Donald Trump is poised to unleash his trade war with the world on Wednesday, pressing ahead with a slew of tariffs on the US’s largest trading partners despite fears of widespread economic damage and calls to reconsider.

The US president claimed “many” countries were seeking a deal with Washington, as his administration prepared to impose steep tariffs on goods from dozens of markets from Wednesday.

However, Beijing vowed to “fight to the end” after Trump threatened to hit Chinese exports with additional 50% tariffs if the country proceeds with plans to retaliate against his initial vow to impose tariffs of 34% on its products. That would come on top of the existing 20% levy and take the total tariff on Chinese imports to 104%.

The White House confirmed that the higher US tariffs on China would, indeed, be imposed from Wednesday. “President Trump has a spine of steel and he will not break,” the press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, said. “And America will not break under his leadership.”

The billionaire Trump adviser Elon Musk has also reportedly asked the president to reverse course and the conservative businessmen Leonard Leo and Charles Koch have filed a lawsuit against the “illegal” tariffs.

The latest tariffs are higher than the 10% flat rate imposed on all global imports to the US on Friday last week and are tailored to specific countries based on a formula that has been criticised by economists that divides trade in goods deficit by twice the total value of imports.

After days of turmoil since they were first revealed last week, global markets initially recovered some ground on Tuesday as senior US officials attempted to reassure investors that the new tariffs – including rates of 20% on the European Union, 26% on India and 49% on Cambodia – could be temporary.

But the bounce didn’t last long. On Wall Street, the benchmark S&P 500 closed down 1.6%, at 4,982.77 – below 5,000 for the first time in more than a year – as the Dow Jones industrial average fell 0.8%. The technology-focused Nasdaq Composite also came under pressure, dropping 2.2%.

Earlier in the day, the FTSE 100 rallied by 2.7% in London, recovering some of the losses it has endured since Trump’s announcement – on what was dubbed “liberation day” by his aides – last week. The Nikkei 225 rallied 6% in Tokyo. The Hang Seng Index rose 1.5% in Hong Kong.

Scott Bessent, the US treasury secretary, has insisted the new tariffs are at “maximum” levels, and expressed confidence that negotiations will bring them down.

“I think you are going to see some very large countries with large trade deficits [with the US] come forward very quickly,” he told CNBC, the financial news network, on Tuesday. “If they come to the table with solid proposals, I think we can end up with some good deals.”

Trump was asked on Monday whether the tariffs set the stage for negotiations with countries, or were permanent. “Well, it can both be true,” he told reporters. “There can be permanent tariffs, and there can also be negotiations.”

But he again raised the prospect of agreements with countries on Tuesday, trailing a potential deal with South Korea.

“Their top TEAM is on a plane heading to the US, and things are looking good,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform. “We are likewise dealing with many other countries, all of whom want to make a deal with the United States.”

The president added: “‘ONE STOP SHOPPING’ is a beautiful and efficient process!!! China also wants to make a deal, badly, but they don’t know how to get it started. We are waiting for their call. It will happen!”

Rachel Reeves, the UK chancellor, sought to ease concerns about market volatility, telling parliament she had spoken to Andrew Bailey, the governor of the Bank of England, who confirmed “markets are functioning effectively and that our banking system is resilient”.

A trade war “is in nobody’s interest”, Reeves argued, confirming that the UK was seeking to negotiate a new deal with the US. Trump has imposed a 10% tariff on UK exports, in line with the minimum benchmark introduced at the weekend.

She declined to back calls from Liberal Democrats for the government to launch a “buy British” campaign. “In terms of buying British, I think everyone will make their own decisions,” Reeves said. “What we don’t want to see is a trade war, with Britain becoming inward-looking.”

China adopted an altogether different stance. In a scathing editorial, the official state news outlet Xinhua accused the US president of “naked extortion”.

“Utterly absurd is the underlying logic of the United States: ‘I can hit you at my will, and you must not respond. Instead, you must surrender unconditionally,’” it said. “This is not diplomacy. It is blunt coercion dressed up as policy.”

On social media a 1987 speech by Ronald Reagan posted by China’s foreign ministry has been widely shared. The video clip, in which the former US president criticises the use of tariffs as leading to retaliation and ultimately hurting the US economy, “has a new meaning in 2025”, China’s the Paper said.

Bessent argued on Tuesday that China was making a “big mistake” by daring to retaliate. “They’re playing with a pair of twos,” he claimed on CNBC. “What do we lose by the Chinese raising tariffs on us? We export one-fifth to them of what they export to us, so that is a losing hand for them.”

China’s government says it will “fight to the end” if the US continues to escalate the trade war, after Donald Trump threatened huge additional tariffs in response to China’s retaliatory measures.

On Tuesday, China’s commerce ministry accused the US of “blackmail” and said the US president’s threats of additional 50% tariffs if Beijing did not reverse its own 34% reciprocal tariff were a “mistake on top of a mistake”.

It vowed to “resolutely take countermeasures”, adding: “China will fight to the end if the US side is bent on going down the wrong path.”

On Tuesday Asian markets appeared to improve slightly in early trading, a day after torrid day on the global markets that prompted the billionaire investor Bill Ackman, one of the US president’s backers in the 2024 race for the White House, to call for a moratorium.

Tuesday’s response from Beijing is the latest in a worsening tit-for-tat between the two countries. Last week Trump announced a swathe of tariffs ranging from 10%-50% against US trading partners to come into effect this Wednesday. He placed a 34% tariff on imports from China – in addition to a previous 20% levy. Beijing then retaliated with a reciprocal 34% tariff on all US imports. That prompted Trump on Monday to threaten an additional 50% tariff on to Chinese imports if Beijing did not reverse theirs.

“If China does not withdraw its 34% increase above their already long term trading abuses by tomorrow, April 8th, 2025, the United States will impose additional tariffs on China of 50%, effective April 9th,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “Additionally, all talks with China concerning their requested meetings with us will be terminated!”

A scathing editorial in Chinese official state news outlet Xinhua accused Trump of “naked extortion”.

“Utterly absurd is the underlying logic of the United States: ‘I can hit you at my will, and you must not respond. Instead, you must surrender unconditionally’,” it said. “This is not diplomacy. It is blunt coercion dressed up as policy.”

On social media a 1987 speech by then US president Ronald Reagan posted by China’s foreign ministry has been widely shared. The video clip, in which Reagan criticises the use of tariffs as leading to retaliation and ultimately hurting the US economy, “has a new meaning in 2025”, China’s The Paper said.

Wen-ti Sung, a non-resident fellow with the Atlantic Council’s Global China Hub said the US and China were “locked in a game of chicken”. “Like two race cars driving directly toward each other, whoever swerves first will stand to lose prestige and profit,” Sung told the Guardian.

“China seems determined to signal that the world is still bipolar, and that Beijing will not let Washington get to call the shots, lest it sets the tone for the years to come. Plus China is still waiting to get more assurance from Trump that if it accommodates Trump’s demand will it get China out of his crosshairs or whether it will only whet his appetite more.

“If not, China’s main option is to respond with proportional retaliatory trade sanctions against the US, while trying to negotiate with Washington at the same time.”

On Tuesday, Japan’s Nikkei index rose 6%, rebounding from an 18-month low on Monday, after Trump and Japanese prime minister Shigeru Ishiba agreed to open trade talks in a phone call late on Monday.

Chinese blue-chips climbed 0.7%, recouping a fraction of the more than 7% slide on Monday. Hong Kong’s Hang Seng Index jumped 2% after suffering the worst day since 1997. US stock futures also pointed higher after a rollercoaster session in which it touched its lowest level in more than a year.

Trump’s “liberation day” tariffs targeted dozens of countries, and China is not the only one to respond. The European Commission has proposed counter-tariffs of 25% on a range of US goods, including soybeans, nuts and sausages, while saying they stood ready to negotiate a “zero for zero” deal with Trump.

EU trade commissioner Maros Sefcovic said at a news conference: “Sooner or later, we will sit at the negotiation table with the US and find a mutually acceptable compromise.”

The 27-member EU, which had already been hit with tariffs on vehicles and metals, faces another 20% on other items from Wednesday. Trump has also threatened to impose tariffs on alcoholic drinks from the bloc.

Taiwan, which faces a 32% reciprocal tariff and saw its worst ever market fall on Monday, has said it is ready to negotiate “at any time”, with president Lai Ching-te proposing a zero-tariffs agreement, removal of trade barriers, and increased investment in the US.

Taiwan has repeatedly said its large trade surplus with the US is due to the US’s soaring demand for tech, given its companies are major suppliers to companies such as Apple and Nvidia.

Amid the economic maelstrom of Donald Trump’s trade war, drink makers might take a small drop of comfort: the EU has dropped plans to hit American bourbon with retaliatory tariffs.

Bourbon and other US whiskeys have escaped EU countermeasures after heavy lobbying from the EU’s drinks-producing countries – such as whiskey-making Ireland and the wine behemoths Italy and France – who feared their alcohol industries would become casualties of a global trade war.

Bourbon and wine have been removed from a draft list of US goods that will be subject to EU retaliatory tariffs in response to Trump’s duties on steel and aluminium announced last month, according to a leaked list first reported by Reuters.

EU member states will vote on the final list on Wednesday, which targets €21bn goods, down from €26bn originally foreseen, after talks with the EU’s 27 member states and many industry bodies. The list of potential targets facing mostly 25% retaliatory tariffs now ranges from almonds to yachts, via diamonds and dental floss, soya beans and steel parts. But bourbon and wine have been dropped.

France, Italy and Ireland protested against their inclusion after Trump threatened a counter-punch on learning of the threat to bourbon last month. On social media on 13 March, he warned of “a 200% Tariff on all WINES, CHAMPAGNES, & ALCOHOLIC PRODUCTS COMING OUT OF FRANCE AND OTHER E.U. REPRESENTED COUNTRIES”.

Ireland’s foreign minister, Simon Harris, said on Monday he had “questioned the strategic relevance” of targeting bourbon, while the French prime minister, François Bayrou, described the proposal as “a misstep”.

The French government, which has been calling for a tough response to US tariffs, feared damage to its drinks industry, as one champagne maker warned it would be “game over” for the US market if 200% tariffs came to pass.

French cognac and brandy makers have since last October been grappling with Chinese tariffs, levied by Beijing in retaliation over the EU’s decision to impose anti-dumping duties on Chinese electric vehicles.

Bourbon became a possible target as it was already in the EU’s playbook. When Trump imposed steel and aluminium tariffs in his first term, the EU responded by targeting emblematic US goods such as Harley-Davidson motorbikes, blue jeans and bourbon. “We can also do stupid,” was how the then European Commission president, Jean-Claude Juncker, described the counter-measures, as he said the bloc had no choice.

The targeting of alcoholic drinks in trade wars has alarmed and baffled the industry. In the two decades following the removal of nearly all tariffs on spirits between the US and EU in 1997, transatlantic trade grew by 450%, reaching €6.7bn in 2018 before the start of tariffs, according to the pan-European trade body, spiritsEurope.

In the US, Irish whiskey, Cognac and Polish vodka have protected status, while similarly, in the EU only US products can be bourbon or Tennessee whiskey.

Ireland had also feared that Trump’s retribution would snare its sizeable whiskey industry, with Irish whiskey exports to the US in 2024 valued at between €420m and €450m by the national food and drink board Bia.

The sector is dominated by brands such as Jameson. An explosion in the number of craft distilleries has led to around 40 whiskey and gin makers being established, often in rural areas, and another 10 north of the border, with 5.7m cases sent to the US in 2023 from the republic alone. These range in price from $30 a bottle to almost $5,000 for a bottle of Midleton Very Rare Foret de Troncais vintage whiskey.

A tit-for-tat war could have hit production costs, too, as bourbon oak casks are used to colour and age whiskey in Ireland and elsewhere in the EU before sale back to the US.

Under US rules, bourbon is aged in virgin oak, which is discarded after one or two years, but the barrels are sold on to the UK at £300 a unit, generating a whole new side business for the US drink trade.

“It is not good for Europe, not good for Ireland. It’s not good for anybody,” said Paul Nash, the founder of Wild Atlantic Whiskey in county Tyrone, who is concerned about the 10% and 20% tariffs still facing UK and EU exports.

The US applied a universal tariff of 10% on UK goods from 5 April, while the 20% rate on EU goods comes into force on 9 April.

Northern Ireland whiskey is also hampered by the EU trade tariffs, partly because of Brexit rules tying it to the EU trade rules but mostly because whiskey makers source their barley in the republic.

A European Commission spokesperson declined to comment on bourbon, as the list had not been made public. “We are taking every step to ensure that the measures we come forward with achieve their intended purpose, which is to allow for the minimum amount of damage here in the EU while providing us with the maximum amount of leverage in our negotiations,” the spokesperson said. “We don’t want tariffs. We want to avoid them.”

In a letter marking one month since his detention by immigration authorities, Noor Abdalla vowed to continue to fight for the release of her husband, Mahmoud Khalil, and for the right to speak up on behalf of Palestinian rights.

“We will not be silenced,” she said. “We will persist, with even greater resolve, and we will pass that strength on to our children and our children’s children – until Palestine is free.”

Khalil, the recent Columbia graduate and Palestinian activist, was detained on 8 March and remains in Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) detention in Louisiana. The Trump administration is seeking to deport him.

“Exactly a month ago, you were taken from me,” Abdalla, who is nine months pregnant with their first child, wrote in the letter addressed to her husband and published exclusively in the Guardian. “As the days draw us closer to the arrival of our child, I am haunted by the uncertainty that looms over me – the possibility that you might not be there for this monumental moment.”

Khalil helped lead Columbia University’s pro-Palestinian protests last spring. His arrest was the first in what has become a mounting series of actions by the Trump administration to deport international students – some over their pro-Palestinian activism, others for reasons unclear to them.

Abdalla, a 28-year-old dentist residing in New York, is a US citizen who was born and raised in Michigan. Her parents immigrated to the US from Syria about 40 years ago. She was with him the evening of his arrest last month as they were returning from breaking their Ramadan fast with friends, and recorded the arrest.

“Every kick, every cramp, every small flutter I feel inside me serves as an inescapable reminder of the family we’ve dreamed of building together,” Abdalla’s letter said. “Yet, I am left to navigate this profound journey alone, while you endure the cruel and unjust confines of a detention center.”

Khalil has not been charged with any crimes and his lawyers contend that the Trump administration is unlawfully retaliating against him for his activism and constitutionally protected speech.

The administration has accused the recent graduate of leading “activities aligned to Hamas” and is seeking to deport him under a rarely invoked legal provision that allows the state department to deport non-citizens deemed to be a threat to US foreign policy.

Khalil and his lawyers are currently challenging the administration’s deportation effort in court. An immigration hearing in the case is set to take place on Tuesday afternoon.

In the letter, Abdalla said that she “could not be more proud” of Khalil, adding that he embodied everything she ever hoped for in a partner and for the father of her children.

“What more could I ask for as a role model for our children than a man who, with unwavering conviction, stands up for the liberation of his people, fully cognizant of the consequences of speaking truth to power?” she asks. “Your courage is boundless, and now more than ever, I am in awe of your strength and determination. Your voice, your belief in justice, and your refusal to be silenced are the very qualities that make you the man I love and admire.”

The letter slams the administration’s crackdown on pro-Palestinian speech in the name of fighting antisemitism, a campaign that has threatened billions of dollars in funding to American universities in addition to the immigration status of students who have not been accused of committing any crimes. It also critiques Columbia’s administrators, who Abdalla said failed to protect Khalil.

“They sit in their ivory towers, scrambling to fabricate lies and distort the truth, throwing accusations like stones in the hope that something will stick,” she said.

“What they fail to realize is that their efforts are futile. Their wrongful detention of you is a testament to the fact that you have struck a nerve,” she said. “You’ve disrupted the false narratives they’ve worked so hard to maintain, and spoken a truth that they are too terrified to acknowledge.”

In the letter, Abdalla said she eagerly awaited the day when she can tell their son the “stories of his father’s bravery, of the courage that courses through his veins, and of the pride he should feel to carry Palestinian blood … your blood”.

“And, more than anything, I pray that he will not have to grow up fighting the same fight for our basic freedoms,” she said.

“We will be reunited soon,” she said, but “until then, I will continue to fight for you, for us and for our family”.

“I know your spirit is unwavering, that they cannot break you, and that you will emerge from this stronger than ever,” she adds. “I have no doubt that, when you are finally released, you will raise your hands in the air, chanting: ‘Free Palestine.’”

An immigration judge ruled on Tuesday that the Trump administration has until 5pm on Wednesday to present evidence as to why Mahmoud Khalil, the Palestinian activist and Columbia University graduate, should be deported. She said that if the evidence does not support deportation she may rule on Friday on his release from immigration detention.

Khalil, a green card holder and leader in the pro-Palestinian protests at Columbia University last year, was detained on 8 March. The Trump administration claims that his presence has adverse foreign policy consequences, an argument decried by his legal team as a blatant free speech violation. The government has not provided any evidence that he broke the law, a typical condition for revoking permanent residency.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) can “either can provide sufficient evidence or not”, said Judge Jamee Comans from her courtroom in Jena, Louisiana. “If he’s not removable, I’m going to terminate this case on Friday.”

A lawyer for DHS told the judge: “We have evidence we will submit.”

During the hearing, Khalil sat beside an empty chair, his immigration attorneys and counsel appearing over video on a flatscreen TV. Behind him sat a handful of supporters, some of whom had been directed by security to remove keffiyehs. Khalil, in navy blue detention-issued clothes, sat calmly, sometimes fingering a set of prayer beads.

The proceedings were delayed as Comans tried to pick the attorneys out of the nearly 600 people – media, supporters and observers – attempting to join the video call.

“This is highly unusual,” began Comans, in reference to the number of people attempting to watch the hearing.

“Your honor, I’d appreciate it if you could let my wife in,” Khalil said softly into the microphone. A moment later, the face of Khalil’s wife, Noor Abdalla, appeared on the screen.

“Your honor, there is obviously a lot of public interest in this case, and we would appreciate if there could be online access” granted to the public, began Khalil’s immigration lawyer, Mark Van Der Hout. Comans denied this request and added, seeming frustrated, that she was “very, very close” to making the rest of the legal team appear in person as well.

Van Der Hout said they had requested DHS’s evidence of the allegations over two weeks ago and had not received a response. “We cannot plead until we know the specific allegations,” he added.

The DHS also alleges that Khalil failed to disclose on his visa application that he previously worked in a Syrian office of the British Embassy and for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), before becoming a member of a pro-Palestinian activist group at Columbia.

Van Der Hout requested to postpone a follow-up hearing Comans set for Friday, noting: “We may have to depose the Secretary of State” due to the nature of the charges against Khalil.

Comans declined, telling him: “You’re in the wrong court for that.” Indicating she wanted to move the case along, she added: “I’m like you, Mr. Van Der Hout, I’d like to see the evidence.”

Apart from his immigration case, Khalil is challenging his detention in a separate case before a federal judge in New Jersey.

At least 58 people have died and 160 were injured in the Dominican capital early on Tuesday after the roof collapsed at a nightclub where politicians, athletes and others were attending a merengue concert, authorities said.

Crews were searching for survivors in the rubble at the one-storey Jet Set nightclub in Santo Domingo, said Juan Manuel Méndez, director of the Center of Emergency Operations.

“We presume that many of them are still alive, and that is why the authorities here will not give up until not a single person remains under that rubble,” he said.

Nearly 12 hours after the top of the nightclub collapsed on to patrons, rescue crews were still pulling out survivors from the debris. At the scene, firefighters removed blocks of broken concrete and sawed planks of wood, using them to lift heavy debris as the noise of drills filled the air.

The confirmed death toll had reached 44, Méndez said in the early afternoon. Earlier, officials had said there were at least 160 people injured.

Nelsy Cruz, the governor of the north-western province of Montecristi and sister of seven-time Major League Baseball All-Star Nelson Cruz, was among the victims.

She had called President Luis Abinader at 12.49am saying she was trapped and that the roof had collapsed, first lady Raquel Arbaje told reporters. Officials said Cruz died later at the hospital.

“This is too great a tragedy,” Arbaje said in a broken voice.

The Professional Baseball League of the Dominican Republic posted on X that MLB pitcher Octavio Dotel died. Officials had earlier rescued Dotel from the debris and taken him to a hospital.

Meanwhile, the injured included legislator Bray Vargas and merengue singer Rubby Pérez, who was performing when the roof collapsed, officials said.

His manager, Enrique Paulino, whose shirt was spattered with blood, told reporters at the scene that the concert began shortly before midnight, with the roof collapsing almost an hour later, killing the group’s saxophonist.

“It happened so quickly. I managed to throw myself into a corner,” he said, adding that he initially thought it was an earthquake.

It wasn’t immediately clear what caused the roof to collapse.

Jet Set issued a statement saying it was cooperating with authorities. “The loss of human life leaves us in a state of deep pain and dismay,” it said.

Manuel Olivo Ortiz, whose son attended the concert but did not return home, was among those anxiously waiting outside the club, which is known for its traditional parties where renowned national and international artists perform. “We’re holding on only to God,” Olivo said.

Also awaiting word was Massiel Cuevas, godmother of 22-year-old Darlenys Batista. “I’m waiting for her. She’s in there, I know she’s in there,” Cuevas said, firm in her belief that Batista would be pulled out alive.

President Abinader wrote on X that all rescue agencies are “working tirelessly” to help those affected.

“We deeply regret the tragedy that occurred at the Jet Set nightclub. We have been following the incident minute by minute since it occurred,” he wrote.

Abinader arrived at the scene and hugged those looking for friends and family, some with tears streaming down their faces.

“We have faith in God that we will rescue even more people alive,” he told reporters.

An official with a megaphone stood outside the club imploring the large crowd that had gathered to search for friends and relatives to give ambulances space.

“You have to cooperate with authorities, please,” he said. “We are removing people.”

At one hospital where the injured were taken, an official stood outside reading aloud the names of survivors as a crowd gathered around her and yelled out the names of their loved ones.

Meanwhile, dozens of people gathered at the National Institute of Forensic Pathology, which projected pictures of the victims so their loved ones could identify them.

At least 58 people have died and 160 were injured in the Dominican capital early on Tuesday after the roof collapsed at a nightclub where politicians, athletes and others were attending a merengue concert, authorities said.

Crews were searching for survivors in the rubble at the one-storey Jet Set nightclub in Santo Domingo, said Juan Manuel Méndez, director of the Center of Emergency Operations.

“We presume that many of them are still alive, and that is why the authorities here will not give up until not a single person remains under that rubble,” he said.

Nearly 12 hours after the top of the nightclub collapsed on to patrons, rescue crews were still pulling out survivors from the debris. At the scene, firefighters removed blocks of broken concrete and sawed planks of wood, using them to lift heavy debris as the noise of drills filled the air.

The confirmed death toll had reached 44, Méndez said in the early afternoon. Earlier, officials had said there were at least 160 people injured.

Nelsy Cruz, the governor of the north-western province of Montecristi and sister of seven-time Major League Baseball All-Star Nelson Cruz, was among the victims.

She had called President Luis Abinader at 12.49am saying she was trapped and that the roof had collapsed, first lady Raquel Arbaje told reporters. Officials said Cruz died later at the hospital.

“This is too great a tragedy,” Arbaje said in a broken voice.

The Professional Baseball League of the Dominican Republic posted on X that MLB pitcher Octavio Dotel died. Officials had earlier rescued Dotel from the debris and taken him to a hospital.

Meanwhile, the injured included legislator Bray Vargas and merengue singer Rubby Pérez, who was performing when the roof collapsed, officials said.

His manager, Enrique Paulino, whose shirt was spattered with blood, told reporters at the scene that the concert began shortly before midnight, with the roof collapsing almost an hour later, killing the group’s saxophonist.

“It happened so quickly. I managed to throw myself into a corner,” he said, adding that he initially thought it was an earthquake.

It wasn’t immediately clear what caused the roof to collapse.

Jet Set issued a statement saying it was cooperating with authorities. “The loss of human life leaves us in a state of deep pain and dismay,” it said.

Manuel Olivo Ortiz, whose son attended the concert but did not return home, was among those anxiously waiting outside the club, which is known for its traditional parties where renowned national and international artists perform. “We’re holding on only to God,” Olivo said.

Also awaiting word was Massiel Cuevas, godmother of 22-year-old Darlenys Batista. “I’m waiting for her. She’s in there, I know she’s in there,” Cuevas said, firm in her belief that Batista would be pulled out alive.

President Abinader wrote on X that all rescue agencies are “working tirelessly” to help those affected.

“We deeply regret the tragedy that occurred at the Jet Set nightclub. We have been following the incident minute by minute since it occurred,” he wrote.

Abinader arrived at the scene and hugged those looking for friends and family, some with tears streaming down their faces.

“We have faith in God that we will rescue even more people alive,” he told reporters.

An official with a megaphone stood outside the club imploring the large crowd that had gathered to search for friends and relatives to give ambulances space.

“You have to cooperate with authorities, please,” he said. “We are removing people.”

At one hospital where the injured were taken, an official stood outside reading aloud the names of survivors as a crowd gathered around her and yelled out the names of their loved ones.

Meanwhile, dozens of people gathered at the National Institute of Forensic Pathology, which projected pictures of the victims so their loved ones could identify them.

Iran, wrongfooted by Donald Trump’s revelation that “direct talks” between the US and Iran on its nuclear programme are set to start in Oman on Saturday, insisted the talks would actually be in an indirect format, but added that the intentions of the negotiators were more important than the format.

Trump on Monday threw Tehran off guard by revealing the plan for the weekend talks and saying that if the talks failed Iran would be in “great danger”. There has been an unprecedented US military buildup across the Middle East in recent weeks, and Trump’s decision to make the talks public looks designed to press Iran to negotiate with urgency.

The US delegation to the talks will be led by Steve Witkoff, Trump’s special envoy to the Middle East, who has also been involved in talks with Russia over the Ukraine war; and the Iranian side by its foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi. Witkoff’s efforts to broker peace between Israel and Hamas and between Russia and Ukraine have so far failed.

Iran had in public been stalling about talks, saying simply that it was prepared for indirect talks with the US, but had not yet received a formal response from the US as to whether talks were going ahead. In a post on X issued some hours after Trump used an Oval Office press conference to reveal the agreement to stage weekend talks, Araghchi described the talks as an opportunity and a test. He insisted the ball was in the US’s court.

Speaking during a visit to Algiers, Araghchi elaborated that Iran wanted indirect talks. He said: “The form of negotiations is not important, whether they are direct or indirect. In my opinion, what is important is whether the negotiations are effective or ineffective, whether the parties are serious or not in the negotiations, the intentions of the parties in the negotiations, and the will to reach a solution. These are the criteria for action in any dialogue.”

He added Iran had not agreed on any formula that would allow indirect talks to convert into direct talks, but the US expects the talks to evolve into a direct negotiation. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, has vetoed direct talks in protest at US sanctions and in deference to hardliners that believe talks with the US over Tehran’s nuclear programme are a political trap.

The former Iranian president Hassan Rouhani welcomed the news of the talks and said if the 2015 nuclear deal was conducted indirectly it would have taken 20 years and not two to conclude.

Trump pulled out of that deal – known as the joint comprehensive plan of action – during his first term. That deal had offered Iran sanctions relief in exchange for limitations on its uranium enrichment activities.

Iran is waiting to see if Trump will be content if the talks focus on a new system of surveillance of its civil nuclear programme, not dissimilar to the treaty from which Trump withdrew the US in 2018; or instead the US will seek to dismantle Iran’s entire nuclear programme, a step that increasingly has been referred to as the Libya option. In December 2003, Libya’s longtime leader Muammar Gaddafi renounced the country’s weapons of mass destruction programme and allowed international inspectors to verify that Tripoli would follow through on its commitment.

Speaking alongside Trump in the Oval House on Monday, Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, advocated the Libya option, but Iran insists it will not abandon its civil nuclear programme. Israel ultimately does not trust Iran and expects the talks to fail. It then favours a US-Israeli military strike to destroy Iran’s nuclear sites.

But Witkoff, in an interview with Tucker Carlson three weeks ago, suggested Trump’s demands of Iran may be relatively modest. He said Trump, in his letter seeking talks with Iran, had said: “We should clear up the misconceptions. We should create a verification programme so that nobody worries about weaponisation of your nuclear material. And I’d like to get us to that place because the alternative is not a very good alternative. That’s a rough encapsulation of what was said.”

But Trump is under pressure to reach an agreement that is more watertight than the agreement reached by Barack Obama in 2015.

Previewing Iran’s position in the talks, Araghchi said: “Iran’s nuclear programme is completely peaceful and legitimate. UN security council resolution 2231 has just confirmed its legitimacy. There is no doubt about it internationally. If anyone has any questions or ambiguities, we are ready to clarify. We are confident that our nuclear programme is peaceful and we have no problem building more confidence into this unless it creates a limitation for us or is an obstacle to Iran’s goals.”

Iran has always insisted a fatwa exists against building nuclear weapons, but senior Iranian politicians, faced by a series of military reversals, have increasingly challenged that.

Iran also faces the threat that Trump has set a two-month deadline – expiring in May – for the talks to achieve an outcome. Iran, being a consummate negotiator, may test Trump’s patience, especially if Witkoff eventually demands its ballistic weapons programme and financial support for militant forces is also put on the agenda.

A February report by the International Atomic Energy Agency found that Iran’s stockpile of uranium enriched to 60% purity had increased sharply since December. Experts say that reaching 90% enrichment – the threshold for weapons-grade material – is relatively easy from that point. As of 8 February, Iran’s 60%-enriched uranium stockpile had grown by 92.5kg over the previous quarter, reaching 274.8kg. Iran says the stockpile is a response to US sanctions.

Donald Trump signed four executive orders on Tuesday aimed at reviving coal, the dirtiest fossil fuel that has long been in decline, and which substantially contributes to planet-heating greenhouse gas emissions and pollution.

Environmentalists expressed dismay at the news, saying that Trump was stuck in the past and wanted to make utility customers “pay more for yesterday’s energy”.

The US president is using emergency authority to allow some older coal-fired power plants scheduled for retirement to keep producing electricity.

The move, announced at a White House event on Tuesday afternoon, was described by White House officials as being in response to increased US power demand from growth in datacenters, artificial intelligence and electric cars.

Trump, standing in front of a group of mineers in hard hats, said he would sign an executive order “that slashes unnecessary regulations that targeted the beautiful, clean coal”.

He added that “we will rapidly expedite leases for coal mining on federal lands”, “streamline permitting”, “end the government bias against coal” and use the Defense Production Act “to turbocharge coal mining in America”.

The first order directed all departments and agencies to “end all discriminatory policies against the coal industry” including by ending the leasing moratorium on coal on federal land and accelerate all permitted funding for coal projects.

The second imposes a moratorium on the “unscientific and unrealistic policies enacted by the Biden administration” to protect coal power plants currently operating.

The third promotes “grid security and reliability” by ensuring that grid policies are focused on “secure and effective energy production” as opposed to “woke” policies that “discriminate against secure sources of power like coal and other fossil fuels”.

The fourth instructs the justice department to “vigorously pursue and investigate” the “unconstitutional” policies of “radically leftist states” that “discriminate against coal”.

Trump’s approach is in contrast to his predecessor Joe Biden, who in May last year brought in new climate rules requiring huge cuts in carbon pollution from coal-fired power plants that some experts said were “probably terminal” for of an industry that until recently provided most of America’s power, but is being driven out of the sector by cheaper renewables and gas.

Trump, a Republican, has long promised to boost what he calls “beautiful” coal to fire power plants and for other uses, but the industry has been in decline for decades.

The EPA under Trump last month announced a barrage of actions to weaken or repeal a host of pollution limits, including seeking to overturn the Biden-era plan to reduce the number coal plants.

The orders direct the interior secretary, Doug Burgum, to “acknowledge the end” of an Obama-era moratorium that paused coal leasing on federal lands and require federal agencies to rescind policies transitioning the nation away from coal production.

The orders also seek to promote coal and coal technology exports and to accelerate development of coal technologies.

Trump has long suggested that coal can help meet surging electricity demand from manufacturing and the massive datacenters needed for artificial intelligence.

“Nothing can destroy coal. Not the weather, not a bomb – nothing,” Trump told the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, by video link in January. “And we have more coal than anybody.”

Energy experts say any bump for coal under Trump is likely to be temporary because natural gas is cheaper and there is a durable market for renewable energy such as wind and solar power no matter who holds the White House.

Environmental groups were scathing about the orders, pointing out that coal is in steep decline in the US compared with the increasingly cheap option of renewable energy. This year, 93% of the power added to the US grid will be from solar, wind and batteries, according to forecasts from Trump’s own administration.

“What’s next, a mandate that Americans must commute by horse and buggy?” said Kit Kennedy, managing director of power at the Natural Resources Defense Council.

“Coal plants are old and dirty, uncompetitive and unreliable. The Trump administration is stuck in the past, trying to make utility customers pay more for yesterday’s energy. Instead, it should be doing all it can to build the electricity grid of the future.”

Clean energy, such as solar and wind, is now so affordable that 99% of the existing US coal fleet costs more just to keep running than to retire a coal plant and replace it with renewables, a 2023 Energy Innovation report found.

The UK government is developing a “murder prediction” programme which it hopes can use personal data of those known to the authorities to identify the people most likely to become killers.

Researchers are alleged to be using algorithms to analyse the information of thousands of people, including victims of crime, as they try to identify those at greatest risk of committing serious violent offences.

The scheme was originally called the “homicide prediction project”, but its name has been changed to “sharing data to improve risk assessment”. The Ministry of Justice hopes the project will help boost public safety but campaigners have called it “chilling and dystopian”.

The existence of the project was discovered by the pressure group Statewatch, and some of its workings uncovered through documents obtained by Freedom of Information requests.

Statewatch says data from people not convicted of any criminal offence will be used as part of the project, including personal information about self-harm and details relating to domestic abuse. Officials strongly deny this, insisting only data about people with at least one criminal conviction has been used.

The government says the project is at this stage for research only, but campaigners claim the data used would build bias into the predictions against minority-ethnic and poor people.

The MoJ says the scheme will “review offender characteristics that increase the risk of committing homicide” and “explore alternative and innovative data science techniques to risk assessment of homicide”.

The project would “provide evidence towards improving risk assessment of serious crime, and ultimately contribute to protecting the public via better analysis”, a spokesperson added.

The project, which was commissioned by the prime minister’s office when Rishi Sunak was in power, is using data about crime from various official sources including the Probation Service and data from Greater Manchester police before 2015.

The types of information processed includes names, dates of birth, gender and ethnicity, and a number that identifies people on the police national computer.

Statewatch’s claim that data from innocent people and those who have gone to the police for help will be used is based on a part of the data-sharing agreement between the MoJ and GMP.

A section marked: “type of personal data to be shared” by police with the government includes various types of criminal convictions, but also listed is the age a person first appeared as a victim, including for domestic violence, and the age a person was when they first had contact with police.

Also to be shared – and listed under “special categories of personal data” – are “health markers which are expected to have significant predictive power”, such as data relating to mental health, addiction, suicide and vulnerability, and self-harm, as well as disability.

Sofia Lyall, a researcher for Statewatch, said: “The Ministry of Justice’s attempt to build this murder prediction system is the latest chilling and dystopian example of the government’s intent to develop so-called crime ‘prediction’ systems.

“Time and again, research shows that algorithmic systems for ‘predicting’ crime are inherently flawed.

“This latest model, which uses data from our institutionally racist police and Home Office, will reinforce and magnify the structural discrimination underpinning the criminal legal system.

“Like other systems of its kind, it will code in bias towards racialised and low-income communities. Building an automated tool to profile people as violent criminals is deeply wrong, and using such sensitive data on mental health, addiction and disability is highly intrusive and alarming.”

A Ministry of Justice spokesperson said: “This project is being conducted for research purposes only. It has been designed using existing data held by HM Prison and Probation Service and police forces on convicted offenders to help us better understand the risk of people on probation going on to commit serious violence. A report will be published in due course.”

Officials say the prison and probation service already use risk assessment tools, and this project will see if adding in new data sources, from police and custody data, would improve risk assessment.

The UK government is developing a “murder prediction” programme which it hopes can use personal data of those known to the authorities to identify the people most likely to become killers.

Researchers are alleged to be using algorithms to analyse the information of thousands of people, including victims of crime, as they try to identify those at greatest risk of committing serious violent offences.

The scheme was originally called the “homicide prediction project”, but its name has been changed to “sharing data to improve risk assessment”. The Ministry of Justice hopes the project will help boost public safety but campaigners have called it “chilling and dystopian”.

The existence of the project was discovered by the pressure group Statewatch, and some of its workings uncovered through documents obtained by Freedom of Information requests.

Statewatch says data from people not convicted of any criminal offence will be used as part of the project, including personal information about self-harm and details relating to domestic abuse. Officials strongly deny this, insisting only data about people with at least one criminal conviction has been used.

The government says the project is at this stage for research only, but campaigners claim the data used would build bias into the predictions against minority-ethnic and poor people.

The MoJ says the scheme will “review offender characteristics that increase the risk of committing homicide” and “explore alternative and innovative data science techniques to risk assessment of homicide”.

The project would “provide evidence towards improving risk assessment of serious crime, and ultimately contribute to protecting the public via better analysis”, a spokesperson added.

The project, which was commissioned by the prime minister’s office when Rishi Sunak was in power, is using data about crime from various official sources including the Probation Service and data from Greater Manchester police before 2015.

The types of information processed includes names, dates of birth, gender and ethnicity, and a number that identifies people on the police national computer.

Statewatch’s claim that data from innocent people and those who have gone to the police for help will be used is based on a part of the data-sharing agreement between the MoJ and GMP.

A section marked: “type of personal data to be shared” by police with the government includes various types of criminal convictions, but also listed is the age a person first appeared as a victim, including for domestic violence, and the age a person was when they first had contact with police.

Also to be shared – and listed under “special categories of personal data” – are “health markers which are expected to have significant predictive power”, such as data relating to mental health, addiction, suicide and vulnerability, and self-harm, as well as disability.

Sofia Lyall, a researcher for Statewatch, said: “The Ministry of Justice’s attempt to build this murder prediction system is the latest chilling and dystopian example of the government’s intent to develop so-called crime ‘prediction’ systems.

“Time and again, research shows that algorithmic systems for ‘predicting’ crime are inherently flawed.

“This latest model, which uses data from our institutionally racist police and Home Office, will reinforce and magnify the structural discrimination underpinning the criminal legal system.

“Like other systems of its kind, it will code in bias towards racialised and low-income communities. Building an automated tool to profile people as violent criminals is deeply wrong, and using such sensitive data on mental health, addiction and disability is highly intrusive and alarming.”

A Ministry of Justice spokesperson said: “This project is being conducted for research purposes only. It has been designed using existing data held by HM Prison and Probation Service and police forces on convicted offenders to help us better understand the risk of people on probation going on to commit serious violence. A report will be published in due course.”

Officials say the prison and probation service already use risk assessment tools, and this project will see if adding in new data sources, from police and custody data, would improve risk assessment.

The US supreme court has handed Donald Trump a reprieve from a judge’s ruling that his administration must rehire 16,000 probationary workers fired in its purge of the federal bureaucracy.

A day after ruling in the White House’s favor to allow the continued deportation of alleged Venezuelan gang members, the court gave the White House a less clear-cut victory in halting the order by a California court that dismissed workers from six government agencies must be rehired.

The court struck down by a 7-2 majority last month’s ruling by US district court judge William Alsup because non-profit groups who had sued on behalf of the fired workers had no legal standing.

It did not rule on the firings themselves, which affected probationary workers in the Pentagon, the treasury, and the departments of energy, agriculture, interior and veterans affairs.

“The district court’s injunction was based solely on the allegations of the nine non-profit-organization plaintiffs in this case,” the unsigned ruling read. “But under established law, those allegations are presently insufficient to support the organizations’ standing. This order does not address the claims of the other plaintiffs, which did not form the basis of the district court’s preliminary injunction.”

Two of the court’s three liberal justices, Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson, dissented.

The victory, though limited, is likely to embolden the Trump administration in the belief that the spate of legal reverses it has faced since taking office can be eventually overturned in the supreme court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, due largely to three rightwing judges Trump nominated to the bench during his first presidency.

The extent of Tuesday’s victory was qualified by the fact that it does not affect a separate order by a judge in Maryland applying to the same agencies plus several others. Judge James Bredar of the Maryland federal district court ordered the administration to reinstate workers in response to a case brought by 19 states and the government of Washington DC.

In the California ruling, the court heard how staff were informed by a templated email from the office of personnel management that they were losing their jobs for performance-related reasons. “The Agency finds, based on your performance, that you have not demonstrated that your further employment at the Agency would be in the public interest,” the email said.

While accepting that workforce reductions were acceptable if carried out “correctly under the law”, Alsup said workers had been fired for bogus reasons.

“It is sad, a sad day when our government would fire some good employee, and say it was based on performance, when they know good and well, that’s a lie,” he said.

In filings to the supreme court, the acting solicitor general, Sarah Harris, argued that Alsup had exceeded his powers.

“The court’s extraordinary reinstatement order violates the separation of powers, arrogating to a single district court the executive branch’s powers of personnel management on the flimsiest of grounds and the hastiest of timelines,” she wrote. “That is no way to run a government. This court should stop the ongoing assault on the constitutional structure before further damage is wrought.”

Ukrainian forces have captured two Chinese nationals fighting with the Russian army in the eastern Donetsk region, according to Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

The Ukrainian president said they were two of many more Chinese members of the Russian armed forces, and he accused the Kremlin of trying to involve Beijing in the conflict “directly or indirectly”.

Zelenskyy said he would ask his foreign minister “to immediately contact Beijing and clarify how China intends to respond to this”, though it was not clear if the captured soldiers had been sent at the behest of their government or were individuals who had chosen for themselves to sign up.

A few hundred Chinese nationals are thought to have travelled to fight as mercenaries with the Russian army alongside others from Nepal and central Asian countries. Their status appears to be different to that of the 11,000 soldiers from North Korea who were deployed on the frontline after a political agreement between Pyongyang and Moscow.

Zelenskyy said identity documents, bank cards and personal data were found in the possession of the two men captured, and that his country’s domestic security agency, the SBU, was “verifying all the facts”.

He argued that the capture of the two men indicated that Russia had no interest in agreeing to a ceasefire in US-brokered peace negotiations, which have made only limited progress over the past two months.

“Russia’s involvement of China, along with other countries, whether directly or indirectly, in this war in Europe is a clear signal that Putin intends to do anything but end the war. He is looking for ways to continue fighting,” Zelenskyy wrote on social media.

He said the development “definitely requires a response” from the US, Europe and “all those around the world who want peace”. There was no immediate reaction from Moscow or Beijing.

Below his post on X, Zelenskyy released a short video apparently showing a captured soldier, his hands tied, speaking in Mandarin. Prisoners of war are protected from public curiosity according to the Geneva conventions and should not have their images published online.

China says it is a neutral party in the conflict. Russia makes heavy use of Chinese-made components in its arms industry, and Ukraine does so to some extent. Both sides make significant use of Mavic drones from the Chinese manufacturer DJI, though Kyiv is trying to reduce its dependence on products from Beijing.

Western sources said it was early to reach definitive conclusions about the captured individuals. But one official said that so far “we’re not seeing evidence of state sponsorship here”, indicating an initial belief that the captured soldiers had acted on their own initiative.

Individuals from about 70 countries, including the US, UK and other European countries, have fought with Ukraine’s military. Some units, such as the Azov brigade, have actively sought to recruit foreigners to bolster forces depleted after more than three years of war.

A prominent American academic has been detained in Thailand after being charged with insulting the monarchy, a rare case in which a foreign national has fallen foul of the country’s strict lese-majesty law.

Paul Chambers, who specialises in civil-military relations and democratisation in south-east Asia, was denied bail on Tuesday and is being held at Phitsanulok provincial prison in northern Thailand, his lawyers said.

He has been charged under section 112 of the Thai criminal code, which contains the country’s lese-majesty law, and section 14 of the Computer Crimes Act.

The charges relate to a webinar invitation titled “Thailand’s 2024 Military and Police Reshuffles: What Do They Mean?”. It was published in October 2024, on the website of the ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute, a research centre based in Singapore.

“[Chambers] denied all charges. He neither wrote nor published the blurb on the website,” said Akarachai Chaimaneekarakate, of Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, which represents Chambers. Chambers plans to appeal against the court’s decision to deny bail, Akarachai added.

Thailand has one of the world’s most strict lese-majesty laws, under which criticism of the royal family can lead to 15 years in jail on a single charge.

If a person faces multiple cases, they can be sentenced to decades in prison: in January 2024 a man was sentenced to 50 years over his comments about the royal family.

At least 277 people have been charged under the law since authorities cracked down on youth-led mass protests that began in July 2020. People have been prosecuted for political speeches, wearing clothes deemed to be impersonating the royals, or for being involved in the sale of satirical cartoons.

It is rare for a foreign national to be charged under the lese-majesty law, however.

Chambers, who is a well-known academic, is a lecturer at Naresuan University in northern Thailand, and a visiting fellow at the ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute.

According to a summary shared by Chambers’ lawyers, an official from the police inquiry said the information on the blurb was false, “as the king did not exercise powers to restructure the military or appoint high-ranking national security officials. To say otherwise would be an insult to the king and would tarnish the king’s reputation and dignity”.

Sunai Phasuk, a senior researcher on Thailand in Human Rights Watch’s Asia division, said lese-majesty prosecutions were “a serious blot” on Thailand’s human rights record.

“The abusive use of the royal insult law in Thailand has reached a new height of absurdity when Paul Chambers, a prominent Thai studies scholar, is charged with lese-majesty and cybercrime offences for commenting about the monarchy and the military. Academic freedom and free speech in Thailand will suffer devastating blows if this baseless prosecution proceeds,” Sunai said.

The third season of The White Lotus may be over, but the drama continues for the hit HBO show. In a new interview, creator Mike White hit back at composer Cristóbal Tapia de Veer, who told the New York Times last week that he is quitting the show.

De Veer, who composed the show’s score and viral title sequence stylized for each of the three seasons’ locations, told the Times that he would not return for the show’s fourth season following creative differences with White. “We already had our last fight for ever, I think,” he said of White. “He was just saying no to anything.”

Speaking with Howard Stern on Tuesday following the season finale, White, who also serves as the show’s sole writer and director, disputed de Veer’s characterization of the split. “I honestly don’t know what happened, except now I’m reading his interviews because he decides to do some PR campaign about him leaving the show,” he said. “I don’t think he respected me. He wants people to know that he’s edgy and dark and I’m, I don’t know, like I watch reality TV.”

“We never really even fought. He says we feuded,” he continued. “I don’t think I ever had a fight with him – except for maybe some emails. It was basically me giving him notes. I don’t think he liked to go through the process of getting notes from me, or wanting revisions, because he didn’t respect me. I knew he wasn’t a team player and that he wanted to do it his way. I was thrown that he would go to the New York Times to shit on me and the show three days before the finale. It was kind of a bitch move.”

De Veer’s work has been acclaimed by fans and critics: he won three Emmys for The White Lotus, including outstanding theme for season one. The season two version of the theme song became a club hit, remixed by artists such as Tiësto and Sofi Tukker.

White added that he and de Veer had had a rocky relationship during the first two seasons of the black dramedy, which has netted HBO 15 Emmys to date. “By the time the third season came around, he’d won Emmys and he had his song go viral, he didn’t want to go through the process with me, he didn’t want to go to sessions,” he told Stern. “He would always look at me with this contemptuous smirk on his face like he thought I was a chimp or something … he’s definitely making a big deal out of a creative difference.”

Stern replied: “You’re the genius behind this thing. Why quit a hit show because you got some notes and some differences? Just work it out.”

White responded: “He is very talented. [But] I’ve never kissed somebody’s ass so hard to just get him to – to lead that horse to water. Have fun with whatever you’re doing next.”

In the Times story, de Veer said: “Maybe I was being unprofessional, and for sure Mike feels that I was always unprofessional to him because I didn’t give him what he wanted. But what I gave him did this, you know – did those Emmys, people going crazy … That is the main thing that I’m most happy about – it was worth all the tension and almost forcing the music into the show, in a way, because I didn’t have that many allies in there.”

At issue appears to be the third season’s title sequence, which proved more divisive with fans – some expressed disappointment over the absence of the distinctive “ooh-loo-loo-loo” vocal ululation of the previous versions. According to de Veer, he attempted to persuade producers to assuage critics by releasing a full version of the theme that included it, but White refused.

“I texted the producer and I told him that it would be great to, at some point, give them the longer version with the ooh-loo-loo-loos, because people will explode if they realize that it was going there anyway,” he said. “He thought it was a good idea. But then Mike cut that – he wasn’t happy about that.”

Though the third season and its conclusion drew mixed critical reviews, The White Lotus has become a juggernaut for HBO. Sunday’s season finale drew 6.2 million viewers, breaking a series record set the week before by 30%.