Passengers who were freed from a train seized by armed militants have spoken of “doomsday scenes” that unfolded on board the Jaffar Express in Pakistan’s Balochistan province.

“We held our breath throughout the firing, not knowing what would happen next,” Ishaq Noor, who was one of those on board, told the BBC.

He was one of more than 400 passengers travelling from Quetta to Peshawar on Tuesday when the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) attacked and took a number hostage. The train driver was among several reported injured.

Military sources claim 155 passengers have been freed and 27 militants killed. There is no independent confirmation of those figures. Rescue operations are continuing.

Security forces say they have deployed hundreds of troops to rescue the remaining passengers. Authorities have also deployed helicopters and special forces personnel.

The BLA has warned of “severe consequences” if an attempt is made to rescue hostages.

At least 100 of those on the train were members of the security forces, officials have said. It unclear how many passengers are still being held hostage – more than a dozen of those freed were taken to hospital for treatment.

Reports quoting security officials say some of the militants may have left the train, taking an unknown number of passengers with them into the surrounding mountainous area.

On Wednesday, the BBC saw dozens of wooden coffins being loaded at Quetta railway station. A railway official said they were empty and being transported to collect any possible casualties.

Muhammad Ashraf, who was travelling from Quetta to Lahore to visit family, was among a group of passengers who managed to disembark the train late on Tuesday.

“There was a lot of fear among the passengers. It was a scene of doomsday,” he said.

The group then walked for nearly four hours to the next railway station. Several of the men carried the weaker passengers on their shoulders.

“We reached the station with great difficulty, because we were tired and there were children and women with us,” he said.

Mr Noor, who was travelling with his wife and two children, said the initial explosion on the train was “so intense” that one of his children fell from the seat.

He and his wife each tried to shield one child amidst the gunfire.

“If a bullet comes our way, it will hit us and not the children,” he said.

Mushtaq Muhammad, who was in the train’s third carriage, recalled passengers stricken with panic.

“The attackers were talking to each other in Balochi, and their leader repeatedly told them to ‘keep an eye’ particularly on the security personnel to make sure that [the attackers] do not lose them,” he said.

The attackers started to release some Balochistan residents, as well as women, children and elderly passengers, on Tuesday evening, Mr Ishaq said, adding that he was let go when he told them he was a resident of Turbat city in Balochistan, and they saw that he had children and women with him.

Meanwhile, relatives of the train’s driver, Amjad Yasin, are anxiously awaiting news after hearing he was injured. He’d been a train driver for 24 years and survived when explosives targeted another train he was driving about eight years ago, they say.

“For the past couple of weeks, we were under severe stress that something is about to happen as there was an air of fear,” his brother Amir told the BBC in Quetta.

The BLA has waged a decades-long insurgency to gain independence and has launched numerous deadly attacks, often targeting police stations, railway lines and highways.

Counter-insurgency operations in impoverished Balochistan by Pakistan’s army and security forces have reportedly seen thousands of people disappear without trace since the early 2000s. The security forces are accused of crimes including torture and extra-judicial killings, allegations they deny.

Pakistani authorities – as well as several Western countries, including the UK and US – have designated the group a terrorist organisation.

The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan said it is “gravely concerned” by the train hijack.

“We strongly urge all relevant stakeholders to forge an urgent rights-based, pro-people consensus on the issues faced by citizens in Balochistan and to find a peaceful, political solution,” it said in a statement on X.

The United Nations’ Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has “strongly condemned” the train siege and also called for the immediate release of remaining passengers.

Just short of his 80th birthday, Rodrigo Duterte, a man who once vowed to purge his country through a bloody anti-drugs and crime campaign, found himself outmanoeuvred and in custody.

The former president was met by Philippines police as he arrived in Manila on a flight from Hong Kong, where he had been rallying support for his candidates for the upcoming mid-term election among the large Filipino diaspora there.

The much-talked-about warrant for his arrest from the International Criminal Court (ICC) was, it turned out, already in the hands of the Philippines government, which moved swiftly to execute it.

A frail-looking Mr Duterte, walking with a stick, was moved to an air force base within the airport perimeter. A chartered jet was quickly prepared to take him to the ICC in The Hague.

How had this happened? How had a man so powerful and popular, often called “the Trump of Asia”, been brought so low?

In vain, his lawyers and family members protested that the arrest had no legal basis and complained that Duterte’s frail health was being neglected.

While in office, Mr Duterte formed an alliance with the Marcos family – the children of ousted dictator Ferdinand Marcos who had long been working on a political comeback. Mr Duterte could not run again in the 2022 election, but his daughter Sara, mayor of southern city of Davao, was also popular and a strong contender to replace him.

However, Ferdinand Marcos’s son Bongbong, who had been in politics all his life, was also well placed to win and very well-funded.

The two families struck a deal. They would work together to get Bongbong into the presidency and Sara into the vice-presidency, on the assumption that come the next election in 2028, her turn would come and she would have the formidable Marcos machine behind her.

It worked. Both won their positions by a wide margin. Mr Duterte expected that his alliance would protect him from any blowback over his controversial presidency once he was out of power.

The most serious threat hanging over him was an investigation by the ICC into his culpability for thousands of extrajudicial killings carried out during anti-drugs campaigns he ordered – after he became president in 2016, but also during his tenure as mayor of the southern city of Davao from 2011.

Mr Duterte withdrew the Philippines from the jurisdiction of the ICC in 2019, but its prosecutors argued they still had a mandate to look into alleged crimes against humanity committed before that, and launched a formal investigation in 2021. However, President Marcos initially stated that his government would not co-operate with the ICC.

That position only changed after the dramatic breakdown of the Duterte-Marcos alliance. Strains in their relationship were evident from the earliest days of the administration, when Sara Duterte’s request to be given control of the powerful defence ministry was turned down and she was given the education ministry instead.

President Marcos also distanced himself from his predecessor’s mercurial policies, mending fences with the US, standing up to China in contested seas, and stopping the blood-curdling threats of retribution against drug dealers.

In the end, these were two ambitious, power-hungry clans aiming to dominate Filipino politics, and there was not enough power for them to share. Relations reached a nadir last year when Sara Duterte announced that she had hired an assassin to kill President Marcos, should anything happen to her.

Late last year, the lower house of Congress, which is controlled by Marcos loyalists, filed a petition to impeach Ms Duterte. That trial is due to take place in the Senate later this year.

If she is impeached, under the constitution, she would be barred from holding high political office, killing her long-standing presidential ambitions and weakening the political power of the Dutertes even further.

President Marcos now appears to have moved deftly to neutralise his main political rival. But his strategy is not risk-free. The Dutertes remain popular in much of the country, and may be able to mobilise protests against the former president’s prosecution.

Sara Duterte has issued a statement accusing the government of surrendering her father to “foreign powers” and of violating Filipino sovereignty.

An early test of the support enjoyed by both clans will be the mid-term elections in May.

In his comments to journalists after the plane carrying his predecessor had taken off from Manila, President Marcos insisted he was meeting the country’s commitments to Interpol, which had delivered the ICC warrant. But he was coy about the fact that it was an ICC warrant he was executing, given that many Filipinos will question what the ICC’s remit is in a country which has already left its jurisdiction.

It is not risk-free for the ICC either. The court is an embattled institution these days, with the Trump administration threatening to arrest its top officials should they travel to the US, and few countries willing to extradite those it has indicted. Getting former President Duterte to The Hague might therefore look like a welcome high-profile success.

But there was a warning, from China – admittedly not a signatory to the ICC and currently at loggerheads with the Philippines – not to politicise ICC cases. This was a thinly-veiled reference to the fact that this case, which is supposed to be about accountability for serious international crimes, has ended up playing a decisive part in a domestic feud in the Philippines between two rival political forces.

Greenland’s centre-right opposition has won a surprise general election victory – in a vote dominated by independence and US President Donald Trump’s pledge to take over the semi-autonomous territory.

The Democratic party, which favours a gradual approach to independence from Denmark – achieved around 30% of the vote, near-complete results show.

“Greenland needs us to stand together in a time of great interest from outside,” party leader Jens-Frederik Nielsen told local media. “There is a need for unity, so we will enter into negotiations with everyone.”

His party will now have to negotiate with other parties in order to form a coalition.

Greenland – the world’s biggest island, between the Arctic and Atlantic Oceans – has been controlled by Denmark, nearly 3,000km (1,860 miles) away, for about 300 years.

Greenland governs its own domestic affairs, but decisions on foreign and defence policy are made in Copenhagen.

Five of the six main parties in the election favour independence from Copenhagen, but disagree over the pace with which to reach it.

• Greenland’s election: Why does it matter and how does it work?
• Greenland’s vote pivotal for Arctic territory’s future
• Why does Trump want Greenland?

The Democratic party, whose vote was up by more than 20% on 2021, is considered a moderate party on independence.

Another opposition party, Naleraq, which is looking to to immediately kick-off the independence process and forge closer ties with the US, is on course for second place with almost a quarter of the vote.

Support for Naleraq was boosted ahead of the vote by the decision of one of Greenland’s most popular young politicians, Aki-Matilda Hoegh-Dam, to switch from one of the ruling parties. She came second only to Democrats leader Jens Frederik Nielsen in the popular vote.

“It’s the second biggest party, so you can’t avoid them,” Nielsen told local reporters. “But we don’t want to rule out the other parties beforehand.”

The two current governing parties, Inuit Ataqatigiit (IA) and Siumut, are heading for third and fourth place – marking an upset for Prime Minister Mute B Egede.

More than 40,000 Greenlanders out of a population of 57,000 were eligible to cast their votes to elect 31 MPs, as well as the local government. Six parties were on the ballot.

The voting took place at 72 polling stations scattered across the vast island.

“The Democrats need a supporting partner to be able to have a majority,” says Maria Ackren from the University of Greenland. “It would say it can be either Naleraq or Inuit Ataqatigiit. It’s up to the Democrats to try to figure out what they want.”

Since 2009 Greenland has had the right to call an independence referendum.

Although Naleraq is pushing for a vote within a few years, Jens-Frederik Nielsen’s party favours a gradual approach towards independence, focusing first on making self-government a success.

Prof Ackren believes the Democrats won, partly because Greenlanders wanted a change of government, but also because they were unhappy with new fisheries laws and other domestic issues.

Independence is seen as the end goal for most Greenlanders, but not before reforms have been made to the economy, health and other sectors, she says.

Greenland’s strategic location and untapped mineral resources have caught President Trump’s eye in particular. He first floated the idea of buying the island during his first term in 2019.

Since taking office again in January, Trump has reiterated his intention to acquire the territory.

“We need Greenland for national security. One way or the other we’re gonna get it,” he said during his address to the US Congress last week.

Greenland and Denmark’s leaders have repeatedly rebuffed his demands.

The leader of the Democrats said Greenland needed to adopt a calm course with the US. He told public broadcaster KNR that while big developments were happening globally, they should stand together and speak with one voice.

The White House’s envoy, Steve Witkoff, is in Qatar to join indirect talks between Israel and Hamas on extending the fragile ceasefire in Gaza.

This week, negotiators from both sides have begun meeting mediators for the first time since President Donald Trump took office on 20 January. The 42-day first phase of the Gaza deal and temporary truce came into effect on the eve of his inauguration.

That first phase ultimately saw Hamas return 25 living Israeli hostages and the remains of eight others – in exchange for about 1,800 Palestinian prisoners held by Israel – as well as five living Thai hostages. It ended on 1 March.

Israel now hopes the US can advance a plan for a two-month truce extension, which would start with the release of about half of the living hostages still held.

Hamas has so far rejected that, demanding immediate talks on the second phase in the original ceasefire agreement, which would end the war and lead to a full Israeli troop withdrawal.

However, it stated that it was approaching the ongoing discussions in Doha with “full responsibility and positivity”.

Since the start of this month, Israel has blocked all aid deliveries – including food and fuel – to Gaza, saying it aims to put pressure on Hamas.

Electricity has also been cut to the only desalination plant in the territory providing clean water, so that it is now running at a reduced capacity on generators using fuel reserves.

In response, the Houthi movement in Yemen said on Tuesday that it would restart attacks on Israeli ships passing through the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden, threatening to throw a key maritime route into chaos once again.

There is growing alarm at the potential impact of Israel blocking goods to Gaza, with some of its allies warning that this could violate international law.

• Gaza food prices soar after Israel halts aid deliveries
• What we know about the Gaza ceasefire deal
• Hamas hostages: Stories of the people taken from Israel

The local UN Humanitarian Co-ordinator, Muhannad Hadi, has stated: “Any further delays [on aid entering] will further reverse any progress we have managed to achieve during the ceasefire.”

“We pray that these matters get resolved urgently,” a baker, Husam Rustom, told the BBC.

With the halt to supplies of flour and cooking gas, he said his bakery – which had been providing over 2,000 packs of bread a day – had been forced to close as well as several others in the southern city of Khan Younis.

“We are exhausted and tired of all this. It’s driving us mad,” said Zeinab al-Bayuk, a grandmother. She added that food prices had been rising rapidly.

Mariam Abu Mukhimer, a student, opposed an extension of the existing truce. “There needs to be a solution that ends the war,” she said. “It’s enough!”

The US has never confirmed it, but Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on 2 March that Witkoff had proposed a temporary extension of the ceasefire until after the Islamic holy month of Ramadan and the Jewish holiday of Passover.

According to this plan, which Netanyahu said Israel had accepted, half of the hostages would be released together at the outset, and the other half at the end.

The PM suggested Witkoff had “even defined his proposal as a corridor for negotiations on the second stage. Israel is ready for this.”

It is believed that Hamas is still holding up to 24 living hostages in Gaza and the remains of 35 others. An American-Israeli soldier, 21-year-old Edan Alexander, is among those said to be alive. There are also the bodies of four other American citizens.

Hamas has accused Israel of reneging on the original ceasefire deal.

Despite pressure from regional mediators – Qatar and Egypt – as well as the US, it is thought unlikely that the armed group will give up many of the hostages without a full end to fighting in Gaza. It sees them as its major bargaining chips in talks.

For the relatives and supporters of Israelis held captive, these are desperate times.

Since Saturday, some have been camping outside the defence ministry in Tel Aviv to demand an immediate Gaza ceasefire deal that would free everyone in captivity.

“How can I start processing our personal tragedy when the national trauma is not yet over?” said Ofri Bibas, the sister of Yarden Bibas, at the protest on Monday evening.

The recent exchanges with Hamas led to the release of her brother and the return of the bodies of her sister-in-law, Shiri, and two young nephews, Ariel and Kfir, who were killed in Gaza.

“I have 59 brothers and sisters who are in hell,” Ofri continued – referring to the total remaining number of hostages. “We received Yarden alive, but Shiri and the children could have been saved. By Passover, everyone must be home, and the only way to bring everyone back is to end the war. Now.”

A poll for Israel’s Channel 13 TV indicates that half of Israelis believe that the US president is more concerned about the fate of the hostages than Netanyahu.

Asked which of the two they thought was more concerned, 50% of respondents said Trump, 29% Netanyahu, and the rest were not sure.

Far-right allies of the prime minister have threatened to collapse his governing coalition if fighting does not resume in Gaza to achieve its war goal of crushing Hamas.

Up to now, both Israel and Hamas have largely refrained from returning to all-out hostilities in the Palestinian territory.

However, recently, Israel has carried out daily strikes. On Tuesday, four men were killed in Wadi Gaza, which is also known as the Netzarim Corridor – an area from which Israeli forces withdrew as part of the Gaza ceasefire terms.

The Israeli military said its air force had targeted “several terrorists engaged in suspicious activity posing a threat to [Israeli] troops”.

Speaking to the BBC in Gaza City, the father of one of those killed, Arafat Hana, said his son, Omar, had done nothing wrong.

He said he was with neighbours walking to a displaced people’s camp where they had previously stayed to retrieve belongings.

“They were innocent. They were just going to get mattresses and other things. They weren’t carrying rockets!” said Umm Tareq Obaid, who lived near the men.

The new threats from the Houthis have the potential to end a period of relative calm in the wider region which began with the Gaza ceasefire on 19 January.

Over 15 months from November 2023, they used missiles and drones to attack more than 100 merchant ships, saying they were acting in solidarity with Palestinians in Gaza. Many vessels had no connection to Israel. Two sank, one was seized, and four sailors were killed.

The Houthis say they now want “to pressure the Israeli usurper entity to reopen the crossings to the Gaza Strip and allow the entry of aid, including food and medical supplies”.

However, there has been no immediate sign of ships being targeted.

The attacks led by Hamas on 7 October 2023 killed more than 1,200 people in southern Israel, mostly civilians, with 251 taken hostage. Most women and children held captive were released during a week-long truce in November 2023.

The unprecedented, deadly assault triggered a war in Gaza that has since killed more than 48,500 people, most of them civilians, according to figures from the Hamas-run health ministry which are used by the UN and others.

A new four-lane highway cutting through tens of thousands of acres of protected Amazon rainforest is being built for the COP30 climate summit in the Brazilian city of Belém.

It aims to ease traffic to the city, which will host more than 50,000 people – including world leaders – at the conference in November.

The state government touts the highway’s “sustainable” credentials, but some locals and conservationists are outraged at the environmental impact.

The Amazon plays a vital role in absorbing carbon for the world and providing biodiversity, and many say this deforestation contradicts the very purpose of a climate summit.

Along the partially built road, lush rainforest towers on either side – a reminder of what was once there. Logs are piled high in the cleared land which stretches more than 13km (8 miles) through the rainforest into Belém.

Diggers and machines carve through the forest floor, paving over wetland to surface the road which will cut through a protected area.

Claudio Verequete lives about 200m from where the road will be. He used to make an income from harvesting açaí berries from trees that once occupied the space.

“Everything was destroyed,” he says, gesturing at the clearing.

“Our harvest has already been cut down. We no longer have that income to support our family.”

He says he has received no compensation from the state government and is currently relying on savings.

He worries the construction of this road will lead to more deforestation in the future, now that the area is more accessible for businesses.

“Our fear is that one day someone will come here and say: ‘Here’s some money. We need this area to build a gas station, or to build a warehouse.’ And then we’ll have to leave.

“We were born and raised here in the community. Where are we going to go?”

His community won’t be connected to the road, given its walls on either side.

“For us who live on the side of the highway, there will be no benefits. There will be benefits for the trucks that will pass through. If someone gets sick, and needs to go to the centre of Belém, we won’t be able to use it.”

The road leaves two disconnected areas of protected forest. Scientists are concerned it will fragment the ecosystem and disrupt the movement of wildlife.

Prof Silvia Sardinha is a wildlife vet and researcher at a university animal hospital that overlooks the site of the new highway.

She and her team rehabilitate wild animals with injuries, predominantly caused by humans or vehicles.

Once healed, they release them back into the wild – something she says will be harder if there is a highway on their doorstep.

“From the moment of deforestation, there is a loss.

“We are going to lose an area to release these animals back into the wild, the natural environment of these species,” she said.

“Land animals will no longer be able to cross to the other side too, reducing the areas where they can live and breed.”

The Brazilian president and environment minister say this will be a historic summit because it is “a COP in the Amazon, not a COP about the Amazon”.

The president says the meeting will provide an opportunity to focus on the needs of the Amazon, show the forest to the world, and present what the federal government has done to protect it.

But Prof Sardinha says that while these conversations will happen “at a very high level, among business people and government officials”, those living in the Amazon are “not being heard”.

The state government of Pará had touted the idea of this highway, known as Avenida Liberdade, as early as 2012, but it had repeatedly been shelved because of environmental concerns.

Now a host of infrastructure projects have been resurrected or approved to prepare the city for the COP summit.

Adler Silveira, the state government’s infrastructure secretary, listed this highway as one of 30 projects happening in the city to “prepare” and “modernise” it, so “we can have a legacy for the population and, more importantly, serve people for COP30 in the best possible way”.

Speaking to the BBC, he said it was a “sustainable highway” and an “important mobility intervention”.

He added it would have wildlife crossings for animals to pass over, bike lanes and solar lighting. New hotels are also being built and the port is being redeveloped so cruise ships can dock there to accommodate excess visitors.

Brazil’s federal government is investing more than $81m (£62m) to expand the airport capacity from “seven to 14 million passengers”. A new 500,000 sq-m city park, Parque da Cidade, is under construction. It will include green spaces, restaurants, a sports complex and other facilities for the public to use afterwards.

Some business owners in the city’s vast open-air Ver-o-peso market agree that this development will bring opportunities for the city.

“The city as a whole is being improved, it is being repaired and a lot of people are visiting from other places. It means I can sell more and earn more,” says Dalci Cardoso da Silva, who runs a leather shoe stall.

He says this is necessary because when he was young, Belém was “beautiful, well-kept, well cared for”, but it has since been “abandoned” and “neglected” with “little interest from the ruling class”.

João Alexandre Trindade da Silva, who sells Amazonian herbal medicines in the market, acknowledges that all construction work can cause problems, but he felt the future impact would be worth it.

“We hope the discussions aren’t just on paper and become real actions. And the measures, the decisions taken, really are put into practice so that the planet can breathe a little better, so that the population in the future will have a little cleaner air.”

That will be the hope of world leaders too who choose to attend the COP30 summit.

Scrutiny is growing over whether flying thousands of them across the world, and the infrastructure required to host them, is undermining the cause.

Sign up for our Future Earth newsletter to keep up with the latest climate and environment stories with the BBC’s Justin Rowlatt, delivered every Tuesday. Outside the UK? Sign up to our international newsletter here.

Indian Americans are increasingly optimistic about India’s future, but hold deep concerns about US-India relations under a second Donald Trump administration, a new survey finds.

The 2024 Indian-American Survey, conducted by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and YouGov in October, examined Indian-American political attitudes.

Two pivotal elections happened in India and the US last year, amid a deepening – but occasionally strained – partnership. Tensions between the countries flared over a US federal indictment of Indian billionaire Gautam Adani and allegations of a Delhi-backed assassination plot on American soil.

With more than five million Indian-origin residents in the US, the survey asked some key questions: How do Indian Americans view former president Joe Biden’s handling of US-India ties? Do they see Donald Trump as a better option? And how do they assess India’s trajectory post the 2024 election?

Here are some key takeaways from the report, which was based on a nationally representative online survey of 1,206 Indian-American adult residents.

Indian Americans rated the Biden administration’s handling of US-India relations more favourably than Trump’s first term.

A hypothetical Kamala Harris administration was seen as better for bilateral ties than a second Trump term during the polling.

Partisan polarisation plays a key role: 66% of Indian-American Republicans believe Trump was better for US-India ties, while just 8% of Democrats agree.

Conversely, half of Indian-American Democrats favour Biden, compared to 15% of Republicans.

Since most Indian Americans are Democrats, this gives Biden the overall edge.

During their February meeting at the White House, both Trump and Prime Minister Narendra Modi praised each other’s leadership, but Trump criticised India’s high trade tariffs, calling them a “big problem.”

The alleged Indian plot to assassinate a separatist on US soil has not widely registered – only half of respondents are aware of it.

In October, the US charged a former Indian intelligence officer with attempted murder and money laundering for allegedly plotting to assassinate Gurpatwant Singh Pannun, a US-based advocate for an independent Sikh state, Khalistan.

This marked the first time the Indian government has been directly implicated in an alleged assassination attempt on a dissident. India has stated it is co-operating with the US investigation. In January, a panel set up by India to examine Washington’s allegations recommended legal action against an unnamed individual believed to be the former intelligence agent.

A narrow majority of the respondents said that India would “not be justified in taking such action and hold identical feelings about the US if the positions were reversed”.

Indian Americans are split along partisan party lines, with Democrats expressing greater empathy for Palestinians and Republicans leaning pro-Israel.

Four in 10 respondents believe Biden has been too pro-Israel in the ongoing conflict.

The attack in October 2023 by Hamas fighters from Gaza killed around 1,200 people, mostly civilians, inside Israel and saw 251 people taken hostage. Most have been released in ceasefire agreements or other arrangements.

Israel’s military offensive has killed more than 48,000 Palestinians in Gaza, mostly women and children, according to the Hamas-run health ministry.

Talks to prolong the fragile ceasefire, the first phase of which ended on 1 March, are expected to resume in Qatar on Monday.

Forty-seven percent of Indian Americans believe India is heading in the right direction, a 10 percentage point increase from four years ago.

The same share approves of Modi’s performance as prime minister. Additionally, four in 10 respondents feel that India’s 2024 election – where Modi’s party did not get a majority – made the country more democratic.

The survey found that many Indian Americans support Modi and believe India is on the right track, yet half are unaware of the alleged assassination attempt on US soil.

Does this indicate a gap in information access, selective engagement or a tendency to overlook certain actions in favour of broader nationalist sentiment?

“It is hard to tease out the precise reason for this, but our sense is that this has more to do with selective engagement,” Milan Vaishnav, co-author of the study, said.

Data collected by Carnegie in 2020 shows that around 60% of Indian Americans follow Indian government and public affairs regularly, leaving a significant portion who “engage only sporadically”.

“Often people form broad impressions based on a combination of the news, social media and interactions with friends and family. Given the deluge of news in the US of late, it is not entirely surprising that the ‘murder-for-hire’ plot did not break through for a large section of the community,” Mr Vaishnav said.

Indian Americans, while cautious about Trump and generally favouring Biden or Harris for US-India relations, continue to strongly support Modi back in India. Given Modi’s nationalist policies, what accounts for this divergence? Is it driven more by personal impact than ideology?

“This is a case of ‘where you sit is where you stand’,” Mr Vaishnav said.

He said in related research, “we’ve explored this question in depth and found that Indian Americans generally hold more liberal views on US policy issues compared to India”.

“For instance, while Muslim Indian-Americans – minorities both in India and the US – maintain consistently more liberal attitudes, Hindu Indian-Americans express liberal views in the US (where they are a minority) but more conservative stances in India, where they belong to the majority.

“In other words, a person’s majority or minority status plays a key role in shaping their political views,” Mr Vaishnav said.

If Indian Americans viewed Trump as a threat to bilateral ties, why did they embrace him during his first term, as seen at events like ‘Howdy Modi!’? Has their opinion of Trump shifted due to his policies, or is it more about changing political currents?

“We should not generalise from one event or even one segment of the Indian American population. More than 50,000 Indian Americans gathered at ‘Howdy, Modi!’ first and foremost to see Modi, not Trump. Recall that Trump was added at a later date,” Mr Vaishnav said.

“Second, this is a diverse diaspora with a range of political views. While Indian Americans lean overwhelmingly toward the Democratic Party, a very sizeable minority – we estimate around 30% in 2024 – support the Republicans under Trump.”

Indian Americans remain committed to the Democratic Party, but attachment has waned. Some 47% identify as Democrats, down from 56% in 2020, a survey found last year.

Do Indian Americans have a nuanced understanding of political developments in both countries, or are their views more influenced by diaspora-driven narratives and media echo chambers?

Mr Vaishnav said data from 2020 shows that online news was the primary source of information about India, followed by television, social media and word of mouth. Within social media, YouTube, Facebook and WhatsApp were the most common platforms.

“Direct engagement with India is more limited, with foreign-born Indian Americans typically more involved than those born in the US.

“Having said that, one should not overlook the fact that the bonds of cultural connectivity remain quite strong, even with second and third-generation Indian Americans.”

In the end, the survey underscores a complex portrait of the Indian American community – one shaped by a blend of selective engagement, shifting political winds and varying personal experiences.

India’s largest telecoms company Reliance Jio and its rival Bharti Airtel have signed separate deals with Elon Musk’s SpaceX to bring the Starlink internet service to the country.

The move has caught most analysts by surprise, as Musk has publicly clashed with both companies recently.

It comes as Indian and US officials discuss a trade deal. US President Donald Trump has threatened to impose retaliatory tariffs on 2 April.

The agreements, touted to expand satellite internet coverage across India, are still conditional upon SpaceX obtaining the Indian government’s approval to begin operations.

Starlink had 4.6 million subscribers across the world, as of 2024.

SpaceX has been aiming to launch services in India since 2021, but regulatory hurdles have delayed its arrival.

Both Jio and Airtel say they will leverage their mobile network along with Starlink to deliver broadband services to communities and businesses across the country, including in rural and remote regions.

Jio will offer Starlink equipment in its retail outlets and online stores along with providing installation support for the devices, while Airtel says it is exploring the same.

Airtel also says the tie-up, along with an existing deal with Starlink rival Eutelsat OneWeb, would help to expand its connectivity.

Many had not anticipated Starlink’s simultaneous deals with Jio Platforms and Airtel.

Up until the announcement, Jio was seen as Starlink’s biggest competitor in India’s satellite broadband market.

Billionaires Mukesh Ambani and Sunil Bharti Mittal, who own Jio and Airtel respectively, had jointly opposed Musk’s demand to administratively allocate satellite spectrum.

Mr Musk had argued that spectrum should be allotted as this would align with international standards.

Ambani and Mittal had wanted it to be auctioned instead in a competitive bidding process.

Last October, in a major win for Musk, the Indian government announced that spectrum would be allocated administratively.

The tie-ups come off the back of that policy and Musk’s meeting with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi in Washington last month, during which they discussed cooperation in areas of space technology and mobility.

Musk’s influence on the US government is “sky-high” and “probably a good reason why Delhi took a contrarian position with respect to Jio’s ask for spectrum auction rather than allocation, which is rare”, says Prasanto K Roy, a technology analyst.

India is the world’s second largest internet market but more than 670 million of its 1.4 billion people have no access to the internet, according to a 2024 report by GSMA, a trade body representing mobile network operators worldwide.

Satellite broadband provides internet access anywhere within the satellite’s coverage.

This makes it a reliable option for remote or rural areas where traditional services like DSL – a connection that uses telephone lines to transmit data – or cable are unavailable. It also helps to bridge the hard-to-reach digital divide.

“Starlink is a clear winner here,” says Tarun Pathak, an analyst at Counterpoint Research. If approved, the tie-ups give Musk access to 70% of India’s mobile users.

Musk has been “eyeing a presence [in India] because its size will also give him economies of scale” given how expensive satellite internet is, he says.

These partnerships are also a quick way for Starlink to comply with India’s data localisation laws, he adds.

For consumers, how the services are priced will be key, given mobile data in India is among the cheapest globally.

Satellite broadband plans cost around $150 a month, whereas mobile data is 150 rupees ($2; £1.33).

But a partnership with both Airtel and Jio could help bring prices down to around 3,000 rupees, says Roy.

“Also, pricing may be better from Musk’s point of view and not rock-bottom, with Jio and Airtel offering the same services,” he says.

For Airtel and Jio, the partnership with Musk is a clear result of the telecoms policy not favouring them, analysts say.

“Jio was hoping that it would raise the entry barriers for others by pressing for the auction route. But since that hasn’t happened, they must have felt it is better to change tack and do a tie-up,” says Roy.

Pathak says the Indian government, on the other hand, possibly felt it would be better to “co-operate” rather than “compete” with Musk with Trump’s tariffs looming and a trade deal under discussion.

The US Department of Education is planning to cut about half of its workforce, as the Trump administration works to slash the size of the federal government.

The mass layoffs will affect nearly 2,100 people who are set to be placed on leave from 21 March.

Trump has long sought to eliminate the department, a long-cherished goal of some conservatives, but such an action would require approval by Congress.

The department, which has an annual budget of around $238bn (£188bn), employs more than 4,000 people.

Established in 1979, the department oversees funding for public schools, administers student loans and runs programmes that help low-income students.

But Trump has accused the agency of “indoctrinating young people with inappropriate racial, sexual, and political material”.

A common misconception is that the department operates US schools and sets curricula – that is done by states and local districts.

And a relatively small percentage of funding for primary and secondary schools – about 13% – comes from federal funds. The majority is made up from states and local groups.

The agency also plays a prominent role in administering and overseeing the federal student loans used by millions of Americans to pay for higher education.

“As part of the Department of Education’s final mission, the department today initiated a reduction in force impacting nearly 50% of the department’s workforce,” a statement from Education Secretary Linda McMahon said on Tuesday.

She said the cuts would impact all divisions in the department and were made to “better serve students, parents, educators, and taxpayers”.

The agency had 4,133 employees when Trump was sworn into office, an announcement from the department states. It has the smallest staff of all the 15 US cabinet-level agencies.

After the cuts, 2,183 people would remain, which included several hundred who retired or accepted a buyout programme earlier this year, the agency said.

The notice to employees said that all of those who are laid off would continue to receive their normal pay and benefits until 9 June, as well as a severance package or retirement pay based on how long they’d worked at the department.

“The Department of Education will continue to deliver on all statutory programs that fall under the agency’s purview, including formula funding, student loans, Pell Grants, funding for special needs students, and competitive grantmaking,” the email states.

Reports have suggested that Trump, for weeks, has considered signing an executive order impacting the Department of Education, though he has not yet done so.

Several of his executive orders have been met with lawsuits, as have Trump’s dramatic cuts at agencies around Washington.

Several lawsuits have also challenged actions by the Department of Government Efficiency (Doge), a team aiming to slash government spending that’s being led by Elon Musk. The agency has installed deputies at various agencies, slashed staff and accessed data across the government.

For decades, Republicans have floated the idea of axing the Education Department. When Ronald Reagan ran for president in 1980, he pushed for its dismantling.

It hasn’t been done because it would take an act of Congress to accomplish, which in the current makeup would mean Trump would need Democratic support.

Many conservatives have pointed to decentralising education and giving states and local governments more power.

The American Federation of Teachers, the nation’s most powerful education union, condemned the cuts to the department in a statement.

“The massive reduction in force at the Education Department is an attack on opportunity that will gut the agency and its ability to support students, throwing federal education programs into chaos across the country,” the union’s president Randi Weingarten said.

She called for Congress and the courts to intervene.

The captain of the Solong cargo ship arrested after a collision with a tanker in the North Sea is a Russian national, the ship’s owner has confirmed.

Humberside Police said the 59-year-old man remained in custody after being arrested on suspicion of gross negligence manslaughter on Tuesday.

The Portuguese-flagged Solong and the US-registered tanker Stena Immaculate crashed off the East Yorkshire coast at about 10:00 GMT on Monday.

A missing crew member from the cargo ship is presumed dead after a search and rescue operation was called off late on Monday.

Humberside Police said it had begun a criminal investigation into the cause of the collision and was working with the Maritime and Coastguard Agency.

“Detectives are continuing to conduct extensive lines of enquiry alongside partners in connection with the collision,” the force said.

Both ships caught fire after the collision triggering a major response from emergency services.

Virginia McVea, chief executive of Maritime and Coastguard Agency, said: “There have been no further reports of pollution to the sea from either vessel beyond what was observed during the initial incident.”

HM Coastguard said 36 people had been rescued and taken safely to shore.

Grimsby-based Windcat, which provides support to offshore wind farms, assisted in the rescue operation.

The company said it had two ships in the area at the time.

“Both vessels were called to assist in the rescue operation,” a spokesperson said.

“They immediately responded and they brought around 17 people involved to safety ashore.”

Ms McVea said the Solong was “being held in a safe position offshore by a tug”.

“The Stena Immaculate remains at anchor, with safety tugs in position should they be required. There are no visible flames on board and an on-board assessment may be carried out later today,” she added.

Ms McVea said the agency was working with salvage companies hired by the two ship owners “to protect the public and the environment to the best of our ability, during this ongoing incident response”.

Whitehall sources have told the BBC there were Russians and Filipinos among the crew of the Solong.

It is quite common for the global shipping industry to use crews from these two countries.

The BBC understands all of the crew on board the Stena Immaculate are Americans who are currently in Grimsby and will be repatriated in due course.

The Stena Immaculate was carrying 220,000 barrels of aviation fuel to be used by the US military.

Its co-owners, Florida-based Crowley, said it had been at anchor waiting for a berth to become available at the Port of Killingholme on the Humber Estuary.

The firm added the crash had caused “multiple explosions” on board and an unknown quantity of jet fuel to be released.

Hull and East Yorkshire on BBC Soundslatest episode of Look North here.

Spotify paid the music industry $10bn (£7.7bn) in 2024, which the streaming service said was the highest annual payment from any single retailer in history.

But the figures come as a heated debate continues about how much money artists and songwriters receive in royalties.

Earlier this year, several Grammy-nominated songwriters boycotted an awards event hosted by Spotify in a row about their streaming earnings.

As the new figures were published, a spokesperson for Spotify said the responsibility for distributing the money it pays lay with record labels and publishers.

The company said it pays royalties to rights holders, adding that it does not have “visibility” on where the money ultimately goes because earnings are based on artists’ individual contracts with their labels.

A spokesperson said: “Spotify does not pay artists or songwriters directly. We pay rights-holders, these are typically record labels, music publishers, collection societies.

“These rights-holders then pay artists and songwriters based on their individual agreements.”

The amount of money earned by artists will vary, but a committee of MPs heard in 2021 that the performer’s share of royalties is often about 16%.

That would mean an artist whose music generated £100,000 on Spotify might only receive £16,000 in royalty payments, before tax.

However, Spotify is not the only streaming service to generate revenue for artists, and many pop stars make more money from other income streams such as live tours.

Spotify said more than two-thirds of all music revenue goes “straight to the recording and publishing rights-holders”, and added that, like other streamers, Spotify does not pay on a per-stream basis.

The annual figures were published in Spotify’s Loud and Clear report – part of the company’s aim to provide transparency on how it pays the music industry.

The amount Spotify paid this year was an increase on the more than $9bn (£7bn) it handed over in 2023.

The report highlighted that the number of artists generating annual royalties between $1,000 (£770) and $10m had tripled since 2017.

Taylor Swift was named Spotify’s top artist globally with more than 26 billion streams, in the year she released her double-length album The Tortured Poets Department: The Anthology.

Swift herself was part of the debate about streaming royalties in 2014, when she removed her music from Spotify as part of a boycott, eventually re-joining the platform in 2017.

More recent artist boycotts have generally been prompted by other factors, such as Neil Young and Joni Mitchell removing their music over the streamer’s employment of podcast host Joe Rogan. Both artists returned to the platform last year.

But dissatisfaction over streaming royalties continues.

A large-scale survey of musicians in Europe carried out last year found that about 70% were unhappy with the amount they were paid in streaming revenue.

Reflecting back on the Netflix hit based on his own life, there are two things that come to mind for Palestinian comedian Mo Amer.

Pride and hurt.

“It’s very difficult to talk about without breaking down at some point,” he tells BBC Newsbeat.

He is the star of the semi-autobiographical show titled Mo, playing the role of Mo Najjar.

The character is a Palestinian refugee learning to adapt to his new world as he seeks to gain US citizenship by navigating a complicated immigration process – all while trying to bring together his cultures and languages.

Making a show so closely tied to his life was “very taxing” because of “the sheer amount of emotion” involved.

“I’m extremely proud of it. I put my soul into it and I’m still hurting from making it,” Mo says.

There was another challenge to navigate – when this second season would be set.

The final episode, which depicts Mo’s visit to his family home in the West Bank, is set on 6 October 2023.

That’s a day before the armed Palestinian group Hamas launched an unprecedented cross-border attack on Israel, killing about 1,200 people and taking more than 250 hostages.

This triggered a massive Israeli military offensive in Gaza, which has killed more than 48,000 Palestinians, most of them civilians, according to the Hamas-run health ministry.

Avoiding 7 October in the storyline was “very intentional”, Mo says.

The show is ultimately “grounded in comedy”, he says, and episodes set post-attack drew focus away from the storyline and the characters.

“You weren’t really tracking them, the emotions of them,” says Mo.

Mo says he wanted to keep the “greater context” in mind and that focusing on 7 October and its aftermath “almost insinuates this just started”.

“That couldn’t be further from the truth,” he says, referring to the long history of the conflict.

There was a practical consideration too, he says, due to the length of time between filming and release being over a year.

“That was kind of like scary territory to write about something, and then all these things would happen.

“And then whatever you had written and composed in the series could be irrelevant.”

The show has broadly had a positive reception, with the finale being emotional for fans – and Mo.

It tracks the character’s journey with his family to the Israeli-occupied West Bank and their experience of life there.

From his perspective, it shows the complicated day-to-day issues Palestinians can face, such as being subjected to closer scrutiny at checkpoints controlled by Israeli soldiers.

Mo’s character is also shown being tear-gassed.

The West Bank – land between Israel and the River Jordan – is home to an estimated three million Palestinians and half a million Jewish settlers.

Along with East Jerusalem and Gaza, it is part of what is widely known as the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

Israel occupied the areas in the 1967 Middle East war and built settlements, which are considered illegal under international law. Israel disputes this.

Palestinians claim the areas for a future independent state and want all the settlements removed.

“I’ve gotten so many calls from people just completely in shambles after watching the last episode and how meaningful it was to them to watch,” Mo says.

He adds it was “not only Palestinians” contacting him.

Mo says the final episode – originally 60 minutes long – was “almost like we filmed a movie” before it was eventually edited down to 39 minutes.

He says he wanted to cover “the main strokes”, which included how difficult it can be to enter and live as a Palestinian once there.

“Immediately, you’re not on vacation,” he says. “You’re on edge, actually.”

Mo feels there has generally been limited representation of Palestinians in TV and film, which means more pressure on his shoulders.

“There’s a lot of [pressure] from the fans… more outside voices of what I should say and not say – both Palestinian and non-Palestinian,” he says.

“You really have to put the blinders on and stay focused on telling the story that I know and that I’ve experienced first-hand.”

Mo says he can’t “walk away” from being seen as a spokesperson for Palestinians, admitting to feeling “like public property at this point”.

“I think that everyone just needs to manage their expectations. But I’m not going to shy away from it,” he says.

“Those that agree with me or disagree with me… it’s important to continue the dialogue and have a conversation.”

The ceasefire agreement in Gaza has provided some hope that there could be an end to fighting, but it has also felt fragile with concern that deal could collapse.

Mo says he is “always hopeful” things can get better.

“I never lose hope.

“If you do, then it becomes a really, really sad place whenever you’re devoid of hope,” he says.

Listen to Newsbeat live at 12:45 and 17:45 weekdays – or listen back here.

James Finlayson failed to make it as a leading man in Hollywood but became one of the most memorable comic foils ever to grace the silver screen.

The Scottish actor performed in more than 100 films but was best known for being the “third man” to Laurel and Hardy.

With his distinctive fake moustache, he starred with the iconic duo in 33 of their films and later became the inspiration for Homer Simpson’s “D’oh!” catchphrase.

Now Finlayson has been memorialised with a new portrait in the Scottish theatre where he first tread the boards more than a century ago.

Dobbie Hall in his hometown of Larbert, Stirling, commissioned the oil painting to celebrate the actor’s career and rise to international fame in the early days of cinema.

The portrait by young artist Connor Draycott was unveiled by Finlayson’s family.

They were joined by fans of the black and white movies and “talkies” from the UK chapters of Sons of the Desert, named after the fictional lodge that Laurel and Hardy belonged to in the 1933 film of the same name.

Finlayson, known as Fin to his fans and as Jimmy to his good friend Stan Laurel, was born in Larbert in 1887.

He worked for a while as a tinsmith in his father’s foundry before moving to Edinburgh to study and then pursue an acting career.

At the age of 23 he was performing at the Theatre Royal, but his ambitions were not satisfied.

After the death of his parents he moved to New York with his brother.

Within the year he had landed a role on Broadway in The Great Game, for which reviews offered “nothing but praise“.

In May 1912, the New York Dramatic Mirror said Finlayson had “an excellent opportunity, which he did not miss, for developing two characters in his one role – the simple, naive Scotsman and the artful, determined detective”.

It added: “The remarkable thing is that he managed to do them both at the same time.”

He took on another Scottish character in the Broadway production of Bunty Pulls the Strings, but pulled out of the national tour in 1916 when Hollywood beckoned.

By 1919 he was signed with the “King of Comedy” Mack Sennet, appearing as a Keystone Cop and lauded as a “legitimate and screen player of international celebrity”.

After a move to Hal Roach at Culver City in 1923, Finlayson was tested in different billings, sometimes in a lead role or as one of a comic trio with up-and-coming comics Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy.

He eventually found his niche as their established comic support or antagonist.

By the time he died aged 66 in 1953, he had more than 100 film credits to his name and his eccentric mannerisms were internationally recognised.

The double-take, the squint then a one-eyed stare and raised eyebrow – Finlayson’s madcap facial expressions became his trademark, along with the drawn-out “dohhhh”.

It inspired Dan Castellaneta when he voiced Homer in The Simpsons, which first aired in 1989.

It is also said Finlayson’s fake walrus moustache allowed him a degree of anonymity even in his heyday in Hollywood.

The artist who created his new portrait said he toyed with the idea of picturing the actor without his famous facial hair.

Draycott, who is studying fine art at Glasgow School of Art, was commissioned to produce the artwork by the Dobbie Hall Trust.

It wanted to commemorate the Larbert man’s global success and inspire young performers who appear in shows at the theatre.

Draycott, 20, said it was an honour to be asked to create the portrait for the theatre.

And he revealed he spent hours watching Finlayson’s films to “recreate his trademark facial expression”.

Draycott said: “James is such a well-known face among fans of black and white movies and I wanted to capture the distinctive look that made him a real superstar of his day.”

The award-winning artist said he was fascinated by Finlayson’s look and story.

He added: “There was initially some debate as to whether I should include his moustache in the portrait, as it was actually a false moustache that he wore specially for filming, but we decided that his moustache was such an integral part of his unique look that it should feature in the painting.”

“I like the fact that despite his face being so well-known during the 19040s and 50’s he could apparently remove the moustache and walk around Hollywood without being recognised by members of the public.”

But now, thanks to his portrait, new generations in his hometown will recognise the young man from Larbert who followed his dream all the way to Hollywood.

Romanian far-right populist Calin Georgescu has lost his appeal against a ruling barring him from participating in May’s presidential election.

The Constitutional Court issued the final ruling on Tuesday afternoon after deliberating for two hours. It said the decision was unanimous.

The Central Electoral Bureau had earlier rejected Georgescu’s candidacy for a rerun of the presidential election in May.

Georgescu had won the first round of last year’s presidential vote, but it was annulled after intelligence revealed Russia had been involved in setting up almost 800 TikTok accounts backing him.

On Sunday, the election bureau said Georgescu’s candidacy did not “meet the conditions of legality”, as he “violated the very obligation to defend democracy”.

Georgescu appealed that verdict the following day.

In a Facebook video on Tuesday night, Georgescu did not call for further protests – but instead suggested supporters could choose another candidate to back in the re-run election in May.

“If you want to support anyone by signing new lists for the presidential campaign, please do as your conscience tells you,” he said. “It seems democracy and freedom are taking their last breath these days.

“But we need to show now, more than any other time, that our choice matters in a peaceful and democratic way,” Georgescu added.

Earlier in the evening, many of the protesters outside the court had Romanian flags draped around their shoulders. Some held up Orthodox Christian icons and one clutched a large wooden crucifix.

A man dressed in a traditional peasant smock scaled a lamppost with a giant Romanian flag and waved it enthusiastically over the crowd.

They chanted “Calin Georgescu is president” and “freedom”, and condemned the judges as traitors. One woman had a sign that read “Stop dictatorship”.

It took a while for news of the ruling upholding the ban to reach the crowd. When it did, there were loud “boos” directed at the judges inside.

The crowd soon became noisy and angry, saying they had come to the streets to defend democracy.

Calin Georgescu, the man they support, has come from the far-right fringes of Romanian politics, but he is now at the forefront and promises to make Romania great again.

On 26 February, he was detained for questioning on his way to register as a candidate for the May election, prompting tens of thousands of Romanians to take to the streets of Bucharest in protest.

Many Romanians believe he is being blocked by a political elite that is corrupt and remote from the people.

George Simion, an ally of Georgescu and the leader of the far-right opposition Alliance for Uniting Romanians (AUR) wrote on Facebook: “Shame! You will not defeat us. The people of Romania have awoken. They will win.”

The presidential election was annulled after Georgescu won the first round in November 2024, when intelligence was released suggesting a giant TikTok promotion campaign for Georgescu had been backed by Russia.

To European leaders and many in Romania it looked like Russia was trying to weaken Europe and undermine its liberal values.

That is still the opinion of many Romanians who fear a man who admires Vladimir Putin and dislikes Nato.

The Kremlin press secretary Dmitry Peskov said that suggestions that Russia had links to Georgescu were “absolutely baseless”, and protesters out in Bucharest on Tuesday evening called the claims “fake news”.

“I don’t care who you vote for, I just want to be able to vote,” Anna told the BBC.

Soon after Georgescu’s video statement, people began to leave the area.

Several supporters told the BBC they were disappointed more people had not come out in protest.

One man said there should have been hundreds of thousands on the streets.

Thousands of people have been gathering in southern Ethiopia for one of the country’s biggest cultural events.

The week-long Gada ceremony, which ended on Sunday, sees the official transfer of power from one customary ruler to his successor – something that happens every eight years.

The tradition of regularly appointing a new Abbaa Gadaa has been practised by the Borana community for centuries – and sees them gather at the rural site of Arda Jila Badhasa, near the Ethiopian town of Arero.

It is a time to celebrate their special form of democracy as well as their cultural heritage, with each age-group taking the opportunity to wear their different traditional outfits.

These are paraded the day before the official handover during a procession when married women march with wooden batons, called “siinqee”.

The batons have symbolic values of protection for women, who use them during conflict.

If a siinqee stick is placed on the ground by a married woman between two quarrelling parties, it means the conflict must stop immediately out of respect.

During the procession, younger women walk at the front, distinguished from the married women by the different colour of their clothing.

In this pastoralist society, women are excluded from holding the top position of Abbaa Gadaa, sitting on the council of elders or being initiated into the system as a child.

But their important role can be seen during the festival as they build all the accommodation for those staying for the week – and prepare all the food.

And the unique Gada system of governance, which was added to the UN’s cultural heritage list in 2016, allows for them to attend regular community meetings and to voice their opinions to the Abbaa Gadaa.

Gada membership is only open to boys whose fathers are already members – young initiates have their heads shaven at the crown to make their rank clear.

The smaller the circle, the older he is.

As the global cultural body Unesco reports, oral historians teach young initiates about “history, laws, rituals, time reckoning, cosmology, myths, rules of conduct, and the function of the Gada system”.

Training for boys begins as young as eight years old.

Later, they will be assessed for their potential as future leaders.

As they grow up, tests include walking long distances barefoot, slaughtering cattle efficiently and showing kindness to fellow initiates.

Headpieces made from cowrie shells are traditionally worn by young trainees. The only other people allowed to wear them are elderly women.

Both groups are revered by Borana community members.

Men aged between 28 and 32 are identified by the ostrich feathers they wear, which are known in the Afaan Oromo language as “baalli”.

Their attendance at the Gada ceremony is an opportunity to learn, prepare and bond as it is already known who from this age-group will be named Abbaa Gadaa in 2033.

The main event at the recent Gada ceremony was the handover of power, from the outgoing 48-year-old Abbaa Gadaa to his younger successor.

Well-wishers crossed the border from Kenya and others travelled from as far as Ethiopia’s capital, Addis Ababa, to witness the spectacle. The governor of Kenya’s Marsabit county was among the honoured guests.

Thirty-seven-year-old Guyo Boru Guyo, seen here in white, holding a spear, was chosen to lead because he impressed the council of elders during his teenage years.

He becomes the 72nd Abbaa Gadaa and will now oversee the Borana people who live in both southern Ethiopia and north-western Kenya.

As their top diplomat, he will also be responsible for solving the feuds that may emerge in the pastoralist community.

These often involve cattle-raiding and disputes over access to water in this drought-prone region.

During his eight years at the helm, his successor will finish his training to take on the job in continuation of this generations-old tradition.

• The Ethiopians changing their names as a show of pride
• How royal divorce papers have shaken the Zulu kingdom
• LISTEN: Tanzania’s Maasai people evicted from ancestral lands

A war of words has erupted between the chief minister of a southern Indian state and the federal government over an education policy that, among other things, also deals with what languages children are taught in schools.

The National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 was introduced by Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government five years back and is being implemented in stages. It has made headlines recently after Tamil Nadu Chief Minister MK Stalin alleged that the federal government was penalising his state for refusing to implement it – charges Delhi has denied.

A section of the policy recommends that students learn three languages. It doesn’t mention any language specifically, but adds that at least two should be “native to India”.

Stalin has cited a number of reasons for not implementing the NEP. But it is his allegation that the three-language policy will lead to the imposition of Hindi – the northern Indian language that is the most widely spoken in India – in his state that has dominated headlines recently.

India, where states are mostly organised on linguistic lines, has nearly two dozen official languages, including Hindi, Tamil and English. But southern states have often protested against efforts by successive federal governments to privilege Hindi over other languages.

It is an especially sensitive issue in Tamil Nadu, which has historically been at the forefront of such protests.

The issue led to heated exchanges in India’s parliament on Monday, with federal Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan accusing Stalin and his party members of “mischief”.

“Their only job is to raise language barriers. They are undemocratic and uncivilised,” Pradhan said, sparking protests by Stalin’s party, the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, in Tamil Nadu.

Education is a part of the constitution’s “concurrent” list, which means that both the federal and state governments can make and enact laws around it. Schools and colleges follow different syllabi and rules depending on who oversees them – the federal or state governments.

The National Education Policy aims to promote and regulate education in India and the government updates it occasionally, with the NEP 2020 being the fourth iteration.

The three-language formula has found place in the NEP from its first version in 1968 and has often faced pushback from states, including Tamil Nadu. Many of its recommendations were not legally binding on state-run schools – Tamil Nadu, for instance, teaches only two languages, English and Tamil, in schools it runs. The state’s leaders have argued that learning their mother tongue, Tamil, helps children learn subjects better while English opens up more promising opportunities.

Tamil Nadu government schools have also performed well over the years on surveys measuring parameters including access to education and quality of infrastructure.

The latest NEP says that the “three-language policy will continue to be implemented” but adds that – unlike earlier versions – there will be “greater flexibility” and that “no language will be imposed on any state”.

But Stalin and his party – who say they are not against Hindi itself – have argued over the past few weeks that the policy’s eventual aim is to force the language on non-Hindi-speaking states.

The chief minister wrote on X last month that Hindi – which emerged as a standardised language for easy communication during the British era – ended up dominating other languages and dialects spoken in northern India, such as Bhojpuri and Awadhi.

His party’s MP Kanimozhi Karunanidhi also recently questioned why a student should be forced to learn three languages.

“Students have enough burden in schools. You have to learn so many subjects, and on top of that you are forced to learn three languages instead of two,” she told the Indian Express newspaper.

But Pradhan has denied allegations that the policy will force Hindi through.

“We have never said in NEP 2020 that only Hindi will be there; we have only said that education will be based on mother tongue – in Tamil Nadu, it will be Tamil,” he told reporters last week.

The latest controversy has been exacerbated by Tamil Nadu’s claims that it has not been allotted its share of funds for Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan – a school education programme partially funded by the federal government – due to the state’s refusal to implement the NEP.

The Hindu newspaper reported last August that the federal government had asked Tamil Nadu to sign a memorandum of understanding (MoU) to participate in the scheme. However, according to the MoU, participating in the scheme meant that the state had to adopt NEP 2020 “in its entirety”.

In December, a junior federal minister told parliament that Tamil Nadu did not sign the MoU for the scheme despite agreeing initially – a claim the DMK denied, saying it never agreed to do so.

In February, Stalin wrote a letter to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, asking him to urgently release the funds, amounting to around 21.5bn rupees ($247m; £191m).

India is one of the world’s most linguistically diverse countries and some estimates say thousands of languages are spoken here.

But there are only 22 official languages, with Hindi – spoken by more than 46% of the population – being the most widely used, according to the last census held in 2011.

After the British left India in 1947, the newly independent nation sought to promote Hindi as a link language to replace English. The constitution – enacted in 1950 – also nudges the federal government to promote the spread of Hindi.

This invited fierce opposition from non-Hindi-speaking states, prompting the federal government to continue using English as an alternate official language for 15 years after 1950.

As the deadline year of 1965 approached, violent protests over fears of Hindi “imposition” erupted again across Tamil Nadu, leading the federal government to pass a law that assured the continued use of English as an official language.

However, successive federal governments have introduced policies or made announcements that have kept these anxieties simmering.

The 1968 NEP adopted the three-language formula for the first time and, in the same year, the government introduced policies mandating the teaching of Hindi in non-Hindi speaking states, leading to fresh protests.

Over the years, the issue of Hindi versus other languages has made headlines repeatedly. In 2023, Stalin criticised the Modi government for replacing some colonial-era laws with ones bearing Hindi names (the Indian Penal Code, for instance, has been replaced with a law named Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita).

A federal government commission that examined the language policy during 1948-49 acknowledged that the issue’s sentimental nature made it “difficult to consider it in a calm and detached manner”.

“No other problem has caused greater controversy among educationists and evoked more contradictory views from our witnesses,” it said.

Staff at the US Agency for International Development (USAID) have been told to shred and burn classified documents and personnel files.

The request raised alarm among employees and labour groups amid the ongoing dismantling of the agency.

Acting Executive Secretary Erica Y Carr sent an email that thanked staff for clearing out classified safes and personnel documents from a Washington DC office and told them to meet in the building’s lobby for an all-day disposal event on Tuesday.

“Shred as many documents first, and reserve the burn bags for when the shredder becomes available or needs a break,” her email to staff read.

Typically, documents placed in burn bags for disposal are sealed and then taken to a secure site for incineration.

The email asked staff not to overfill the burn bags and label them with the words “SECRET” and “USAID (B/IO)” – which stands for bureau, or independent office – using permanent markers.

The BBC has viewed a copy of the email, which was also reported by its US partner, CBS News. It was first reported by ProPublica.

The US State Department did not immediately return a request for comment.

It was not immediately clear if the agency had preserved copies of the documents marked for destruction.

The American Foreign Service Association (AFSA), a union representing USAID staff, was aware employees had been asked to shred documents, spokesperson Nikki Gamer told the BBC.

The union said it was “alarmed” by the reports and warned that such documents “may be relevant to ongoing litigation regarding the termination of USAID employees and the cessation of USAID grants”.

The Trump administration faces multiple lawsuits over its dismantling of USAID, which began shortly after Trump took office in January. Unions and other groups have challenged the administration’s power to shut down an agency and freeze funds that had been established and approved by the US Congress.

AFSA noted that federal law dictates that government records must be preserved as they are “essential to transparency, accountability, and the integrity of the legal process”.

The union warned that “the unlawful destruction of federal records could carry serious legal consequences for anyone directed to act in violation of the law.”

Government agencies do occasionally destroy paper records of classified materials and other documents, but strict procedures govern the process.

The Federal Records Act of 1950 sets out guidelines for the proper disposal of documents and creating backup or archival records, including electronic records.

The email sent by Carr did not contain some of the details traditionally found in a records disposal request, raising concerns about procedure, experts told the BBC.

“There is no indication in this email order that any thought is being given to proper retention or even identifying which records can be destroyed and which records cannot,” said Kel McClanahan, executive director of the National Security Counselors, a non-profit law firm in Washington.

Mr McClanahan filed a complaint with the National Archives and Records Administration, asking them to “take immediate measures” to stop the destruction of records.

The loss of personnel records could also cause serious complications for federal employees who need to verify or process their employment benefits.

USAID was one of the first targets of the Department of Government Efficiency (Doge), which was established by the Trump administration to root out what they view as waste and fraud in the federal bureaucracy. Billionaire Elon Musk is helping lead the agency.

Musk referred to the agency as “evil” and the White House has argued that the agency’s international programmes were a wasteful use of taxpayer dollars.

Over a few dramatic weeks, the agency was essentially shut down, with thousands of employees being laid off or placed on administrative leave. Many foreign service officers stationed abroad received little to no instructions for how to return home.

Many USAID staff remain on administrative leave, which allows them to receive pay but keeps their lives and careers in limbo.

The Trump administration named Secretary of State Marco Rubio the acting head of USAID in February and announced that Pete Marocco, who works at the State Department, would oversee its daily operations.

The Trump administration also ordered a temporary freeze on foreign aid that included funds distributed by USAID, which sent shockwaves through the international development community and forced some private companies and nonprofits to lay off staff.

On Monday, Rubio announced on X that the administration was cancelling “83% of the programmes at USAID.”

“The 5200 contracts that are now cancelled spent tens of billions of dollars in ways that did not serve, (and in some cases even harmed), the core national interests of the United States,” he wrote. The State Department would administer the roughly 1,000 remaining grants.

The Prince of Wales will make his first visit to Estonia at the end of next week to meet British troops providing a deterrent to Russian aggression in the region.

Prince William will travel in his role as colonel-in-chief of the Mercian Regiment to learn more about how British troops are bolstering Nato’s eastern flank, Kensington Palace said.

He will also carry out engagements in Estonia’s capital city Tallinn to see how the country, a Nato member, has responded to the ongoing conflict in Ukraine and how it is innovating in renewable energy and technology.

News of the visit comes at a pivotal time for the war in Ukraine as the US prepares to present a proposed 30-day ceasefire to Russia.

British forces are deployed to Estonia and Poland under Operation Cabrit, the UK’s contribution to Nato’s efforts to counter Russian aggression in the Baltic states.

The official visit to Estonia has been planned for several months but it now feels especially timely.

Royal sources see the trip as part of the “evolution of Prince William as a global statesman” and describe it as a serious trip for him where “he is showing his support for the leadership in the UK and the troops we have based at the fringes of Russia”.

Those working with the prince say he is increasingly comfortable in this world of soft diplomacy and believe he has something of value to add.

They cite the role he played when he met US President Donald Trump in Paris in December, and when he represented the UK alongside other global leaders during the commemorations to mark the 80th Anniversary of D-Day last June.

In Estonia, Prince William will be there professionally as a future commander in chief of the Armed Forces and personally as a former soldier.

As ever, it is a delicate, diplomatic line to tread.

While in Estonia, Prince William will meet Ukrainian families displaced by the war.

After his father King Charles met Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky at Sandringham just over a week ago, it is further public support from the royal family for those dealing with the conflict and experiencing its consequences.

King Charles met Zelensky after the Ukrainian president attended a summit of European leaders in London.

Estonia shares a border with Russia and has been a key supporter of Ukraine during the war.

Last month, the country and two other Baltic states – Latvia and Lithuania – unplugged from Russia’s electricity grid and joined the European Union’s network.

A man who ran the entire length of Africa has begun his latest challenge – running the full length of New Zealand.

Russ Cook, nicknamed Hardest Geezer, completed his previous endurance challenge in April last year after 352 days.

The 27-year-old, from Worthing, West Sussex, plans to run the 1,864 mile (3,000km) Te Araroa Trail, which will see him take on 60 ultramarathons while navigating mountains, forests, coastlines and cities.

“The incredible, warm welcome I’ve received so far has already given me a glimpse of how special the journey ahead of me will be,” he said.

He has begun the challenge at Stirling Point in Bluff – the southern tip of New Zealand’s South Island – and will run northbound for about 60 days to the finish line in Cape Rēinga, in Northland.

Mr Cook said he expected to climb the equivalent of approximately 10 Mount Everests in elevation over approximately the next 10 weeks.

During the challenge, he is also due to bungee jump off Auckland Harbour Bridge, canyon swing in Queenstown and sky dive in Abel Tasman.

He said he was excited to be “back on the road again” in his first major expedition since running the length of Africa.

“If anything, from my experiences before in Africa, it has made me more finely attuned to the risks that I can take and the risks that I can’t take,” he said.

“A lot of personal growth is done in those little uncomfortable spots.

“You’re not totally 100% sure, but you go for it anyway, and you make it happen, and that’s when you learn.”

Mr Cook raised more than £1m for charity during his previous challenge in Africa, despite complications with visas, health scares, geopolitical issues and an armed robbery.

The extreme challenge began at South Africa’s most southerly point on 22 April 2023, and finished more than 10,190 miles (16,400km) north in Tunisia.

The ultramarathon runner said he planned to continue living adventurously for as long as his body allowed.

“When I’m older, when the body’s keeled over a bit, I expect I’ll pick up where I left off,” he said.

Somali security forces have ended a deadly 24-hour siege by Islamist fighters who stormed a popular hotel in the central city of Beledweyne, authorities said.

The attack by al-Shabab began with a car bomb exploding, followed by gunmen entering the hotel, leading to intense clashes with security forces.

“The attackers have been neutralised. Some detonated themselves while others were killed by police forces,” Omar Osman Calasow, the mayor of Beledweyne district, told the BBC.

The mayor said seven people had been killed in the attack but witnesses said the death toll could be higher.

The raid at the Qahira Hotel took place as politicians, security officials and traditional elders were meeting to discuss plans for an offensive against al-Shabab in central Somalia.

Police officer Ali Mahad told AFP news agency that most of those in attendance had been rescued.

A federal lawmaker from Beledweyne, Dahir Amin Jesow, told the BBC that about seven gunmen had attacked the hotel.

It is unclear how many people have been wounded, but the lawmaker said they were trying to organise planes to fly victims to Mogadishu for treatment.

Parts of the hotel were reduced to rubble as government forces and gunmen exchanged fire, shopkeeper Ali Suleiman, who witnessed the attack, told the Reuters news agency.

“We first heard a huge blast followed by gunfire, then another blast was heard,” he said.

Calasow said the 24-hour siege ended on Wednesday morning, leaving “significant damage”.

“Among those killed in the attack were military officers, traditional elders, and soldiers,” Calasow added.

Al-Shabab said it had killed 20 people, including government officials and leaders of a pro-government clan militia.

The federal government said it was still investigating and has not commented on the reported killing of the officials.

In a statement, Ali Abdullahi Hussein, the president of Hirshabelle state, praised the security forces for their bravery in neutralising the extremist militants.

“Let us unite to complete the elimination of these brutal extremists,” Hussein added.

Beledweyne is about 335km (208 miles) north of the capital, Mogadishu, and is a strategic location in the campaign against al-Shabab.

The Somali forces, alongside African Union peacekeepers, continue to wage a campaign against the militants, which remain a big threat despite the ongoing military operations.

• Why Trump is on the warpath in Somalia
• The men in sarongs taking on al-Shabab militants
• Somali piracy 2.0 – the BBC meets the new robbers of the high seas

Apple’s appeal against a UK government demand to be able to access its customers’ most highly encrypted data is set to be considered at a secret hearing at the High Court on Friday, the BBC understands.

It is due to be considered by the Investigatory Powers Tribunal – an independent court which has the power to investigate claims against the UK intelligence services.

The US tech giant took legal action earlier this month in response to the Home Office’s demand for the right to access customer information protected by Apple’s Advanced Data Protection (ADP) programme.

Currently Apple cannot access data stored in this way and therefore is unable to share it with law enforcement if issued with a warrant.

The government says it needs to be able to see it if there is a national security risk.

The US tech giant took legal action earlier this month in response to the Home Office’s demand for the right to access customer information protected by Apple’s Advanced Data Protection (ADP) programme.

Apple declined to comment. The Home Office and the Tribunal have been approached by the BBC.

The hearing is due to be held in private because it relates to the security services, but campaigners say the public has a right to hear it.

“This hearing should not be held in secret,” Caroline Wilson Palow, legal director at Privacy International told the BBC.

“The public has a right to know whether or not the security of a service that could be used by millions or perhaps billions of people worldwide is being undermined.”

The row began in February when it first emerged the government was seeking the right to be able to access data protected by ADP, using powers granted to it under the Investigatory Powers Act.

The Act allows it to covertly compel firms to provide information to law enforcement agencies.

ADP allows users with iCloud accounts and storage to secure photos, notes, voice memos and other data with end to end encryption, meaning no-one but the user – not even Apple – can access it.

Getting round that would involve the creation of a so-called “backdoor” – a capability some fear bad actors would ultimately be able to exploit.

At the time Apple reiterated its long-standing commitment not to weaken the privacy or security of its systems.

“As we have said many times before, we have never built a backdoor or master key to any of our products, and we never will,” a spokesperson told the BBC.

Later in February the row escalated, as Apple announced it was pulling ADP in the UK.

Shortly after that, the BBC learnt Apple was taking legal action by appealing to the Investigatory Powers Tribunal to try to overturn the government’s demand.

On its website, the Tribunal lists a hearing to be held before its president Lord Rabinder Singh on Friday afternoon.

The listing makes no mention of Apple or the government, nor has the Tribunal confirmed if they are the parties involved however a source familiar with the matter has indicated that is the case.

In the statement it issued in February, Apple said it regretted the action it felt it had been forced to take.

“Enhancing the security of cloud storage with end-to-end-encryption is more urgent than ever before,” it said.

“Apple remains committed to offering our users the highest level of security for their personal data and are hopeful that we will be able to do so in future in the UK.”

In a previous statement, a Home Office spokesperson said: “The UK has a longstanding position of protecting our citizens from the very worst crimes, such as child sex abuse and terrorism, at the same time as protecting people’s privacy.

“The UK has robust safeguards and independent oversight to protect privacy and privacy is only impacted on an exceptional basis, in relation to the most serious crimes and only when it is necessary and proportionate to do so.”

• Listen to Mike Wendling read this article on BBC Sounds

An argument in the White House tore apart the US alliance with Ukraine, shook European leaders and highlighted JD Vance’s key role in forcefully expressing Donald Trump’s foreign policy. The vice-president has come out punching on the global stage – so what is it that drives his worldview?

Vance’s first major foreign speech, at the Munich Security Conference in mid-February, caught many by surprise.

Rather than focusing on the war raging in Ukraine, the US vice-president only briefly mentioned the bloodiest European conflict since World War Two.

Instead, he used his debut on the international stage to berate close US allies about immigration and free speech, suggesting the European establishment was anti-democratic. He accused them of ignoring the wills of their people and questioned what shared values they were truly banding together with the US to defend.

“If you are running in fear of your own voters, there is nothing America can do for you, nor for that matter is there anything you can do for the American people,” he warned.

It was a bold and perhaps unexpected way to introduce himself to the world – by angering European allies. But days later he was back in the news, at the centre of a blistering row with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, whom he accused of being ungrateful.

For those who have been studying the rise of Vance, these two episodes came as no surprise.

The vice-president has come to represent an intellectual wing of the conservative movement that gives expression to Trumpism and in particular how its America First mantra applies beyond its borders. In writings and interviews, Vance has expressed an ideology that seems to join the dots between American workers, global elites and the role of the US in the wider world.

On the campaign trail with Donald Trump last year, Vance spent much of his time sharply criticising Democrats – the usual attack-dog duties that traditionally get dished out to running mates – and sparring with reporters.

• The ‘hillbilly’ Maga loyalist who became vice-president
• Vance took the lead attacking Zelensky. Why?

And while Elon Musk’s outsized and unconventional role in the Trump administration initially overshadowed him, that Munich speech and the Oval Office showdown have raised the profile of Trump’s deputy.

It’s also led to questions about the winding ideological journey he’s made during his years in the conservative movement – and what he truly believes now.

“He’s much more of a pragmatist than an ideologue,” said James Orr, associate professor of philosophy of religion at the University of Cambridge and a friend whom Vance has described as his “British sherpa”.

“He’s able to articulate what is and is not in the American interest,” Orr said. “And the American interest is not the interest of some abstract utopia or matrix of propositions and ideas, but the American people.”

Vance has repeatedly returned to this “America First” – or perhaps “Americans First” – theme in speeches, drawing a line between what he castigates as Washington’s economic and foreign policy orthodoxy abroad and the struggles of the left-behind American working class at home.

At the Republican National Convention last summer, for example, he lamented how in small towns across the US “jobs were sent overseas and children were sent to war”. And he attacked then-President Joe Biden, saying: “For half a century, he’s been a champion of every single policy initiative to make America weaker and poorer.”

But Vance is also someone who, after a tough upbringing in an Ohio family with Appalachian roots and sudden fame on the back of a bestselling memoir, Hillbilly Elegy, has tried out many different views.

Not only is he a former “Never Trumper” who described the US president in 2016 as “reprehensible” and “an idiot”, his book places much of the blame for the plight of the rural poor squarely on the choices made by individuals.

More recently he’s shifted that blame to elites – a group he’s variously defined as Democrats, conventional Republicans, liberals, corporate leaders, globalists and academics.

In speeches, Vance regularly argues that “America is not just an idea… America is a nation.”

He couples this statement with an anecdote about his family’s ancestral graveyard in Kentucky, where he says he, his wife and their children will one day be buried, arguing that family and homeland are more important than some of America’s traditional core ideas.

In Vance’s view, the Trump administration’s priority should be to make life better for Americans who have been in the country for generations, and yet have little of the nation’s vast wealth.

Rod Dreher, a conservative American writer who is also a friend of the vice-president, said Vance’s thinking arises from a belief that “moderate normie Republicans… failed to offer anything to stop the so-called forever wars, and they also failed to offer anything to ordinary Americans like where he comes from, who are suffering economically from globalism and from the effects of mass migration and fentanyl”.

“He got red-pilled, so to speak, by Donald Trump,” Dreher told BBC Radio 4’s Today Programme this week.

“Red-pilled” is internet slang for suddenly waking up to a supposedly hidden truth, as featured in The Matrix movies. It’s commonly used by those on the right online who believe they have special access to reality and that people with liberal, centrist or establishment views are uncritical thinkers.

Vance is a vice-president who, more than his boss, seems extremely plugged into internet culture. He’s an enthusiastic user of X, often jumping directly into arguments rather than using it, as many politicians do, as a platform for announcements.

His appearances on fringe right-wing podcasts, while he was trying to drum up support for a Senate run, provided fodder for his opponents, as did provocative trollish comments such as that the US was being run by “childless cat ladies”.

Married to the daughter of Indian immigrants, he has rejected and been rejected by members of the alt-right even if he does echo some of their views. However, he does have friends and allies both at the top of Silicon Valley and in some of its lesser known corners.

After graduating from Yale Law School, he was brought into the world of venture capital by influential Silicon Valley conservative Peter Thiel, who later funded his US Senate campaign.

He has cited people like the blogger Curtis Yarvin, a key guru in the “neo-reactionary” movement which dreams up fantasies of technologically-assisted, hyper-capitalist societies led by powerful monarchs.

His familiarity with the internet’s fringes was further demonstrated when he spread false rumours about immigrants eating pets and an allegation about Ukrainian corruption – which the BBC traced back to Moscow.

• Why the Danes now feel threatened by Trump
• Greenland heads to polls as Trump eyes territory

“He sort of stews in this online world,” said Cathy Young, a writer for the conservative, anti-Trump media outlet The Bulwark.

At the same time, Young said, his anecdote about family graveyards and homeland suggests another political tendency – a “disturbing undertone of nativism”.

“That bothers some people and rightly so,” she said. “Part of the American legacy is that we are a nation of immigrants. [Former Republican President] Ronald Reagan talked about that, about one of the distinctive things about this country is that anyone can come here from any part of the world and become an American.”

Vance’s “Americans First” thinking clearly extends to the issue of the war in Ukraine. When he was a senator, he was often critical of America’s involvement in the war and the huge sums spent on it, his former Senate colleague Josh Hawley, a Republican from Missouri, recalled.

“His position then was very much like what it is now… that the conflict must end,” Hawley told the BBC. “It needs to end in a way that’s maximally advantageous to the security of the United States and it needs to end in a way that gets our European allies to take increased responsibility.”

Vance regularly accused the Biden administration of being more interested in Ukraine than in stemming illegal immigration. Writing in 2022, during his Senate campaign and after the Russian invasion, he said: “I will be damned if I am going to prioritise Ukraine’s eastern border right now when our own southern border is engulfed by a human tsunami of illegal migrants.”

His views burst out into the open during that dramatic argument with President Zelensky in the Oval Office. Vance accused Zelensky of lacking respect, of sending politicians on a “propaganda tour” of Ukraine and of being insufficiently thankful for US aid.

“Offer some words of appreciation for the United States of America and the president who’s trying to save your country,” he told the Ukrainian president.

The argument left European leaders scrambling to defend Zelensky, while also trying to maintain negotiations over a possible peace deal.

Vance then prompted widespread outrage from allies when he poured scorn on the idea of security guarantees in the form of troops “from some random country that hasn’t fought a war in 30 or 40 years”.

He later denied he was talking about the UK or France, the only two European countries that have publicly stated their willingness to send peacekeepers to Ukraine.

But the vice-president’s willingness to step on the toes of allies reflect a world view which, in his words, has little time for “moralisms about ‘this country is good’, ‘this country is bad'”.

“That doesn’t mean you have to have a complete moral blind spot, but it means that you have to be honest about the countries that you’re dealing with, and there’s a complete failure to do that with most of our foreign policy establishment in this country,” he told a New York Times columnist last year.

His tone has shifted from the two years he spent in the US Senate before being picked by Trump. Democrat Cory Booker remembered Vance as “very pragmatic and thoughtful”.

“That’s why some of this stuff surprises me,” Booker told the BBC.

• Vance’s cousin criticises him for ‘belittling’ Zelensky

Others detect the same disconnect.

David Frum, now a writer for The Atlantic magazine, said that Vance’s views have changed significantly from when he first commissioned the former marine, who was attending Ohio State University at the time, to write for his website on conservative politics more than 15 years ago.

“He was not in any way the culture warrior that he is today,” Frum said.

Frum, a former George W Bush speechwriter and staunch critic of Trump, said that Vance’s view of Russia represented “ideological admiration”.

In Munich, as he spoke about free speech, the vice-president cited cases involving conservatives and Christians in Western countries but avoided any mention of Russia’s harsh clampdowns on expression.

Vance and his allies reject that he is sympathetic to Putin.

“I’ve never once argued that Putin is a kind and friendly person,” Vance, then an Ohio senator, said in a speech at the 2024 Munich Security Conference.

“We don’t have to agree with him. We can contest him and we often will contest him,” he said. “But the fact that he’s a bad guy does not mean we can’t engage in basic diplomacy and prioritising America’s interests.”

The BBC has asked the White House for comment on Vance’s stance in relation to Ukraine and Russia.

A quick end to the conflict in Ukraine is, in Vance’s view, not only about putting a stop to billions of dollars being spent thousands of miles away.

He himself has said that there are bigger issues for the US and its friends to focus on than Ukraine, namely the threat of China, which he has called “our most significant competitor… for the next 20 or 30 years”.

Vance’s views on Ukraine and his willingness to publicly air them provided a dramatic moment in the early days of Trump’s second presidential term.

But it also offered a vivid illustration of the vice-president’s ideology, his prominence in the Trump administration and how he views America’s place in the world.

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.

An Indonesian TikToker has been sentenced to almost three years in prison after reportedly ‘talking’ to a picture of Jesus on her phone and telling him to get a haircut.

Ratu Thalisa, a Muslim transgender woman with more than 442,000 TikTok followers, had been on a livestream, and was responding to a comment that told her to cut her hair to look more like a man.

On Monday, a court in Medan, Sumatra found Thalisa guilty of spreading hatred under a controversial online hate-speech law, and sentenced her to two years and 10 months in jail.

The court said her comments could disrupt “public order” and “religious harmony” in society, and charged her with committing blasphemy.

The court ruling came after multiple Christian groups filed police complaints against Ms Thalisa for blasphemy.

The sentence has been condemned by human rights groups, including Amnesty International, who described it as “a shocking attack on Ratu Thalisa’s freedom of expression” and called for it to be quashed.

“The Indonesian authorities should not use the country’s Electronic Information and Transactions (EIT) law to punish people for comments made on social media,” Amnesty International Indonesia’s Executive Director Usman Hamid said in a statement.

“While Indonesia should prohibit the advocacy of religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence, Ratu Thalisa’s speech act does not reach that threshold.”

Mr Hamid called on Indonesian authorities to overturn Ms Thalisa’s conviction and ensure her immediate release from custody.

He also urged them to repeal or make substantial revisions to what he described as “problematic provisions” in the EIT Law – namely, those criminalising alleged immorality, defamation and hate speech.

First introduced in 2008 and amended in 2016 to address online defamation, the EIT Law was designed to safeguard the rights of individuals in online spaces.

It has been roundly criticised, however, by rights groups, press groups and legal experts, who have long raised concerns about the law’s potential threat to freedom of expression.

At least 560 people were charged with alleged violations of the EIT Law while exercising their freedom of expression between 2019 and 2024, and 421 were convicted, according to data from Amnesty International.

Those charged with offenses of defamation and hate speech have included several social media influencers.

In September 2023, a Muslim woman was sentenced to two years’ prison for blaspheming Islam, after she posted a viral TikTok video where she said an Islamic phrase before eating pork.

In 2024, another TikToker was detained for blasphemy after they posted a quiz asking children what kind of animals can read the Quran, according to Amnesty International.

Indonesia is home to many religious minorities, including Buddhists, Christians and Hindus. But a vast majority of Indonesians are Muslim – and most cases of people found in violation of the EIT Law have typically related to religious minorities allegedly insulting Islam.

Ms Thalisa’s case, where a Muslim woman is accused of invoking hate speech against Christianity, is less common.

Prosecutors previously demanded that she receive a sentence of more than four years, and immediately appealed against Monday’s verdict. Ms Thalisa was given seven days to appeal.

Passengers who were freed from a train seized by armed militants have spoken of “doomsday scenes” that unfolded on board the Jaffar Express in Pakistan’s Balochistan province.

“We held our breath throughout the firing, not knowing what would happen next,” Ishaq Noor, who was one of those on board, told the BBC.

He was one of more than 400 passengers travelling from Quetta to Peshawar on Tuesday when the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) attacked and took a number hostage. The train driver was among several reported injured.

Military sources claim 155 passengers have been freed and 27 militants killed. There is no independent confirmation of those figures. Rescue operations are continuing.

Security forces say they have deployed hundreds of troops to rescue the remaining passengers. Authorities have also deployed helicopters and special forces personnel.

The BLA has warned of “severe consequences” if an attempt is made to rescue hostages.

At least 100 of those on the train were members of the security forces, officials have said. It unclear how many passengers are still being held hostage – more than a dozen of those freed were taken to hospital for treatment.

Reports quoting security officials say some of the militants may have left the train, taking an unknown number of passengers with them into the surrounding mountainous area.

On Wednesday, the BBC saw dozens of wooden coffins being loaded at Quetta railway station. A railway official said they were empty and being transported to collect any possible casualties.

Muhammad Ashraf, who was travelling from Quetta to Lahore to visit family, was among a group of passengers who managed to disembark the train late on Tuesday.

“There was a lot of fear among the passengers. It was a scene of doomsday,” he said.

The group then walked for nearly four hours to the next railway station. Several of the men carried the weaker passengers on their shoulders.

“We reached the station with great difficulty, because we were tired and there were children and women with us,” he said.

Mr Noor, who was travelling with his wife and two children, said the initial explosion on the train was “so intense” that one of his children fell from the seat.

He and his wife each tried to shield one child amidst the gunfire.

“If a bullet comes our way, it will hit us and not the children,” he said.

Mushtaq Muhammad, who was in the train’s third carriage, recalled passengers stricken with panic.

“The attackers were talking to each other in Balochi, and their leader repeatedly told them to ‘keep an eye’ particularly on the security personnel to make sure that [the attackers] do not lose them,” he said.

The attackers started to release some Balochistan residents, as well as women, children and elderly passengers, on Tuesday evening, Mr Ishaq said, adding that he was let go when he told them he was a resident of Turbat city in Balochistan, and they saw that he had children and women with him.

Meanwhile, relatives of the train’s driver, Amjad Yasin, are anxiously awaiting news after hearing he was injured. He’d been a train driver for 24 years and survived when explosives targeted another train he was driving about eight years ago, they say.

“For the past couple of weeks, we were under severe stress that something is about to happen as there was an air of fear,” his brother Amir told the BBC in Quetta.

The BLA has waged a decades-long insurgency to gain independence and has launched numerous deadly attacks, often targeting police stations, railway lines and highways.

Counter-insurgency operations in impoverished Balochistan by Pakistan’s army and security forces have reportedly seen thousands of people disappear without trace since the early 2000s. The security forces are accused of crimes including torture and extra-judicial killings, allegations they deny.

Pakistani authorities – as well as several Western countries, including the UK and US – have designated the group a terrorist organisation.

The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan said it is “gravely concerned” by the train hijack.

“We strongly urge all relevant stakeholders to forge an urgent rights-based, pro-people consensus on the issues faced by citizens in Balochistan and to find a peaceful, political solution,” it said in a statement on X.

The United Nations’ Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has “strongly condemned” the train siege and also called for the immediate release of remaining passengers.

Greenland’s centre-right opposition has won a surprise general election victory – in a vote dominated by independence and US President Donald Trump’s pledge to take over the semi-autonomous territory.

The Democratic party, which favours a gradual approach to independence from Denmark – achieved around 30% of the vote, near-complete results show.

“Greenland needs us to stand together in a time of great interest from outside,” party leader Jens-Frederik Nielsen told local media. “There is a need for unity, so we will enter into negotiations with everyone.”

His party will now have to negotiate with other parties in order to form a coalition.

Greenland – the world’s biggest island, between the Arctic and Atlantic Oceans – has been controlled by Denmark, nearly 3,000km (1,860 miles) away, for about 300 years.

Greenland governs its own domestic affairs, but decisions on foreign and defence policy are made in Copenhagen.

Five of the six main parties in the election favour independence from Copenhagen, but disagree over the pace with which to reach it.

• Greenland’s election: Why does it matter and how does it work?
• Greenland’s vote pivotal for Arctic territory’s future
• Why does Trump want Greenland?

The Democratic party, whose vote was up by more than 20% on 2021, is considered a moderate party on independence.

Another opposition party, Naleraq, which is looking to to immediately kick-off the independence process and forge closer ties with the US, is on course for second place with almost a quarter of the vote.

Support for Naleraq was boosted ahead of the vote by the decision of one of Greenland’s most popular young politicians, Aki-Matilda Hoegh-Dam, to switch from one of the ruling parties. She came second only to Democrats leader Jens Frederik Nielsen in the popular vote.

“It’s the second biggest party, so you can’t avoid them,” Nielsen told local reporters. “But we don’t want to rule out the other parties beforehand.”

The two current governing parties, Inuit Ataqatigiit (IA) and Siumut, are heading for third and fourth place – marking an upset for Prime Minister Mute B Egede.

More than 40,000 Greenlanders out of a population of 57,000 were eligible to cast their votes to elect 31 MPs, as well as the local government. Six parties were on the ballot.

The voting took place at 72 polling stations scattered across the vast island.

“The Democrats need a supporting partner to be able to have a majority,” says Maria Ackren from the University of Greenland. “It would say it can be either Naleraq or Inuit Ataqatigiit. It’s up to the Democrats to try to figure out what they want.”

Since 2009 Greenland has had the right to call an independence referendum.

Although Naleraq is pushing for a vote within a few years, Jens-Frederik Nielsen’s party favours a gradual approach towards independence, focusing first on making self-government a success.

Prof Ackren believes the Democrats won, partly because Greenlanders wanted a change of government, but also because they were unhappy with new fisheries laws and other domestic issues.

Independence is seen as the end goal for most Greenlanders, but not before reforms have been made to the economy, health and other sectors, she says.

Greenland’s strategic location and untapped mineral resources have caught President Trump’s eye in particular. He first floated the idea of buying the island during his first term in 2019.

Since taking office again in January, Trump has reiterated his intention to acquire the territory.

“We need Greenland for national security. One way or the other we’re gonna get it,” he said during his address to the US Congress last week.

Greenland and Denmark’s leaders have repeatedly rebuffed his demands.

The leader of the Democrats said Greenland needed to adopt a calm course with the US. He told public broadcaster KNR that while big developments were happening globally, they should stand together and speak with one voice.

During his election campaign last year, Donald Trump promised Americans he would usher in a new era of prosperity.

Now two months into his presidency, he’s painting a slightly different picture.

He has warned that it will be hard to bring down prices and the public should be prepared for a “little disturbance” before he can bring back wealth to the US.

Meanwhile, even as the latest figures indicate inflation is easing, analysts say the odds of a downturn are increasing, pointing to his policies.

So is Trump about to trigger a recession in the world’s largest economy?

In the US, a recession is defined as a prolonged and widespread decline in economic activity typically characterised by a jump in unemployment and fall in incomes.

A chorus of economic analysts have warned in recent days that the risks of such a scenario are rising.

A JP Morgan report put the chance of recession at 40%, up from 30% at the start of the year, warning that US policy was “tilting away from growth”, while Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, upped the odds from 15% to 35%, citing tariffs.

The forecasts came as the S&P 500, which tracks 500 of the biggest companies in the US sank sharply. It has now fallen to its lowest level since September in a sign of fears about the future.

The market turmoil is being driven partly by concerns about new taxes on imports, called tariffs, which Trump has introduced since he took office.

He has hit products from America’s three biggest trade partners with the new duties, and threatened them more widely in moves that analysts believe will increase prices and curb growth.

The latest official inflation figures in the US showed the rate of price increases cooling in February, however.

Prices were up 2.8% over the 12 months to February, down from 3% in January, the Labor Department said.

Still, Trump and his economic advisers have been warning the public to be prepared for some economic pain, while appearing to dismiss the market concerns – a marked change from his first term, when he frequently cited the stock market as a measure of his own success.

“There will always be changes and adjustments,” he said last week, in response to pleas from businesses for more certainty.

The posture has increased investor worries about his plans.

Goldman Sachs last week raised its recession bets from 15% to 20%, saying it saw policy changes as “the key risk” to the economy. But it noted that the White House still had “the option to pull back if the downside risks begin to look more serious”.

“If the White House remained committed to its policies even in the face of much worse data, recession risk would rise further,” the firm’s analysts warned.

For many firms, the biggest question mark is tariffs, which raise costs for US businesses by putting taxes on imports. As Trump unveils tariff plans, many companies are now facing lower profit margins, while holding off on investments and hiring as they try to figure out what the future will look like.

Investors are also worried about big cuts to the government workforce and government spending.

Brian Gardner, chief of Washington policy strategy at the investment bank Stifel, said businesses and investors had thought Trump intended tariffs as a negotiating tool.

“But what the president and his cabinet are signalling is actually a bigger deal. It’s a restructuring of the American economy,” he said. “And that’s what’s been driving markets in the last couple of weeks.”

The US economy was already undergoing a slowdown, engineered in part by the central bank, which has kept interest rates higher to try to cool activity and stabilise prices.

• What are tariffs and why is Trump using them?
• Six things that could get more expensive

In recent weeks, some data suggests a more rapid weakening.

Retail sales fell in February, confidence – which had popped after Trump’s election on several surveys of consumers and businesses – has fallen, and companies including major airlines, retailers such as Walmart and Target, and manufacturers are warning of a pullback.

Some analysts are worried a drop in the stock market could trigger a further clampdown in spending, especially among higher income households.

That could deliver a major hit to the US economy, which is driven by consumer spending and has grown increasingly dependent on those richer households, as lower income families face pressure from inflation.

The head of the US central bank, Jerome Powell, offered assurances in a speech last week, noting that sentiment had not been a good indicator of behaviour in recent years.

“Despite elevated levels of uncertainty, the US economy continues to be in a good place,” he said.

But the US economy is currently deeply linked to the rest of the world, warned Kathleen Brooks, research director at XTB.

“The fact that tariffs could disrupt that at the same time that there were signs that the US economy was weakening anyway … is really fuelling recession fears,” she says.

The unease in the stock market isn’t all about Trump.

Investors were already jittery about the possibility of a correction, after big gains over the last two years, driven by the sharp run-up in tech stocks fuelled by investor optimism about artificial intelligence (AI).

Chipmaker Nvidia, for example, saw its share price jump from less than $15 at the start of 2023 to nearly $150 in November of last year.

That type of rise had stirred debate about an “AI bubble” – with investors on high alert for signs of it bursting, which would have a big impact on the stock market, regardless of the dynamics in the wider economy.

Now, with views of the US economy darkening, optimism about AI is getting even harder to sustain.

Tech analyst Gene Munster of Deepwater Asset Management wrote on social media this week that his optimism had “taken a step back” as the chance of a recession increased “measurably” over the past month.

“The bottom line is that if we enter a recession, it will be extremely difficult for the AI trade to continue,” he said.

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.

Just short of his 80th birthday, Rodrigo Duterte, a man who once vowed to purge his country through a bloody anti-drugs and crime campaign, found himself outmanoeuvred and in custody.

The former president was met by Philippines police as he arrived in Manila on a flight from Hong Kong, where he had been rallying support for his candidates for the upcoming mid-term election among the large Filipino diaspora there.

The much-talked-about warrant for his arrest from the International Criminal Court (ICC) was, it turned out, already in the hands of the Philippines government, which moved swiftly to execute it.

A frail-looking Mr Duterte, walking with a stick, was moved to an air force base within the airport perimeter. A chartered jet was quickly prepared to take him to the ICC in The Hague.

How had this happened? How had a man so powerful and popular, often called “the Trump of Asia”, been brought so low?

In vain, his lawyers and family members protested that the arrest had no legal basis and complained that Duterte’s frail health was being neglected.

While in office, Mr Duterte formed an alliance with the Marcos family – the children of ousted dictator Ferdinand Marcos who had long been working on a political comeback. Mr Duterte could not run again in the 2022 election, but his daughter Sara, mayor of southern city of Davao, was also popular and a strong contender to replace him.

However, Ferdinand Marcos’s son Bongbong, who had been in politics all his life, was also well placed to win and very well-funded.

The two families struck a deal. They would work together to get Bongbong into the presidency and Sara into the vice-presidency, on the assumption that come the next election in 2028, her turn would come and she would have the formidable Marcos machine behind her.

It worked. Both won their positions by a wide margin. Mr Duterte expected that his alliance would protect him from any blowback over his controversial presidency once he was out of power.

The most serious threat hanging over him was an investigation by the ICC into his culpability for thousands of extrajudicial killings carried out during anti-drugs campaigns he ordered – after he became president in 2016, but also during his tenure as mayor of the southern city of Davao from 2011.

Mr Duterte withdrew the Philippines from the jurisdiction of the ICC in 2019, but its prosecutors argued they still had a mandate to look into alleged crimes against humanity committed before that, and launched a formal investigation in 2021. However, President Marcos initially stated that his government would not co-operate with the ICC.

That position only changed after the dramatic breakdown of the Duterte-Marcos alliance. Strains in their relationship were evident from the earliest days of the administration, when Sara Duterte’s request to be given control of the powerful defence ministry was turned down and she was given the education ministry instead.

President Marcos also distanced himself from his predecessor’s mercurial policies, mending fences with the US, standing up to China in contested seas, and stopping the blood-curdling threats of retribution against drug dealers.

In the end, these were two ambitious, power-hungry clans aiming to dominate Filipino politics, and there was not enough power for them to share. Relations reached a nadir last year when Sara Duterte announced that she had hired an assassin to kill President Marcos, should anything happen to her.

Late last year, the lower house of Congress, which is controlled by Marcos loyalists, filed a petition to impeach Ms Duterte. That trial is due to take place in the Senate later this year.

If she is impeached, under the constitution, she would be barred from holding high political office, killing her long-standing presidential ambitions and weakening the political power of the Dutertes even further.

President Marcos now appears to have moved deftly to neutralise his main political rival. But his strategy is not risk-free. The Dutertes remain popular in much of the country, and may be able to mobilise protests against the former president’s prosecution.

Sara Duterte has issued a statement accusing the government of surrendering her father to “foreign powers” and of violating Filipino sovereignty.

An early test of the support enjoyed by both clans will be the mid-term elections in May.

In his comments to journalists after the plane carrying his predecessor had taken off from Manila, President Marcos insisted he was meeting the country’s commitments to Interpol, which had delivered the ICC warrant. But he was coy about the fact that it was an ICC warrant he was executing, given that many Filipinos will question what the ICC’s remit is in a country which has already left its jurisdiction.

It is not risk-free for the ICC either. The court is an embattled institution these days, with the Trump administration threatening to arrest its top officials should they travel to the US, and few countries willing to extradite those it has indicted. Getting former President Duterte to The Hague might therefore look like a welcome high-profile success.

But there was a warning, from China – admittedly not a signatory to the ICC and currently at loggerheads with the Philippines – not to politicise ICC cases. This was a thinly-veiled reference to the fact that this case, which is supposed to be about accountability for serious international crimes, has ended up playing a decisive part in a domestic feud in the Philippines between two rival political forces.

The US is set to introduce a 30-day ceasefire proposal negotiated with Ukraine to Russia in the coming days.

Trump administration officials are seeing it as a major breakthrough towards the foreign policy goals of a president who campaigned to end the war.

So does it make a ceasefire plausible? And if so, can it end the war after Russia’s full-scale invasion three years ago in a just and sustainable way, and on terms that keep the region and the world safe?

Statement:

Analysis: The key word here is “immediate,” which doesn’t leave any doubt: Trump wants the guns to fall silent now. His sense of urgency, however, has often led to concerns in Europe.

Many fear that rushing the desired outcome without first working out the terms takes the military pressure off Moscow as the invading power and could lead to a truce being exploited.

They argue it empowers the occupying force.

The fear is of ultimately leading Ukraine into an effective surrender. The theory is that Russia – the bigger, more populous and militarily more self-sufficient power – could use a truce without first establishing concessions to consolidate its forces, string out a negotiation process and wait to see what happens politically for Trump during his term while it holds on to everything it seized; and even then try to take more ground, building on its current occupation and potentially using a fracture in the Western alliance to threaten more of Europe.

The process of negotiating terms before a ceasefire in conflicts can be important to ensure the sides convert current military threats into meaningful strategic gains.

Zelensky has previously tried to persuade the Americans that Russian President Vladimir Putin cannot be trusted, evidenced by the fact he broke the European-backed Minsk agreements after seizing Ukrainian territory in 2014.

Trump dismisses these concerns, saying there will be security for Ukraine, but without saying how this will be assured. He has said Putin will be deterred and is in a difficult position with “no choice” but to make a deal for reasons that “only I know”.

Rubio said on Tuesday the US delegation had substantive discussions with the Ukrainians on a permanent end to the war, including “what type of guarantees they’re going to have for their long-term security and prosperity”, but again didn’t elaborate.

Statement:

Analysis: This is the big win for Zelensky in this agreement and sees US weapons supplies being delivered at a rate of around $2bn (£1.5bn)-worth a month, restored.

Critically, it also means Washington will once again share its intelligence data and satellite pictures with Kyiv, which helps it target Russian positions. The White House said it suspended this aid because it felt Zelensky wasn’t “committed” to Trump’s peace plan.

The Ukrainian leader had tried to voice his concerns based on some of the reasons above when he was ejected from the Oval Office. His reservations are likely being set aside while he welcomes the agreement in this form – a necessary price to pay to restore US security assistance.

• Ukraine ceasefire plan live updates
• US set to present 30-day ceasefire offer to Russia

Statement:

Analysis: This paragraph is confusing because it’s unclear whether it refers to negotiations between Ukraine and the US on establishing any security guarantees for Ukraine, or if it refers to negotiations between Ukraine and Russia to permanently end the war once a ceasefire is under way.

If it is the former, it appears to suggest that Washington and Kyiv will hammer out any decisions on how to back up Ukraine’s security and deter Russian breaches of a truce, and the US will then discuss these with Moscow.

But it is all a far cry from the kind of security guarantee Zelensky ultimately wanted, which was membership of Nato, which Trump has said won’t happen – a major long-term concession to Moscow’s demands.

The paragraph also contains a vague and lukewarm reference to the idea of European peacekeepers, which have been pitched by the UK and France, with the line attributed only to the Ukrainian delegation.

It’s notable that the US appears not to be putting its name to this part after Moscow categorically rejected the idea.

Statement:

Analysis: This was the agreement that never got signed after Zelensky was told to leave the White House last month.

It would give the US a future stake in some of Ukraine’s state-owned mineral deposits, as well as oil and gas revenues.

Trump sees it as an effective security guarantee for Ukraine, arguing it would deter Russian re-invasion because American companies would be on the ground.

Opponents point out this is meaningless because US economic presence in Ukraine didn’t deter Putin in 2014 or 2022.

This is a key line that might help explain Zelenky’s rehabilitation in the eyes of the White House.

Vance had castigated him in the Oval Office for not thanking Trump, even though the Ukrainian leader has thanked the US dozens of times for its military support.

Now Trump has an official Ukrainian thank you, on a piece of paper meant to make peace.

A fire on one of two ships involved in a collision in the North Sea has been extinguished.

US-registered tanker Stena Immaculate and Portuguese-flagged cargo ship Solong collided off the East Yorkshire coast on Monday.

Erik Hanel, chief executive of Swedish firm Stena Bulk, which co-owns the tanker, said the fire had been “very strong for a while”, adding it was still too early to understand the full impact of the collision.

Solong’s owners, the German firm Ernst Russ, said the vessel continued to emit smoke with “occasional reports of flames”.

The Stena Immaculate was carrying 220,000 barrels of aviation fuel spread among 18 containers of different sizes to be used by the US military.

Speaking to the BBC, Mr Hanel said: “We have not got a team on board yet.

“It looks serious but how much structural damage there is we cant be sure based on the pictures.”

He said the ship was currently anchored at sea and it was hoped a decision on what to do with it could be made over the next 24-48 hours.

“It will be easier to make those kinds of decisions once they can get a team on board to assess the damage,” he added.

The UK authorities are currently leading the investigation and there is no involvement from the US, despite the vessel being under contract to their military.

The Solong’s owners said the ship had separated from the Stena Immaculate and had drifted south, with salvage and marine firefighting craft still tackling the blaze.

They added that the coastguard had confirmed that there had been no further reports of pollution to the sea since the initial incident, and that they were working to limit the damage.

Following the collision, the Russian national captain of the Solong was arrested on suspicion of gross negligence manslaughter following reports of a missing crew member.

Ernst Russ said it was working on plans to recover the vessel and was assisting the authorities with their investigations.

The company said its thoughts remained with the family of the missing crew member.

Humberside Police said it had begun a criminal investigation into the cause of the collision and was working with the Maritime and Coastguard Agency.

“Detectives are continuing to conduct extensive lines of enquiry alongside partners in connection with the collision,” the force said.

Both ships caught fire after the collision triggering a major response from emergency services.

Virginia McVea, chief executive of Maritime and Coastguard Agency, said: “There have been no further reports of pollution to the sea from either vessel beyond what was observed during the initial incident.”

HM Coastguard said 36 people had been rescued and taken safely to shore.

Grimsby-based Windcat, which provides support to offshore wind farms, assisted in the rescue operation.

The company said it had two ships in the area at the time.

“Both vessels were called to assist in the rescue operation,” a spokesperson said.

“They immediately responded and they brought around 17 people involved to safety ashore.”

Ms McVea said the Solong was “being held in a safe position offshore by a tug”.

“The Stena Immaculate remains at anchor, with safety tugs in position should they be required. There are no visible flames on board and an on-board assessment may be carried out later today,” she added.

Ms McVea said the agency was working with salvage companies hired by the two ship owners “to protect the public and the environment to the best of our ability, during this ongoing incident response”.

Whitehall sources have told the BBC there were Russians and Filipinos among the crew of the Solong.

It is quite common for the global shipping industry to use crews from these two countries.

The BBC understands all of the crew on board the Stena Immaculate are Americans who are currently in Grimsby and will be repatriated in due course.

Its co-owners, Florida-based Crowley, said it had been at anchor waiting for a berth to become available at the Port of Killingholme on the Humber Estuary.

The firm added the crash had caused “multiple explosions” on board and an unknown quantity of jet fuel to be released.

Hull and East Yorkshire on BBC Soundslatest episode of Look North here.

A new four-lane highway cutting through tens of thousands of acres of protected Amazon rainforest is being built for the COP30 climate summit in the Brazilian city of Belém.

It aims to ease traffic to the city, which will host more than 50,000 people – including world leaders – at the conference in November.

The state government touts the highway’s “sustainable” credentials, but some locals and conservationists are outraged at the environmental impact.

The Amazon plays a vital role in absorbing carbon for the world and providing biodiversity, and many say this deforestation contradicts the very purpose of a climate summit.

Along the partially built road, lush rainforest towers on either side – a reminder of what was once there. Logs are piled high in the cleared land which stretches more than 13km (8 miles) through the rainforest into Belém.

Diggers and machines carve through the forest floor, paving over wetland to surface the road which will cut through a protected area.

Claudio Verequete lives about 200m from where the road will be. He used to make an income from harvesting açaí berries from trees that once occupied the space.

“Everything was destroyed,” he says, gesturing at the clearing.

“Our harvest has already been cut down. We no longer have that income to support our family.”

He says he has received no compensation from the state government and is currently relying on savings.

He worries the construction of this road will lead to more deforestation in the future, now that the area is more accessible for businesses.

“Our fear is that one day someone will come here and say: ‘Here’s some money. We need this area to build a gas station, or to build a warehouse.’ And then we’ll have to leave.

“We were born and raised here in the community. Where are we going to go?”

His community won’t be connected to the road, given its walls on either side.

“For us who live on the side of the highway, there will be no benefits. There will be benefits for the trucks that will pass through. If someone gets sick, and needs to go to the centre of Belém, we won’t be able to use it.”

The road leaves two disconnected areas of protected forest. Scientists are concerned it will fragment the ecosystem and disrupt the movement of wildlife.

Prof Silvia Sardinha is a wildlife vet and researcher at a university animal hospital that overlooks the site of the new highway.

She and her team rehabilitate wild animals with injuries, predominantly caused by humans or vehicles.

Once healed, they release them back into the wild – something she says will be harder if there is a highway on their doorstep.

“From the moment of deforestation, there is a loss.

“We are going to lose an area to release these animals back into the wild, the natural environment of these species,” she said.

“Land animals will no longer be able to cross to the other side too, reducing the areas where they can live and breed.”

The Brazilian president and environment minister say this will be a historic summit because it is “a COP in the Amazon, not a COP about the Amazon”.

The president says the meeting will provide an opportunity to focus on the needs of the Amazon, show the forest to the world, and present what the federal government has done to protect it.

But Prof Sardinha says that while these conversations will happen “at a very high level, among business people and government officials”, those living in the Amazon are “not being heard”.

The state government of Pará had touted the idea of this highway, known as Avenida Liberdade, as early as 2012, but it had repeatedly been shelved because of environmental concerns.

Now a host of infrastructure projects have been resurrected or approved to prepare the city for the COP summit.

Adler Silveira, the state government’s infrastructure secretary, listed this highway as one of 30 projects happening in the city to “prepare” and “modernise” it, so “we can have a legacy for the population and, more importantly, serve people for COP30 in the best possible way”.

Speaking to the BBC, he said it was a “sustainable highway” and an “important mobility intervention”.

He added it would have wildlife crossings for animals to pass over, bike lanes and solar lighting. New hotels are also being built and the port is being redeveloped so cruise ships can dock there to accommodate excess visitors.

Brazil’s federal government is investing more than $81m (£62m) to expand the airport capacity from “seven to 14 million passengers”. A new 500,000 sq-m city park, Parque da Cidade, is under construction. It will include green spaces, restaurants, a sports complex and other facilities for the public to use afterwards.

Some business owners in the city’s vast open-air Ver-o-peso market agree that this development will bring opportunities for the city.

“The city as a whole is being improved, it is being repaired and a lot of people are visiting from other places. It means I can sell more and earn more,” says Dalci Cardoso da Silva, who runs a leather shoe stall.

He says this is necessary because when he was young, Belém was “beautiful, well-kept, well cared for”, but it has since been “abandoned” and “neglected” with “little interest from the ruling class”.

João Alexandre Trindade da Silva, who sells Amazonian herbal medicines in the market, acknowledges that all construction work can cause problems, but he felt the future impact would be worth it.

“We hope the discussions aren’t just on paper and become real actions. And the measures, the decisions taken, really are put into practice so that the planet can breathe a little better, so that the population in the future will have a little cleaner air.”

That will be the hope of world leaders too who choose to attend the COP30 summit.

Scrutiny is growing over whether flying thousands of them across the world, and the infrastructure required to host them, is undermining the cause.

Sign up for our Future Earth newsletter to keep up with the latest climate and environment stories with the BBC’s Justin Rowlatt, delivered every Tuesday. Outside the UK? Sign up to our international newsletter here.

Lawyers for a Palestinian student activist who the Trump administration attempted to deport will argue against that effort at a Manhattan courtroom hearing on Wednesday.

Mahmoud Khalil, a US permanent resident and Columbia University graduate, was a participant in last year’s protests at the campus over the war in Gaza and US support for Israel.

President Donald Trump said Mr Khalil’s arrest was the first of “many to come”, pledging to crack down on college protesters who he accuses of sympathising with Hamas.

Mr Khalil is a green card holder and is married to an American citizen. Earlier this week, a federal judge blocked Trump’s attempt to deport him.

US civil rights advocates, lawmakers and some Jewish groups have said that deporting Mr Khalil would be in violation of American due process rights and an attack on free speech.

But when speaking to reporters on Wednesday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio claimed that the US could deport visa and green card holders for “virtually any reason”.

Mr Khalil’s wife, who has not been named, detailed her husband’s arrest in a statement released by their lawyers on Tuesday. She said that the pair were confronted by immigration agents on Saturday when they returned to their apartment from a dinner.

She said the officials did not provide a warrant or a reason for arrest and ended a call to the couple’s lawyers. They then handcuffed Mr Khalil and forced him into an unmarked car.

“Watching this play out in front of me was traumatizing: It felt like a scene from a movie I never signed up to watch,” the woman’s statement said.

Mr Khalil – who was born in Syria to Palestinian refugees – has been in immigration detention since his arrest. He was initially placed in a New Jersey immigration facility before authorities transferred him to a detention centre in Jena, Louisiana, according to records from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

“US immigration ripped my soul from me when they handcuffed my husband and forced him into an unmarked vehicle. Instead of putting together our nursery and washing baby clothes in anticipation of our first child, I am left sitting in our apartment, wondering when Mahmoud will get a chance to call me from a detention center,” Mr Khalil’s wife said.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has said the arrest was part of its effort to fulfil Trump’s executive order that prohibits antisemitism.

It accused Mr Khalil of leading “activities aligned to Hamas” – the Islamist group based in Gaza that the US has designated a terrorist organisation – but provided no details.

The BBC has asked the agency for further information on the allegations.

• US court temporarily blocks effort to deport Gaza protest leader

Mr Khalil has long maintained that he simply acted as a spokesperson and mediator for the Columbia student protesters.

Critics have accused him of leading Columbia University Apartheid Divest (Cuad) – a student group that demanded the school divest from Israel and called for a ceasefire in Gaza – which the Palestinian activist has denied.

Columbia was just one college campus that played host to mass student protests after the war erupted in Gaza. Some are now concerned that the Trump administration is attempting to silence potential detractors by targeting protesters who are not US citizens.

More than 2.4 million people have signed a letter to demand Mr Khalil’s “immediate release,” according to a petition on Action Network.

But critics of Mr Khalil and some students protesting over the war in Gaza have in recent weeks reportedly advocated for the deportation of Mr Khalil and other protesters.

Trump appeared to respond to these calls when he posted on social media on Monday about Mr Khalil’s detainment.

“We know there are more students at Columbia and other Universities across the Country who have engaged in pro-terrorist, anti-Semitic, anti-American activity, and the Trump Administration will not tolerate it… We will find, apprehend, and deport these terrorist sympathizers from our country – never to return again,” the president wrote.

Mr Khalil’s wife said that her husband had faced online attacks prior to his arrest that “were simply not based on reality”. She said the Palestinian advocate had grown “concerned about his safety” and turned to Columbia University for legal support.

“I haven’t been able to sleep, fearing that ICE or a dangerous individual might come to my home. I urgently need legal support and I urge you to intervene,” Mr Khalil said in his email, according to his wife’s statement.

A plane carrying the former president of the Philippines, Rodrigo Duterte, has left Manila after the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued a warrant accusing him of crimes against humanity over his deadly “war on drugs”.

He was taken into police custody shortly after his arrival at the capital’s international airport from Hong Kong on Tuesday morning.

Duterte, 79, contested his detention but within hours was on a chartered jet en route to The Hague in the Netherlands, where the ICC sits. Current President Ferdinand Marcos Jr said the country was meeting its legal obligations.

During Duterte’s time in office, thousands of small-time drug dealers, users and others were killed without trial.

Marcos said his predecessor would face charges relating to what he described as Duterte’s “bloody war on drugs”.

“Interpol asked for help and we obliged,” President Marcos told a press conference. “This is what the international community expects of us.”

Duterte’s daughter Sara, who said she would accompany him to The Hague, is vice president and a political rival of Marcos. She has said the arrest amounts to persecution.

Rodrigo Duterte has offered no apologies for his brutal anti-drugs crackdown, which saw more than 6,000 suspects killed when he was president from 2016 to 2022, and mayor of Davao city before that.

Nevertheless, he questioned the basis for the warrant, asking: “What crime [have] I committed?” in a video posted online on Tuesday by another daughter, Veronica Duterte.

“If I committed a sin, prosecute me in Philippine courts, with Filipino judges, and I will allow myself to be jailed in my own nation,” he said in a later video.

In response to his arrest, a petition was launched on his behalf in the Supreme Court – urging it not to comply with the request.

According to a statement from the court’s spokesperson, the former president also called for a declaration that the Philippines withdrawal from the ICC in 2019 “effectively terminated” its jurisdiction over the country and its people.

The ICC says it still has authority in the Philippines over alleged crimes committed before the country withdrew as a member.

• Duterte’s downfall marks dramatic end to Philippines power struggle

Some of Duterte’s supporters rallied at the airport compound, where the former president was taken following his arrest.

“I’m sad because I didn’t think it would come to a point where he would be arrested. For me, he did a lot for our country and this is what they did to him,” one supporter, Aikko Valdon, told the Reuters news agency.

State media said more than 370 police had been deployed to the airport and to other “key locations” to ensure peace was maintained.

While his supporters have criticised the arrest, activists have called it a “historic moment” for those who perished in his anti-drug war and their families, the International Coalition for Human Rights in the Philippines (ICHRP) said.

“Duterte’s arrest is the beginning of accountability for the mass killings that defined his brutal rule,” said ICHRP chairman Peter Murphy.

The former leader had been in Hong Kong to campaign among the large Filipino diaspora there for the 12 May mid-term elections, in which he had planned to run again for mayor of Davao.

Duterte’s arrest marks the “beginning of a new chapter in Philippine history”, said political scientist Richard Heydarian. “This is about rule of law and human rights.”

Heydarian added that authorities had arrested Duterte promptly instead of letting the matter take its course through the local courts to “avoid political chaos”.

The Duterte and Marcos families formed a formidable alliance in the last elections in 2022, where against the elder Duterte’s wishes, his daughter Sara ran as Marcos Jr’s vice-president instead of seeking her father’s post.

The relationship unravelled publicly in recent months as the two families pursued separate political agendas.

Marcos initially refused to co-operate with the ICC investigation, but as his relationship with the Duterte family deteriorated, he changed his stance.

The demand for justice in Duterte’s drug war goes “hand in hand” with the political interests of President Marcos, Mr Heydarian said.

Duterte served as mayor of Davao, a sprawling southern metropolis, for 22 years and has made it one of the country’s safest from street crimes.

He cast himself as a tough-talking anti-establishment politician to win the 2016 elections by a landslide.

With fiery rhetoric, he rallied security forces to shoot drug suspects dead. More than 6,000 suspects were killed by police or unknown assailants during the campaign, but rights groups say the number could be higher.

A previous UN report found that most victims were young, poor urban males and that police, who do not need search or arrest warrants to conduct house raids, systematically forced suspects to make self-incriminating statements or risk facing lethal force.

Critics said the campaign targeted street-level pushers and failed to catch big-time drug lords. Many families also claimed that the victims – their sons, brothers or husbands – were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Investigations in parliament pointed to a shadowy “death squad” of bounty hunters targeting drug suspects. Duterte has denied the allegations of abuse.

“Do not question my policies because I offer no apologies, no excuses. I did what I had to do, and whether or not you believe it… I did it for my country,” Duterte told a parliament investigation in October.

“I hate drugs, make no mistake about it.”

The ICC first took note of the alleged abuses in 2016 and started its investigation in 2021. It covered cases from November 2011, when Duterte was mayor of Davao, to March 2019, before the Philippines withdrew from the ICC.

Since taking power, Marcos has scaled back Duterte’s anti-narcotics campaign and promised a less violent approach to the drug problem, but hundreds of drug-related killings have been recorded during his administration.

Duterte remains widely popular in the Philippines as he is the country’s first leader from Mindanao, a region south of Manila, where many feel marginalised by the leaders in the capital.

He often speaks in Cebuano, the regional language, not Tagalog, which is more widely-spoken in Manila and northern regions.

When he stepped down in 2022, nearly nine in 10 Filipinos said they were satisfied with his performance as president – a score unseen among his predecessors since the restoration of democracy in 1986, according to the Social Weather Stations research institute.

His populist rhetoric and blunt statements earned him the moniker “Donald Trump of the East”. He has called Russian President Vladimir Putin his “idol” and under his administration, the Philippines’ pivoted foreign policy to China away from the US, its long-standing ally.

Marcos restored Manila’s ties with Washington and criticised the Duterte government for being “Chinese lackeys” as the Philippines is locked in sea dispute with China.

China’s foreign ministry said on Tuesday that it was “closely monitoring the development of the situation” and warned the ICC against “politicisation” and “double standards” in the arrest of Duterte.

His political heir, Sara, is tipped as a potential presidential candidate in 2028. The incumbent, Marcos, is barred by the constitution from seeking re-election.

People protesting against Tesla should be labelled domestic terrorists, President Donald Trump said on Tuesday at a White House media event designed to bolster Elon Musk’s electric car company.

Trump sat in the driver’s seat of a brand new red Tesla that he said he planned to buy, with Musk in the passenger seat, but did not test drive it.

Demonstrators have targeted Tesla showrooms in recent weeks in protest against Musk’s cost-cutting role in Trump’s administration.

Trump said they were “harming a great American company”, and anyone using violence against the electric carmaker would “go through hell”.

The president described the shiny red Model-S, one of a number of Teslas lined up on the White House drive, as “beautiful” but said he was no longer allowed to drive and so would keep the car for the use of White House staff. Current and former presidents are not allowed to drive for security reasons.

He also said he would not want to buy a self-driving model, which Musk said would reach the market next year.

The showcase for Tesla’s cars outside the White House came after Tesla’s market value halved since its all-time peak in December, sliding 15% in a single day on Monday, before recovering slightly on Tuesday.

Trump said he had told Musk, “You know, Elon, I don’t like what’s happening to you, and Tesla’s a great company.”

Musk, Trump’s top donor in the election campaign, has been tasked with radically cutting government spending through his Department of Government Efficiency (Doge).

He has instigated sweeping cuts to federal workforce, cancelled international aid programmes, and has voiced support for far-right politics.

That has prompted a backlash among Tesla owners.

“Tesla takedown” protests have seen demonstrators gather outside dealerships, in Portland, Oregon, last week, and New York City earlier in March, with the aim of undermining the Tesla brand.

Organisers behind the protests said on social media that the demonstrations were peaceful, but a few have been destructive with fires intentionally set at Tesla showrooms and charging stations in Colorado and Massachusetts last week.

Asked in front of the White House whether such protesters should be labelled “domestic terrorists”, the president said “I will do that”, a position later confirmed by a White House spokesperson.

“You do it to Tesla and you do it to any company, we’re going to catch you and you’re going to go through hell,” Trump said.

On his social media platform, Truth Social, Trump blamed Tesla’s share price falls on “radical left lunatics”, who he said were trying to “illegally and collusively boycott” the firm.

However, stock analysts said the main reason for the poor performance of the shares was fear about Tesla meeting production targets and a drop in sales over the past year.

UBS warned that new Tesla deliveries could be much lower than expected this year.

Lindsay James, an investment strategist at Quilter Investors, said that although there was “an element” of Elon Musk’s politics having a “brand impact”, there were other reasons for the share price fall.

Ultimately the drop came down to “hard numbers”, she said.

“When we look at new orders, for example in Europe and China, you can see that they’ve effectively halved over the last year,” she said.

Sales in Europe have fallen sharply this year. Across the continent, they were down 45% in January compared to the same month in 2024, according to the European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association (ACEA).

There has also been a steep decline in China – a key market – and Australia.

Other experts have said Tesla is over-valued, so the fall is seen as a correction, while others have pointed to rising competition from some of China’s electric vehicle companies.

Investors are “certainly getting more worried about an economic slowdown too, so the richest-valued companies like Tesla have been hit hardest in recent days”, Ms James said.

There have also been concerns that Musk has not been focusing enough of his attention on his firms.

In an interview with Fox Business on Monday, he said he was combining the Doge role with running his businesses “with great difficulty”.

Alongside Tesla, his businesses include Space X, which has experienced serious failures in the last two launches of its giant Starship rocket, and the social media network X, which suffered an outage on Monday.

Despite his supportive comments, President Trump’s policies so far have been designed to limit electric car sales in the US, including revoking a 2021 order by former president Joe Biden that half of all car sales should be electric by 2030, and halting unspent government funds for charging stations.

Trump’s tariffs could also hurt the manufacturer. Tesla chief financial officer Vaibhav Taneja said in January Tesla parts sourced from Canada and Mexico would be subject to the levies and that this could hit profitability.

Tesla’s share price fall came against a broader US market slump on Monday as investors, concerned about the economic effects of Trump tariffs and weakening confidence in the economy, sold shares.

Trump’s own economic policies on tariffs are also making investors nervous, analysts said.

Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the biggest developments in global technology, with analysis from BBC correspondents around the world.

Outside the UK? Sign up here.