation from accountability and oversight, not just because that’s how the legal standards are set up but because of an added layer of first amendment protections. Law enforcement often doesn’t want to intrude behind the doors of godly places.”

Whatever the legal outcome of abuse claims against the Mormon church, says Garabedian, any change will probably come externally from the legal framework of institutional protections.

“Institutions are icebergs unto themselves, so the real change comes from the public realizing that institutions are not properly supervising and protecting children,” he said, “and the public is now more aware that they have to watch their children.”

In the US, call or text the Childhelp abuse hotline on 800-422-4453 or visit their website for more resources and to report child abuse or DM for help. For adult survivors of child abuse, help is available at ascasupport.org. In the UK, the NSPCC offers support to children on 0800 1111, and adults concerned about a child on 0808 800 5000. The National Association for People Abused in Childhood (Napac) offers support for adult survivors on 0808 801 0331. In Australia, children, young adults, parents and teachers can contact the Kids Helpline on 1800 55 1800; adult survivors can seek help at Blue Knot Foundation on 1300 657 380. Other sources of help can be found at Child Helplines International

Westminster Bridge remains closed to traffic after a six-hour standoff between emergency services and a protester who has scaled a building in the Houses of Parliament carrying the flag of Palestine.

A large crowd gathered in Parliament Square to show their support for the man who climbed the Elizabeth Tower, which houses Big Ben, on Saturday morning.

Emergency services used an aerial ladder platform outside the tower to raise people up towards the barefoot man in an attempt to coax him down.

At least nine fire and ambulance vehicles lined Bridge Street in central London and crowds looked on from beyond a police cordon.

A Met police spokesperson said: “At 7.24am on Saturday 8 March officers were alerted to a man climbing up the Elizabeth Tower at the Houses of Parliament.

“Officers are at the scene working to bring the incident to a safe conclusion. They are being assisted by the London fire brigade and the London ambulance service.”

Bridge Street, at the north end of Westminster Bridge, was closed to allow the emergency services to deal with the incident, police said. It is understood one exit of Westminster station is also closed, but there is no disruption to tube services and passengers can use other exits.

A spokesperson for the London fire brigade said: “Firefighters are responding alongside the Metropolitan police service to reports of a person scaling the Palace of Westminster.”

In the afternoon, a large crowd gathered on the corner of Parliament Square in support of the protester. Some held signs reading: “Labour Tories BBC you show Russia’s crimes but hide Israel’s … why?”

Reports suggested the protester had been overheard saying “peaceful protesters are being brutally arrested” and “I’ve brought the protest to the so-called hub of democracy in the UK” to onlookers below.

The incident came amid a flurry of pro-Palestine protests launched across the country this weekend.

Activists targeted one of Donald Trump’s golf courses in Scotland on Saturday. Palestine Action supporters spray-painted the clubhouse at the Trump Turnberry resort and dug up some of the greens overnight.

In a video the group posted on social media, the words “Gaza is not 4 sale” are sprayed on the grass of the course.

The group said its action was a “direct response to the US administration’s stated intent to ethnically cleanse Gaza” after “having laid out plans to ‘clean out the whole thing’ and forcibly displace its population”.

A spokesperson said: “Palestine Action rejects Donald Trump’s treatment of Gaza as though it were his property to dispose of as he likes. To make that clear, we have shown him that his own property is not safe from acts of resistance. We will continue to take action against US-Israeli colonialism in the Palestinian homeland.”

Britain’s ability to rely on the US to maintain the UK’s nuclear arsenal is now in doubt, experts have warned, but working with European states to replace it will be costly and take time.

An existing debate about the future of Trident – Britain’s ageing submarine-launched nuclear missile system – has taken a dramatic new turn in recent weeks amid fears Donald Trump could pull out of Nato.

A range of concerns had already loomed over the £3bn-a-year programme, not least around its efficiency and effectiveness after a second embarrassing failed test launch last year.

Costs have also been a longstanding challenge but replacing Vanguard submarines on time has been prioritised over coming in under budget.

Downing Street sought to play down concerns earlier this week after diplomatic figures including the former British ambassador to the US Sir David Manning floated the scenario of an end to Anglo-US nuclear cooperation.

However, calls for Britain to make alternative plans have been joined by the former UK foreign secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind, who initiated talks in the 90s between the UK and France on nuclear weapons cooperation.

“It really is necessary for Britain and France to work more closely together because if American reliability ever came into question, then Europe could be defenceless in the face of Russian aggression,” he said.

“The contribution by America must now be to some degree in doubt, not today or tomorrow, but over the next few years and certainly as long as Trump and people like him are in control in Washington.”

A No 10 spokesperson insisted this week that Keir Starmer viewed the US as a reliable ally, saying: “The UK’s nuclear deterrent is completely operationally independent.”

Yet the UK is – unlike France – highly intertwined with the US when it comes to maintaining its nuclear weapons, which are designed, manufactured and maintained in the US under a deal rooted in a 1958 agreement. Britain had 50 missiles left as of 2008 after purchases from a US stockpile, according to research by the University of Bradford.

“Britain likes to call its nuclear posture independent, but it, of course, is absolutely not,” said Hans Kristensen, who monitors the status of nuclear forces for the Federation of American Scientists, a US thinktank.

“It may be that Britain can fire weapons independently of the US, but below that, the entire infrastructure covering missile compartments on submarines, the missiles themselves, all are supplied by the Americans.”

Defence analysts are emphasising the need to plan for a scenario where a transatlantic relationship fractures to the extent that the US declines to give the UK missiles.

Dr Marion Messmer, a senior research fellow at Chatham House and an expert on nuclear weapons policy, said: “It would be a big risk if it wasn’t being planned for, but it’s something the UK government can’t be too public about, as it wouldn’t want to give the Trump administration or Russia any ideas.”

Developing a replacement for Trident or adapting it for use without the US would be “hugely complicated” and costly, she emphasised, but added that ideas being floated included looking at ways for Britain to launch nuclear weapons by air rather than at sea.

“You wouldn’t necessarily be able to take the warheads which the UK uses for submarine launches and fit them for air launch. You would very likely need to develop a whole second warhead. That would require everything from new assembly facilities and workforce planning, but it could be a worthwhile investment for Britain,” she said.

“You could hope that France – the most obvious contender for Britain to work with – has a delivery vehicle similar to Trident that could easily be adapted, but it would require the French government and the French nuclear enterprise being willing to share those designs with the UK.”

Other factors are also coming in to play, including an openness by France’s president, Emmanuel Macron, to talks on extending its nuclear umbrella over the rest of Europe, and comments by Germany’s likely next chancellor, Friedrich Merz, that it could pay towards French and British nuclear costs.

Calvin Bailey, a Labour MP on parliament’s defence committee and a former RAF officer, said it was “difficult to conceive” of the US not wanting to maintain its relationship with the UK, stressing that this had been strengthened by the Aukus alliance between Australia, Britain and the US.

But he added: “We now also have to look at how we as Europeans ensure and guarantee our own safety and security. We’re showing leadership on this with the French, who are the most obvious partners for us.”

The thoughts of Mao Zedong, published in 1964 under the title Quotations, are considered the blueprint for Chinese communism and a guidebook to the Cultural Revolution. The collected soundbites from his speeches and writings have become known the world over as the Little Red Book.

But the red-covered Quotations of the former Chinese Communist Party chairman, who died in 1976, aged 82, went through many ideological iterations before the official version was settled on. The original cover was also a different colour – in fact, had some of those earlier thought experiments been declared the final draft, we could now be talking about Chairman Mao’s Little Blue Book.

For the first time, a huge collection of the various editions of Quotations has been assembled and is to be unveiled and presented for sale at the New York International Antiquarian Book Fair next month, with a communism-busting price tag of £1m.

The collection is the work of more than two decades by Justin G Schiller, an American collector who began to visit China in the 1990s. Dr Matt Wills of London rare book dealer Peter Harrington, which is representing the sale, said: “At that time, the market for collecting the Little Red Book was only just beginning, and you could find all kinds of rare and one-off editions being discarded by institutions and private individuals if you knew where to look. Justin was in place at the perfect time to build a collection without parallel. It would be impossible to do the same today, as the majority of the rarer editions have long perished.”

The collection is some 200 items strong and includes many of the early versions as well as first editions and international printings of the book. Before the famous red vinyl cover was settled on, the prototype editions had brown, white and blue bindings.

And it wasn’t just cosmetic changes that were effected for the final printing. Many of the ideas in the book changed and evolved from 1960, when Mao’s sayings and slogans started to be compiled.

“The first widely published edition of the Little Red Book, released in May 1964, naturally opens with a quote on the vanguard role of the Chinese Communist Party,” said Wills.

“Look to prototype and trial versions and you will see that most do not open with this quote. As the Little Red Book became a ‘mass market’ publication, it became very important to put the party at the forefront on page one.

“You will also see, across editions from 1961 to 1964, that the text shrinks, and the quotes often become punchier and rhetorically impactful as compilers tried to make the ­selection as effective and user-friendly as possible.”

In fact, it seems that even 60 years ago spin doctors were at work to make the thoughts of Chairman Mao easily digestible for the masses.

Prof Christopher Marquis, Sinyi professor of Chinese management at Cambridge Judge Business School and author of the book Mao and Markets, said: “The original book was for the People’s Liberation Army so it focused a lot on Mao’s military guidance and quotes on discipline and loyalty.

“Following the start of the Cultural Revolution in 1966, the book was transformed into much more of an element of propaganda and a more ideologically focused text to rally the populace behind Mao and his ideas.”

Wills agrees: “The final version represents a very specific way of presenting Maoism: short, punchy phrases, many of which became everyday idiomatic expressions during the Cultural Revolution, arranged in no more than three dozen easily digestible chapters produced in a cheap and durable binding.”

The Little Red Book has earned its place as an item of cultural significance – Prof Marquis points to China’s Red Guards waving the book in revolutionary fervour as an enduring image of Mao’s time and also its utilisation by 1960s leftwing movements.

The Little Red Book is more than just a piece of nostalgia though. “Many of the business entrepreneurs I have researched quote Mao and discuss his work as inspiration and in some cases a guide for their work,” said Marquis.

“And [Chinese president] Xi Jinping also quotes Mao and uses his ideas in guiding his policies.

“More broadly, I think it also shapes the general propaganda atmosphere and idea that political control through propaganda is essential to governing China. I think of the promotion of ‘Xi Jinping thought’ and literally hundreds of books Xi has ‘authored’. It reflects an attempt to create a written canon like Mao.”

Mao himself said in the Little Red Book: “It is dreadful to imagine a time when everyone will be rich.” So what would he think of his work going on sale for £1m?

“I think he would have a very mixed reaction,” says Prof Marquis.

“On the one hand, selling items for the rich to buy at such astronomical prices does point to the underlying problems with capitalism, which he strongly resisted.

“However, on an intellectual level, it is a great manifestation of commodity fetishism – a key idea of Karl Marx’s – so in some ways he might have found it reinforcing of his world view being right.

“But he might have actually been quite pleased, because aside from his ideological positions, he was an extreme narcissist and revelled in the cult of personality he created, so he might have been pleased that this book is getting such attention and is being so highly valued.”