Israel’s military said it was conducting “extensive strikes on terror targets” in Gaza early on Tuesday, with officials there reporting at least 30 deaths in the most intense airstrikes since the 19 January ceasefire began.

An unnamed senior Hamas official told Reuters that Israel was “unilaterally” ending the ceasefire.

Medics reported that at least 30 people had been killed. The Palestinian civil emergency service said Israel carried out at least 35 airstrikes across the Gaza Strip. In Gaza City, medics reported that at least eight Palestinians, including children, had been killed.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) did not provide more details about the strikes but prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office said in a statement cited by Israeli media that the attacks had “the goal of achieving the war objectives as determined by the political leadership, including the release of all our hostages – both the living and the fallen”.

“This follows Hamas’s repeated refusal to release our hostages and its rejection of all the proposals it received from US president’s envoy, Steve Witkoff, and from the mediators,” the statement said.

Three houses were hit in Deir Al-Balah in central Gaza, a building in Gaza City, and targets in Khan Younis and Rafah, according to medics and witnesses.

The first phase of the ceasefire agreement ended two weeks ago but Israel has refused to implement the scheduled second phase, which is supposed to end with its withdrawal from Gaza, the freedom of all remaining hostages held by Hamas, and a definitive end to the conflict.

It has also blocked all aid to Gaza over the past two weeks, in violation of the ceasefire deal, in a bid to force Hamas to accept its demands. The move has been condemned by countries including the UK, France and Germany.

Hamas has said that it would only release hostages if Israel lifted its blockade, withdrew from a strategic corridor along Gaza’s border with Egypt and freed more Palestinian prisoners.

More details soon …

With Reuters

Israel’s military said it was conducting “extensive strikes on terror targets” in Gaza early on Tuesday, with officials there reporting at least 30 deaths in the most intense airstrikes since the 19 January ceasefire began.

An unnamed senior Hamas official told Reuters that Israel was “unilaterally” ending the ceasefire.

Medics reported that at least 30 people had been killed. The Palestinian civil emergency service said Israel carried out at least 35 airstrikes across the Gaza Strip. In Gaza City, medics reported that at least eight Palestinians, including children, had been killed.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) did not provide more details about the strikes but prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office said in a statement cited by Israeli media that the attacks had “the goal of achieving the war objectives as determined by the political leadership, including the release of all our hostages – both the living and the fallen”.

“This follows Hamas’s repeated refusal to release our hostages and its rejection of all the proposals it received from US president’s envoy, Steve Witkoff, and from the mediators,” the statement said.

Three houses were hit in Deir Al-Balah in central Gaza, a building in Gaza City, and targets in Khan Younis and Rafah, according to medics and witnesses.

The first phase of the ceasefire agreement ended two weeks ago but Israel has refused to implement the scheduled second phase, which is supposed to end with its withdrawal from Gaza, the freedom of all remaining hostages held by Hamas, and a definitive end to the conflict.

It has also blocked all aid to Gaza over the past two weeks, in violation of the ceasefire deal, in a bid to force Hamas to accept its demands. The move has been condemned by countries including the UK, France and Germany.

Hamas has said that it would only release hostages if Israel lifted its blockade, withdrew from a strategic corridor along Gaza’s border with Egypt and freed more Palestinian prisoners.

More details soon …

With Reuters

The Trump administration claimed to a federal judge on Monday that it did not recall deportation flights of hundreds of suspected Venezuelan gang members over the weekend despite his specific instructions because that was not expressly included in the formal written order issued afterwards.

The administration also said that even if James Boasberg, the chief US district judge in Washington, had included that instruction in his formal order, his authority to compel the planes to return disappeared the moment the planes entered international airspace.

The extraordinary arguments suggested the White House took advantage of its own perceived uncertainty with a federal court order to do as it pleased, testing the limits of the judicial system to hold to account an administration set on circumventing adverse rulings.

An incredulous Boasberg at one stage asked the administration: “Isn’t then the better course to return the planes to the United States and figure out what to do, than say: ‘We don’t care; we’ll do what we want’?”

The showdown between the administration and the judge reached a crescendo over the weekend after the US president secretly invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to deport, without normal due process, Venezuelans over age 14 who the government says belong to the Tren de Aragua gang.

The underlying basis for Trump to invoke the statute is unclear because it historically requires the president to identify a state adversary, and Boasberg on Saturday issued a temporary restraining order blocking deportations of five Venezuelans who had filed suit against the government.

At an emergency hearing on Saturday evening, Boasberg extended his injunction to block the deportation of all Venezuelan migrants using Alien Enemies Act authority, and told the administration that any deportation flights already in the air needed to be recalled.

By the time of the hearing, two flights had already taken off and a third flight left after Boasberg issued his ruling. All three flights landed in El Salvador, where the deportees were taken to a special maximum security prison, after Boasberg issued his written order.

The Trump administration claimed at a hearing on Monday that it believed it had complied with the written order issued by Boasberg, which did not include his verbal instructions for any flights already departed to return to the US.

“Oral statements are not injunctions and the written orders always supersede whatever may have been stated in the record,” Abhishek Kambli, the deputy assistant attorney general for the justice department’s civil division, argued for the administration.

The judge appeared unimpressed by that contention. “You felt that you could disregard it because it wasn’t in the written order. That’s your first argument? The idea that because my written order was pithier so it could be disregarded, that’s one heck of a stretch,” Boasberg said.

The administration also suggested that even if Boasberg had included the directive in his written order, by the time he had granted the temporary restraining order, the deportation flights were outside of the judge’s jurisdiction.

The judge expressed similar skepticism at the second argument, noting that federal judges still have authority over US government officials who make the decisions about the planes, even if the planes themselves were outside of US airspace.

“The problem is the equitable power of United States courts is not so limited,” Boasberg said. “It’s not a question that the plane was or was not in US airspace.” Boasberg added. “My equitable powers are pretty clear that they do not lapse at the airspace’s edge.”

At times, the Trump administration appeared to touch on a separate but related position that the judge’s authority to block the deportations clashed with Trump’s authority to direct US military forces and foreign relations without review by the courts.

Boasberg expressed doubt at the strength of that argument, as well as Kambli’s separate claim that he could not provide more details about when the deportation flights took off and how many flights left the US on Saturday, before and possibly after his order.

Kambli said he was not authorized to provide those details on account of national security concerns, even in private, to the judge himself. Asked whether the information was classified, Kambli demurred. Boasberg ordered the government to provide him with more information by noon on Tuesday.

The statements offered by the administration in federal district court in Washington offered a more legally refined version of public statements from White House officials about the possibility that they had defied a court order.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt insisted on Monday that the administration acted within “the bounds of immigration law in this country” and said the Trump team did not believe a verbal order carried the same legal weight as a written order.

But the White House’s “border czar” Tom Homan offered greater defiance at the court order and told Fox News in an interview that the court order came too late for Boasberg to have jurisidiction over the matter, saying: “I don’t care what the judges think.”

The Trump administration claimed to a federal judge on Monday that it did not turn around the deportation flights of hundreds of suspected Venezuelan gang members over the weekend despite his specific instructions because that was not expressly included in the formal written order.

The administration also said that even if James Boasberg, the chief US district judge in Washington, had included that instruction in his formal order, his authority to compel the planes to return disappeared the moment the planes entered international airspace.

An incredulous Boasberg at one stage asked the administration: “Isn’t then the better course to return the planes to the United States and figure out what to do, than say: ‘We don’t care; we’ll do what we want’?”

Here are Monday’s key US politics stories:

Donald Trump is to speak to Vladimir Putin on Tuesday – with the two expected to discuss territory and control of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant – after the Russian president last week pushed back on a US-brokered plan for an immediate ceasefire in Ukraine with a series of sweeping conditions he said would need to be met.

The US president said on Monday that many elements of a final deal on Ukraine had been agreed but much remained, ahead of the call with his Russian counterpart. “I look very much forward to the call with President Putin,” he wrote on Truth Social.

The Kremlin confirmed on Monday that the two leaders were due to speak by phone, after Trump’s statement that he planned to discuss with Putin ending the war in Ukraine. The US president also said that negotiators had already talked about “dividing up certain assets”, including power stations.

“I’ll be speaking to President Putin on Tuesday. A lot of work’s been done over the weekend,” Trump told reporters on Air Force One during a flight back to the Washington area from Florida.

“We want to see if we can bring that war to an end. Maybe we can, maybe we can’t, but I think we have a very good chance,” Trump said.

US and Russian officials have engaged in discussions about Ukraine in recent weeks, with talks accelerating after Washington and Kyiv agreed on a proposal for an immediate 30-day ceasefire last week.

Nevertheless, Putin in effect rejected the plan, instead outlining a series of conditions, including a halt to Ukraine’s rearmament and mobilisation, as well as a suspension of western military aid to Kyiv during the 30-day ceasefire. He also renewed calls for broader negotiations on a long-term settlement to the war.

Ukraine, which has agreed to the truce, accused Putin of seeking to prolong the war. Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Ukraine’s president, has also consistently said the sovereignty of his country is not negotiable and that Russia must surrender the territory it has seized.

Trump said: “We will be talking about land. We will be talking about power plants.”

The US president did not elaborate, but he was most likely referring to the Russian-occupied Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant in Ukraine, the largest in Europe. He said: “I think we have a lot of it already discussed very much by both sides, Ukraine and Russia. We are already talking about that, dividing up certain assets.”

The White House gave no further details during a press briefing on Monday, but White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said “there’s a power plant that is on the border of Russia and Ukraine that was up for discussion with the Ukrainians, and he (Trump) will address it in his call with Putin tomorrow.” Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant is not on the Russia-Ukraine border, but in Ukrainian territory which was seized by Russia early in the war.

Trump’s comments came hours after his special envoy, Steve Witkoff, said that the Russian president “accepts the philosophy” of Trump’s ceasefire and peace terms.

Witkoff told CNN that discussions with Putin over several hours last week had been “positive” and “solution-based”.

But he declined to confirm when asked whether Putin’s demands included the surrender of Ukrainian forces in Kursk, international recognition of Ukrainian territory seized by Russia as Russian, limits on Ukraine’s ability to mobilise, a halt to western military aid, and a ban on foreign peacekeepers.

The UK on Monday said a so-called “coalition of the willing” had now expanded beyond 30 countries willing to help with guarantees for a post-ceasefire Ukraine, with a “significant” number of those countries prepared to provide troops.

A Downing Street spokesperson said: “Obviously the contribution capabilities will vary, but this will be a significant force, with a significant number of countries providing troops and a larger group contributing in other ways.”

David Lammy later told parliament that the gathering of G7 foreign ministers in Canada last week had pledged to keep up the pressure on Russia to agree to the ceasefire.

The UK foreign secretary told MPs: “Now it is Putin who stands in the spotlight; Putin who must answer; Putin, who must choose. Are you serious, Mr Putin, about peace? Will you stop the fighting, or will you drag your feet and play games, play lip service to a ceasefire while still pummelling Ukraine?”

If so, Lammy said, the UK and other nations would respond. He said: “We are not waiting for the Kremlin if they reject a ceasefire. We have more cards that we can play.”

Kaja Kallas, the EU’s top diplomat, on Monday criticised Putin’s negotiation tactics ahead of a meeting of the bloc’s foreign ministers. “What Russia has put forward makes it clear they don’t truly want peace. They are setting their ultimate war objectives as preconditions.”

Kallas is to visit London on Tuesday for talks, Lammy said, adding: “In this moment, Ukraine’s friends should be working hand in glove, and that requires a new era in UK-EU security cooperation.”

Emmanuel Macron, the French president, on Sunday said Russia’s permission was not needed for peacekeepers to deploy to Ukraine, noting that Ukraine was a sovereign state. “If Ukraine requests allied forces to be on its territory, it is not up to Russia to accept or reject them,” he said in remarks quoted by several French newspapers.

Russia’s deputy foreign minister, Alexander Grushko, also on Sunday said that any long-lasting peace treaty on Ukraine must meet Moscow’s demands and foreign troops deployed to Ukraine as peacekeepers would be considered by Russia to be combatants.

Regarding the possibility of European troops in Ukraine, he said: “It does not matter under what label Nato contingents were to be deployed on Ukrainian territory: be it the European Union, Nato, or in a national capacity … If they appear there, it means that they are deployed in the conflict zone with all the consequences for these contingents as parties to the conflict.

Meanwhile, the US Department of Justice has notified European officials that the US is withdrawing from a multinational taskforce established to investigate leaders behind the invasion of Ukraine, including Putin.

The Trump administration’s decision to withdraw from the International Center for the Prosecution of the Crime of Aggression against Ukraine, which the US joined under Joe Biden in 2023, signals the latest shift in the unprecedented warming relations between Moscow and Washington. The US previously voted against a UN resolution drafted by Ukraine and the European Union condemning Russia on the third anniversary of its full-scale invasion.

On Monday, Russia also welcomed Trump’s decision to cut funding for Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, two US-funded news organisations that broadcast to audiences in authoritarian states. The Kremlin’s spokesperson, Dmitry Peskov, described the media outlets as “propagandistic, purely propagandistic”.

In February last year, Russia designated Radio Free Europe as an “undesirable organisation”, a move that effectively bans an organisation outright and creates problems for anyone who interacts with it

The Trump administration is withdrawing from an international body formed to investigate responsibility for the invasion of Ukraine in the latest sign that the White House is adopting a posture favouring Vladimir Putin.

The Department of Justice said it was pulling out of the International Centre for the Prosecution of the Crime of Aggression against Ukraine (ICPA) two years after the Biden administration joined it with a commitment to hold Putin, Russia’s president, to account for the 2022 invasion and subsequent crimes committed by Russian forces.

An announcement by the justice department was expected later on Monday.

The centre was established to hold the leaders of Russia and its allies in Belarus, North Korea and Iran accountable for a category of crimes listed as aggression under international law for undertaking and supporting the attack.

Merrick Garland, the US attorney general during Joe Biden’s presidency, announced that the US would contribute $1m to the organisation, based in the Hague, in November 2023, making it the only non-European country to send a prosecutor to take part in the centre’s investigation, along with prosecutors from Ukraine, Poland, the Baltic states, Romania and the international criminal court.

“The United States stands in steadfast and unwavering support for the people of Ukraine as they defend their democracy against the brutal and unjust war being waged by the Russian regime,” Garland said at the time.

On Monday, the New York Times cited an internal letter from the group’s parent organisation, the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust).

“The US authorities have informed me that they will conclude their involvement in the ICPA,” Michael Schmid, Eurojust’s president wrote.

He said the centre’s work would continue without US participation, with the group “fully committed” to holding accountable “those responsible for core international crimes”.

The decision follows weeks of tension between Donald Trump and Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, amid efforts by Washington to broker an end to the three-year war between Russia and Ukraine.

After Trump berated Zelenskyy publicly in the White House, the US suspended military assistance and intelligence sharing to Ukraine, although they were subsequently restored after Kyiv supported American calls for a ceasefire.

Trump had earlier called Zelenskyy “a dictator without election”, falsely accused him of provoking the invasion and said Putin wanted to end the war – although the Russian leader has yet to agree to a ceasefire.

The justice department also said it was reducing the work of its war crimes accountability team, set up by Garland in 2022 to hold Russia accountable for atrocities committed following its invasion of Ukraine.

Garland said at the time that “there is no hiding place for war criminals” and vowed that the department would “pursue every avenue of accountability for those who commit war crimes and other atrocities in Ukraine”.

The unit provided logistical help, training and direct assistance to overburdened Ukrainian prosecutors, who are investigating more than 150,000 possible war crimes, including the summary execution of prisoners, the targeted bombing of civilians and torture.

• Dozens of military chiefs from allies of Ukraine are due to meet in the UK on Thursday – without the US – to plan how a “coalition of the willing” could send in troops to support the Ukrainians if a ceasefire is declared. More than 30 countries were expected to be involved in such a coalition, the office of Keir Starmer, the British prime minister, said on Monday. “The contribution capabilities will vary, but this will be a significant force, with a significant number of countries providing troops,” said a spokesperson. It comes after Starmer held a teleconference with dozens of leaders from European countries and others including Canada and Australia. Starmer and the French president, Emmanuel Macron, have been leading efforts to establish the coalition since Donald Trump opened direct negotiations with Russia without Ukraine or Europe at the table.

• Russia has rejected the idea of soldiers from countries belonging to Nato being stationed in Ukraine, but the French president, Emmanuel Macron, declared on Sunday that such a force would not be seeking Russia’s permission. Asked about Russia’s position, Keir Starmer’s spokesperson said: “It is worth remembering that Russia didn’t ask Ukraine when it deployed North Korean troops to the frontline last year.” With some partners potentially wary of committing troops, Starmer has said he welcomes any offer of support, raising the prospect that some countries could contribute logistics or surveillance. His spokesperson on Monday highlighted engineering, the use of airfields and the housing of crews.

• Kaja Kallas, the EU’s foreign affairs chief, will meanwhile visit London on Tuesday to meet the British foreign and defence secretaries. The UK government hailed the talks as “part of a new era of UK-EU relations”, and said they would discuss cooperation on Ukraine; how to increase economic pressure on Moscow and ensure it pays for the damage it has caused; and ramping up action against cyber-attacks, election interference and Russian disinformation.

• Ukrainian drones set on fire an oil refinery in Russia’s southern Astrakhan region, local authorities said. The regional governor, Igor Babushkin, said on Monday that staff of a “fuel and energy” complex were evacuated before the attack, which started a large fire and wounded one person. Russia launched a barrage of 174 drones on Ukraine, with air defence units shooting down 90 of them and dozens more disabled by electronic jamming, said Ukraine’s air force. About 500 people in the southern region of Odesa lost power and one person was wounded, said the local governor, Oleg Kiper. Back on Russian territory, the Belgorod oblast came under attack from Ukrainian drones on Monday night, local officials said

• Russia claimed its forces were advancing in southern Ukraine and had breached part of the Ukrainian lines less than 50km (30 miles) south-east of the city of Zaporizhzhia. Russia’s defence ministry said its forces had taken the village of Stepove in the Zaporizhzhia region. The claims could not be verified and Ukraine’s military said it forces had repelled attacks near Stepove and the nearby village of Lobkove, and battles were still going on.

• The US president, Donald Trump, has announced he will be speaking to Vladimir Putin on Tuesday after Ukraine and the US agreed to put forward a ceasefire proposal, which the Russian president has pushed back against, write Pjotr Sauer and Peter Walker. Trump said they would talk about “dividing up certain assets … We will be talking about land. We will be talking about power plants.” He did not elaborate, but the White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt referred to a “power plant that is on the border of Russia and Ukraine”. If she and Trump meant the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, it is not located on the Russia-Ukraine border, but sits in sovereign, internationally recognised Ukrainian territory invaded by Russia.

• Ukraine would not agree to territorial concessions, exclusion from Nato, or limits on its defence capabilities, the Ukrainian parliament’s foreign policy committee head, Oleksandr Merezhko, has told the BBC in an interview setting out Kyiv’s “red lines” for peace negotiations.

• Germany’s probable next chancellor, Friedrich Merz, faces a key vote in the Bundestag on Tuesday over plans to unlock record state borrowing he argues is needed partly to boost military spending. Germany has been Europe’s biggest provider of military aid to Ukraine.

• The Trump administration is withdrawing from an international body formed to investigate responsibility for the invasion of Ukraine and hold Vladimir Putin and others accountable, in the latest sign that the White House is adopting a posture favouring Russia’s ruler, Robert Tait writes from Washington.

• Ukraine posted a trade deficit of US$2.3bn in January, compared with a deficit of US$1.5bn in the same period a year ago, the statistics service said on Monday.

Ireland’s taoiseach has denounced anti-immigration comments made by Conor McGregor as the MMA fighter visited the White House before a St Patrick’s Day meeting with Donald Trump.

McGregor said “Ireland is on the cusp of losing its Irishness” and that an “illegal immigration racket” was “running ravage on the country”.

Last week, Donald Trump singled out “Conor” – who last year was found liable for sexual assault after a civil trial – as one of his favourite Irish people.

Dressed in a green business suit to mark Ireland’s national day, McGregor was at the White House at Trump’s invitation and participated in an impromptu Q&A session with reporters. “There are rural towns in Ireland that have been overrun in one swoop,” he said, speaking in the White House briefing room alongside the president’s press secretary, Karoline Leavitt.

The 36-year-old former Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) champion said he was “here to raise the issue and highlight it” and that he would be listening to Trump on immigration – one of the president’s main areas of focus as he seeks to ramp up deportations of people in the US without proper documentation.

The apparently off-the-cuff comments were immediately condemned by Micheál Martin, the taoiseach. “Conor McGregor’s remarks are wrong, and do not reflect the spirit of St Patrick’s Day, or the views of the people of Ireland,” the Irish prime minister said on X. “St Patrick’s Day around the world is a day rooted in community, humanity, friendship and fellowship.”

McGregor was among those at an official pre-inauguration party in Washington in January. He has been one of the biggest stars of the UFC, which was founded by the Trump ally Dana White.

In November McGregor was ordered by an Irish civil court to pay nearly €250,000 (£210,000) in damages to a woman who said he “brutally raped and battered” her in a hotel in Dublin in 2018. McGregor claimed they had consensual sex and is appealing against the verdict with a hearing in Dublin’s high court due later this week.

The fighter has said he is considering running for president in Ireland later this year, a prospect some thought would be ruled out after the civil trial verdict.

He has been supported by figures including the self-styled misogynist influencer Andrew Tate and anti-immigration campaigners in Ireland whose reach has been turbocharged by Elon Musk retweets.

Immigration is a hot topic in Ireland with many arrivals entering Northern Ireland on ferries or planes and crossing the invisible border on the island to enter the Republic of Ireland.

The justice minister, Jim O’Callaghan, has promised to clamp down on those who are not entitled to international protection. Last month he said more than 80% of applications for asylum in January were rejected in the first instance.

Ireland’s taoiseach has denounced anti-immigration comments made by Conor McGregor as the MMA fighter visited the White House before a St Patrick’s Day meeting with Donald Trump.

McGregor said “Ireland is on the cusp of losing its Irishness” and that an “illegal immigration racket” was “running ravage on the country”.

Last week, Donald Trump singled out “Conor” – who last year was found liable for sexual assault after a civil trial – as one of his favourite Irish people.

Dressed in a green business suit to mark Ireland’s national day, McGregor was at the White House at Trump’s invitation and participated in an impromptu Q&A session with reporters. “There are rural towns in Ireland that have been overrun in one swoop,” he said, speaking in the White House briefing room alongside the president’s press secretary, Karoline Leavitt.

The 36-year-old former Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) champion said he was “here to raise the issue and highlight it” and that he would be listening to Trump on immigration – one of the president’s main areas of focus as he seeks to ramp up deportations of people in the US without proper documentation.

The apparently off-the-cuff comments were immediately condemned by Micheál Martin, the taoiseach. “Conor McGregor’s remarks are wrong, and do not reflect the spirit of St Patrick’s Day, or the views of the people of Ireland,” the Irish prime minister said on X. “St Patrick’s Day around the world is a day rooted in community, humanity, friendship and fellowship.”

McGregor was among those at an official pre-inauguration party in Washington in January. He has been one of the biggest stars of the UFC, which was founded by the Trump ally Dana White.

In November McGregor was ordered by an Irish civil court to pay nearly €250,000 (£210,000) in damages to a woman who said he “brutally raped and battered” her in a hotel in Dublin in 2018. McGregor claimed they had consensual sex and is appealing against the verdict with a hearing in Dublin’s high court due later this week.

The fighter has said he is considering running for president in Ireland later this year, a prospect some thought would be ruled out after the civil trial verdict.

He has been supported by figures including the self-styled misogynist influencer Andrew Tate and anti-immigration campaigners in Ireland whose reach has been turbocharged by Elon Musk retweets.

Immigration is a hot topic in Ireland with many arrivals entering Northern Ireland on ferries or planes and crossing the invisible border on the island to enter the Republic of Ireland.

The justice minister, Jim O’Callaghan, has promised to clamp down on those who are not entitled to international protection. Last month he said more than 80% of applications for asylum in January were rejected in the first instance.

Chinese electric vehicle (EV) maker BYD has unveiled a new charging system that it said could make it possible for EVs to charge as quickly as it takes to refill with petrol and announced for the first time that it would build a charging network across China.

The so-called “super e-platform” will be capable of peak charging speeds of 1,000 kilowatts (kW), enabling cars that use it to travel 400km (249 miles) on a five-minute charge, founder Wang Chuanfu said at an event livestreamed from the company’s Shenzhen headquarters on Monday.

Charging speeds of 1,000 kW would be twice as fast as Tesla’s superchargers, whose latest version offers up to 500 kW charging speeds. Fast-charging technology has been seen as key to increasing EV adoption.

The news will be unwelcome for already struggling Tesla, whose stock has plunged – down 15% on 10 March alone – in the wake of its owner Elon Musk’s championing of hard-right causes in Europe and slashing of federal workforce as part of his work with the Trump administration.

Since December, when Tesla’s market value hit a record high of $1.5tn, it has fallen by almost half. Besides missing sales targets, Tesla faces heightened investor pressure to produce autonomous vehicles, which Musk has promised but failed to deliver for about a decade. It is also facing increased competition with more affordable EV models, like those produced by BYD and other Chinese companies.

On Wall Street on Monday, Tesla stock fell 4.8%, its eighth consecutive weekly decline, according to Barrons.

“In order to completely solve our users’ charging anxiety, we have been pursuing a goal to make the charging time of electric vehicles as short as the refuelling time of petrol vehicles,” Wang said.

“This is the first time in the industry that the unit of megawatt (charge) has been achieved on charging power,” he said.

The new charging architecture will be initially available in two new EVs – Han L sedan and Tang L SUV priced from 270,000 yuan ($37,330) – and BYD said it would build more than 4,000 ultra-fast charging piles, or units, across China to match the new platform.

The company didn’t specify the time frame or how much it would invest in building such facilities. To date, BYD owners have largely relied on other automakers’ charging facilities or public charging poles run by third-party operators to charge their vehicles.

Tesla has offered its superchargers in China since 2014 and BYD’s smaller Chinese peers such as Nio, Li Auto, Xpeng and Zeekr have also been investing extensively and building charging facilities for years.

BYD mostly relies on plug-in hybrids for its sales, which hit 4.2m units last year. It has targeted selling 5-6m units this year.

With Reuters

Canadian police have confirmed the identity of a second woman whose body was dumped at a private landfill near Winnipeg by a serial killer who preyed on Indigenous women and left their bodies hidden in trash.

The Manitoba Royal Canadian Mounted police said in a statement on Monday that the human remains found in the Prairie Green Landfill, north of Winnipeg, were those of Marcedes Myran, 26.

Myran’s family “has been notified and the Manitoba government continues to ask that the family’s privacy be respected”.

The young woman from Long Plain First Nation was killed in 2022 by Jeremy Skibicki, who was given a life sentence in July 2024 after he was found guilty of first-degree murder over four murders described as “jarring and numbing” by the judge overseeing the case.

Last week, police announced that another set of human remains found at the Prairie Green Landfill, north of Winnipeg had been identified as those of Morgan Harris, 39.

The discovery came after local officials were forced into a U-turn, launching a large search operation after initially suggesting that it would be too costly to examine the refuse, much of which was buried under tonnes of clay.

The remains of a third victim, Rebecca Contois, a member of Crane River First Nation, were found in a dumpster near Skibicki’s home in 2022.

Investigators are still trying to locate the remains of Skibecki’s fourth victim, an unidentified woman known as Mashkode Bizhiki’ikwe (Buffalo Woman).

Police first suggested in 2022 that the some of the victim’s bodies were buried in the landfill, but said that any recovery would be too challenging, prompting disbelief and outrage from family members.

“They keep saying it comes down to feasibility. But it doesn’t come down to feasibility when it’s about human beings and bringing these people home,” Cambria Harris, Morgan’s daughter, said at the time. After meeting with former prime minister Justin Trudeau, she was blunt: “I told him these women need to be found, and they need to come home.

The province’s former Progressive Conservative premier Heather Stefanson nonetheless defended the decision not to search the landfill in 2023.

“My heart goes out to the families. It’s a horrific situation that they’re facing right now, but I’m also the premier and we have to make what are difficult decisions,” she said. “These are decisions that need to be made, and I continue to stand by the decision that has been made.”

She and others in her government said the search was too costly and too hazardous – a conclusion other experts rejected.

At the time, Federal Crown-Indigenous Relations minister Marc Miller called the decision “heartless” and said a search was necessary.

A search of the landfill became central to a provincial election in 2023, in which New Democratic party leader Wab Kinew campaigned on a search of the landfill. Kinew’s party won a majority government and last year, the federal government pledged C$40m to search for the victims.

When the positive identification of Harris’s remains were first announced, Kinew praised the family members as “having been the people who called us to our better nature and to do the right thing”.

Excavation began at the privately run landfill in December, with teams sorting through early 20,300 cubic metres of material with rakes and by hand.

An enormous steel heated building was also constructed to allow teams to sift though wet material by hand while outside temperatures hovered at about -20C.

Of the 45 search technicians hired, including family liaisons, a forensic anthropologist, a health and safety officer, and a director of operations, half are Indigenous.

Kinew said: “The effort itself is a microcosm of where we’re at as a country … people from different walks of life coming together to try to do the right thing for these families.”

A mysterious foam on a South Australian beach is being blamed for more than 100 surfers becoming ill, and for the deaths of leafy seadragons, fish, and octopuses.

Health authorities have closed Waitpinga and Parsons Beach, about 80km south of Adelaide, and say the foam could be due to a microalgal bloom driven by hot temperatures, still water, and an ongoing marine heatwave.

Surfers in the local area have complained of blurred vision, itchy eyes, and coughing and breathing difficulties.

“It’s just covered in a really heavy, dense, yellow foam, with a fair bit of green, slimy, scummy stuff on the beach at the tidelines,” local surfer Anthony Rowland said.

Rowland posted pictures online of dead sea creatures washed up on the beach, including the seadragons, which are close relatives of seahorses. He said there was “visible evidence that something weird is in the water”.

• Sign up for Guardian Australia’s breaking news email

The pictures show the foam bubbling over rocks and forming snaking coloured lines in the sand.

“Some of the foam has a bit of rainbow effect in the bubbles,” Rowland said.

After going out in the water on the weekend, he had a respiratory reaction.

“I was really raspy. It was sort of like when you inhale a potent cleaning product, if you’re cleaning a kitchen sink or something. It hit the back of my throat,” he said.

The reaction to his post was “absolutely overwhelming”, he said, adding that he and others worked out there were more than 100 people affected. And he is worried that it is spreading to other beaches on the Fleurieu Peninsula.

“In the last 24 hours there’s dead fish along Victor (Harbor), Middleton, Encounter Bay. It’s definitely hit the Victor coast, and there are dead octopuses in Middleton,” he said.

A state environment department spokesperson said in a statement that the beaches were closed “in the interest of safety” and that authorities were investigating.

“Waitpinga Beach and Parsons Beach within the Newland Head Conservation Park will be temporarily closed to the public in response to a fish mortality event in the area,” the spokesperson said.

“The beaches will be re-opened as soon as possible.”

The state Environment Protection Authority (Epa) said in a statement it was aware “that dead fish have been found at Waitpinga and Parsons beaches and surfers have reported suffering from health symptoms such as itchy eyes and blurred/misty vision and coughing and breathing difficulties.

“The Epa have received multiple reports that dead fish and seahorses could be found on shore and that there was red staining on the sand and foam on the beaches.

“The Epa are working with other agencies … to attend the scene and take water samples.

“It is believed the event could be due to a microalgal bloom that has been driven by hot temperatures and still water and an ongoing marine heatwave, with temperatures currently 2.5C warmer than usual, with little wind and small swell contributing to conditions.”

South Australia is experiencing drought conditions and has had recent bouts of extremely hot weather.

A mysterious foam on a South Australian beach is being blamed for more than 100 surfers becoming ill, and for the deaths of leafy seadragons, fish, and octopuses.

Health authorities have closed Waitpinga and Parsons Beach, about 80km south of Adelaide, and say the foam could be due to a microalgal bloom driven by hot temperatures, still water, and an ongoing marine heatwave.

Surfers in the local area have complained of blurred vision, itchy eyes, and coughing and breathing difficulties.

“It’s just covered in a really heavy, dense, yellow foam, with a fair bit of green, slimy, scummy stuff on the beach at the tidelines,” local surfer Anthony Rowland said.

Rowland posted pictures online of dead sea creatures washed up on the beach, including the seadragons, which are close relatives of seahorses. He said there was “visible evidence that something weird is in the water”.

• Sign up for Guardian Australia’s breaking news email

The pictures show the foam bubbling over rocks and forming snaking coloured lines in the sand.

“Some of the foam has a bit of rainbow effect in the bubbles,” Rowland said.

After going out in the water on the weekend, he had a respiratory reaction.

“I was really raspy. It was sort of like when you inhale a potent cleaning product, if you’re cleaning a kitchen sink or something. It hit the back of my throat,” he said.

The reaction to his post was “absolutely overwhelming”, he said, adding that he and others worked out there were more than 100 people affected. And he is worried that it is spreading to other beaches on the Fleurieu Peninsula.

“In the last 24 hours there’s dead fish along Victor (Harbor), Middleton, Encounter Bay. It’s definitely hit the Victor coast, and there are dead octopuses in Middleton,” he said.

A state environment department spokesperson said in a statement that the beaches were closed “in the interest of safety” and that authorities were investigating.

“Waitpinga Beach and Parsons Beach within the Newland Head Conservation Park will be temporarily closed to the public in response to a fish mortality event in the area,” the spokesperson said.

“The beaches will be re-opened as soon as possible.”

The state Environment Protection Authority (Epa) said in a statement it was aware “that dead fish have been found at Waitpinga and Parsons beaches and surfers have reported suffering from health symptoms such as itchy eyes and blurred/misty vision and coughing and breathing difficulties.

“The Epa have received multiple reports that dead fish and seahorses could be found on shore and that there was red staining on the sand and foam on the beaches.

“The Epa are working with other agencies … to attend the scene and take water samples.

“It is believed the event could be due to a microalgal bloom that has been driven by hot temperatures and still water and an ongoing marine heatwave, with temperatures currently 2.5C warmer than usual, with little wind and small swell contributing to conditions.”

South Australia is experiencing drought conditions and has had recent bouts of extremely hot weather.

Japan is planning to deploy long-range missiles on its southern island of Kyushu amid concerns around the Trump administration’s stance towards its security pacts and continuing regional tensions.

The missiles, with a range of about 1,000km, would be capable of hitting targets in North Korea and China’s coastal regions, and are due to be deployed next year in two bases with existing missile garrisons. They would bolster the defences of the strategically important Okinawa island chain and are part of Japan’s development of “counterstrike capabilities” in the event it is attacked, according to reports from Kyodo News agency, citing government sources.

Deployment of long-range missiles on the Okinawa islands, which stretch to within 110km of Taiwan, is unlikely to happen, to avoid provoking China. The islands already house a number of missiles batteries with shorter ranges.

“As the threat from the China and North Korea has been mounting, it is natural for Japan to counter this with more effective weapons systems,” said Yoichi Shimada, professor emeritus at Fukui Prefectural University. “I think Japan should rapidly take measures such as the deployment of longer-range missiles to develop more robust security.”

On 6 March, the US president, Donald Trump, complained that the Japan-US security treaty was nonreciprocal: “We have a great relationship with Japan, but we have an interesting deal with Japan that we have to protect them, but they don’t have to protect us,” adding, “That’s the way the deal reads … and by the way, they make a fortune with us economically. I actually ask who makes these deals?”

The treaty was first signed in 1951, when Japan was still occupied by US forces. Japan’s ability to take military action is restricted by the pacifist article 9 of its constitution, which was effectively imposed on it by Washington after the second world war.

Shimada believes that “proactive measures” such as boosting its missile systems will strengthen US-Japan ties, and that “demands from the Trump administration for reciprocal defence arrangements with Japan are not so unreasonable”.

However, Trump’s pronouncements on allies and fellow Nato members, including Canada and Denmark, have some in Japan concerned about his administration’s commitment to honouring longstanding treaties, according to Robert Dujarric of Temple University in Tokyo.

“It is clear to anyone who is watching this carefully that the US-Japan alliance is in bad shape,” said Dujarric. “Even if China attacked Japan, there is no guarantee that the US under Trump would do anything. That is a big problem.”

Two ground self-defense force (GSDF) bases are being considered for the new missiles, Camp Yufuin in Oita, and Camp Kengun in Kumamoto, both on Kyushu and already home to missile batteries. The new weapon systems are reported to be upgraded versions of the GSDF’s Type-12 land-to-ship guided missiles.

“This is just one part of a gradual increase in Japanese military capacity,” said Dujarric, who believes the country “needs to rethink its security policy” in light of the shifting geopolitical landscape.

Despite having been largely taboo in the 80 years since the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, if Japan feels it can no longer rely on US military support, that would “spark debate as to whether to acquire nuclear weapons”, suggested Dujarric.

Lucy Letby has called for the public inquiry into her crimes to be halted, arguing there is now “overwhelming and compelling” evidence undermining her baby murder convictions.

Lawyers for the former nurse took the extraordinary step of writing to Lady Justice Thirlwall on Monday to say that the inquiry – which is due to end on Wednesday – should be suspended immediately.

In a letter seen by the Guardian, they said the judge’s final report would “not only be redundant but likely unreliable” unless it was paused until the conclusion of a review of her convictions.

They added: “It is estimated that over £10m has been spent so far on the inquiry. It is now clear there is overwhelming and compelling evidence that Lucy Letby’s convictions are unsafe.

“For the inquiry to be effective and that taxpayer’s money not to be wasted, we urge that the inquiry be suspended and to wait for the outcome of the review to take place.”

Letby, 35, is serving 15 whole-life prison terms after being convicted of murdering seven babies and attempting to kill another seven at the Countess of Chester hospital in north-west England.

The former nurse, who has always protested her innocence, has lost two attempts to overturn her convictions at the court of appeal.

The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), which investigates potential miscarriages of justice, is examining fresh material submitted by a range of experts on behalf of Letby last month.

Barristers for NHS England and the Countess of Chester hospital said any decision to postpone the inquiry was primarily for the health secretary, Wes Streeting, to take in consultation with Thirlwall as the inquiry chair.

Andrew Kennedy KC, representing the Countess of Chester hospital, urged the judge not to pause her work because it would delay changes that were “desperately needed”.

Separately, lawyers for a series of organisations expressed regret over their handling of the Letby case.

The Care Quality Commission, a health watchdog, and the Nursing and Midwifery Council, the nurses’ regulator, both said they should have shown greater “professional curiosity” when they became involved in 2016.

The Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health said its review of the neonatal unit on behalf of the hospital executive was “singularly inapposite and wrong” and “should never have taken place” given the serious allegations against Letby at the time.

In its closing submissions, the Department of Health and Social Care made an “unequivocal” apology to the bereaved families and said it bore “ultimate responsibility” for failings.

Neil Sheldon KC, for the department, said ministers were determined to learn the lessons from this inquiry, admitting that there had been a “failure to learn from past incidents”.

Lawyers for Letby said 16 specialists from seven countries had compiled “by far the largest forensic expert neonatal review ever undertaken”.

The conclusion of this, they added, was that there was “no evidence of harmful acts” but that there were “a litany of errors by the treating clinicians”.

They said the expert reports provided a “compelling alternative explanation” for each of the deaths and non-fatal collapses and “heavily criticise” the medical care by those working on the neonatal unit.

Letby’s legal team said it would submit all of this evidence to the CCRC this week and would meet commissioners in the near future.

They said it was “likely that the CCRC will not take long” to consider the material before referring the case back to the court of appeal, which it can do if it believes there is a “real possibility” that the convictions could be quashed.

The letter added: “If, given the overwhelming evidence that the convictions are unsafe, they are overturned, then any report produced by the inquiry will be based on the wrong premise.

“This error will pollute the very nature of the report and any conclusions or indeed recommendations will be of little value.

“In short, it will defeat the purpose of a public inquiry, to fully and fearlessly understand the circumstances in which the babies died or became unwell.”

The calls for the inquiry to be paused came days after Cheshire constabulary said it was investigating other hospital staff in connection with gross negligence manslaughter over the deaths. The force said at the time that this inquiry would not “impact on the convictions of Lucy Letby for multiple offences of murder and attempted murder”.

Detectives are also investigating deaths and non-fatal collapses of other babies on the neonatal units of the Countess of Chester and Liverpool women’s hospital between 2012 and 2016.

The Thirlwall inquiry has been examining the circumstances surrounding the deaths and near-deaths since September last year, with a final report due later this year.

Thirlwall said on Monday that she had also received a request on behalf of former executives at the Countess of Chester – including the former chief executive Tony Chambers and the ex-medical director Ian Harvey – to pause the inquiry.

The inquiry, sitting at Liverpool town hall, is due to hear from the barrister representing the executives later this week.

The Italian parents of a child who was recently born in the US via surrogacy say they are too afraid to return home since Giorgia Meloni’s government enacted the west’s most restrictive law against what she described as “procreative tourism”.

The gay couple could be among the first Italians to be prosecuted under the law, enacted in early December, which extended an outright ban on domestic surrogacy by making it a universal crime that transcends borders, putting them on a par with terrorists, paedophiles and war criminals.

The measure can lead to prison terms of up to two years and fines of between €600,000 and €1m (£500,000 and £840,000).

The couple’s son was born in San Diego, California, in mid-February. “They are very worried about returning to Italy because there’s the prospect of jail and fines,” Gianni Baldini, a lawyer for the pair who has made the case public on their behalf, told the Guardian. “They are now evaluating the possibility of remaining in the US.”

Meloni’s far-right Brothers of Italy had long campaigned for those who seek surrogacy abroad to be criminalised. After the law, which only applies to Italian citizens, was passed in parliament in October, Meloni said it was needed to “fill a regulatory gap to also prevent this inhumane practice in procreative tourism”. The measure is among several socially conservative policies pursued by her government in its quest to promote so-called traditional family values.

Until the international ban was enacted, an estimated 250 Italian couples sought surrogacy overseas, the vast majority of them straight people who turned to surrogates for health reasons.

The practice is legal and regulated in 66 countries, although most Italians access the procedure in the US or Canada, where surrogacy is not specified on the birth certificate and where their child can obtain immediate US or Canadian citizenship.

Baldini believes there could be “a few dozen” children who have been born abroad via surrogacy since the law was enforced. “We don’t know how many couples are currently in this situation, but from cases I have assisted in the past, I do know there are those who simply do not want to talk about it as they are afraid,” he said.

The couple in San Diego are both employed by a multinational company and so could potentially stay and work in the US; however, Baldini said they are also concerned about the climate towards LGBTQ+ families under Donald Trump’s administration, especially if the US president pursues his pledge of ending birthright citizenship.

The Italian law does not apply retroactively but even though the pregnancy was conceived before it was enacted, now that their son has been born the couple still risk prosecution if they return to Italy.

Baldini said a court battle in Italy would probably deter the couple. “It would be very delicate and there would be publicity surrounding the baby. They want to protect their child and don’t want their situation to become a cinema-style story.”

However, if the case did reach court, Baldini said he would aim to take it to Italy’s highest level and argue that the law is unconstitutional. “This is because it violates the principle of double jeopardy – you can’t be criminalised for something if it was not a crime in the country in which it was committed.”

The law was partially founded with the aim of protecting poor women around the world who are exploited for surrogacy. “There are certainly women who are exploited, but this happens in countries where there is no regulation,” said Baldini. “Italy can’t argue that surrogates in California are being exploited because in California it is perfectly legal.”