India and Pakistan have accused each other of “violations” hours after the two nations said they had agreed to a ceasefire following days of cross-border military strikes.

After sounds of explosions were heard in Indian-administered Kashmir, India’s Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri said there had been “repeated violations of the understanding we arrived at”.

A short while later, Pakistan’s foreign ministry said it remained “committed to faithful implementation of a ceasefire…notwithstanding the violations being committed by India in some areas”.

The fighting between India and Pakistan over the last four days has been the worst military confrontation between the two rivals in decades.

The use of drones, missiles and artillery started when India struck targets in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir in response to a deadly militant attack in Pahalgam last month. Pakistan had denied any involvement.

After four days of cross-border strikes, India and Pakistan said they had agreed on a full and immediate ceasfire.

US President Donald Trump announced the news on his Truth Social Platform on Saturday morning. He said it had been brokered by the US.

Pakistan’s Foreign Minister later confirmed the agreement had been reached by the two countries, adding that “three dozen countries” were involved in the diplomacy.

But hours after the announcement, residents – and BBC reporters – in the main Indian-administered Kashmiri cities of Srinagar and Jammu reported hearing the sounds of explosions and seeing flashes in the sky.

Indian Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri said: “For the last few hours, there have been repeated violations of the understanding we arrived at earlier this evening.

“This is a breach of the understanding arrived at earlier today.”

Misri said India’s armed forces was “giving an appropriate response” and he concluded his briefing by “calling upon Pakistan to address these violations”.

In response, a spokesman for Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said: “Pakistan remains committed to faithful implementation of ceasefire between Pakistan and India, announced earlier today.

“Notwithstanding the violations being committed by India in some areas, our forces are handling the situation with responsibility and restraint.

“We believe that any issues in smooth implementation of the ceasefire should be addressed through communication at appropriate levels.

“The troops on ground should also exercise restraint.”

Kashmir is claimed in full by India and Pakistan, but administered only in part by each since they were partitioned following independence from Britain in 1947.

It has been a flashpoint between the two nuclear-armed nations and they have fought two wars over it.

Confirming the ceasefire, India’s external affairs minister S Jaishankar said the two nations had “worked out an understanding on stoppage of firing and military action”.

“India has consistently maintained a firm and uncompromising stance against terrorism in all its forms and manifestations. It will continue to do so,” he added.

Later, in an address to the nation, Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif said the ceasefire had been reached “for the benefit of everybody”.

Speaking after the ceasefire announcement, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said India and Pakistan had agreed to start talks on a broad set of issues at a neutral site.

He said he and US Vice-President JD Vance had spent 48 hours with senior Indian and Pakistani officials, including their respective Prime Ministers Narendra Modi and Shehbaz Sharif.

UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres said he welcomed “all efforts to de-escalate the conflict”.

UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said Britain has been “engaged” in talks for “some days”, with Foreign Secretary David Lammy speaking to both sides.

“I’m pleased to see today that there’s a ceasefire,” Sir Keir said. “The task now is to make sure that that is enduring and is lasting.”

The recent fighting came after two weeks of tension following the killing of 26 tourists in the resort town of Pahalgam.

Survivors of the 22 April attack in Indian-administered Kashmir, which killed 25 Indians and one Nepali national, said the militants were singling out Hindu men.

The Indian defence ministry said its strikes this week were part of a “commitment” to hold “accountable” those responsible for the attack. Pakistan described them as “unprovoked”.

Pakistan said Indian air strikes and cross-border fire since Wednesday had killed 36 people in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir, while India’s army reported at least 21 civilians deaths from Pakistani shelling.

Fighting intensified overnight on Friday, with both countries accusing each other of targeting airbases and other military sites.

The US-China trade war could be letting up, with the world’s two largest economies beginning talks in Switzerland.

Top trade officials from both sides met on Saturday in the first high-level meeting since US President Donald Trump hit China with tariffs in January.

Beijing retaliated immediately and a tense stand-off ensued as the two countries heaped levies on each other. New US tariffs on Chinese imports stand at 145%, and some US exports to China face duties of 125%.

There have been weeks of stern, and sometimes fiery, rhetoric where each side sought to paint the other as the more desperate party.

And yet this weekend they face each other over the negotiating table.

So why now?

Despite multiple rounds of tit-for-tat tariffs, both sides have been sending signals that they want to break the deadlock. Except it wasn’t clear who would blink first.

“Neither side wants to appear to be backing down,” said Stephen Olson, senior visiting fellow at Singapore’s ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute and a former US trade negotiator.

“The talks are taking place now because both countries have judged that they can move forward without appearing to have caved in to the other side.”

Still, China’s foreign ministry spokesperson Lin Jian emphasised on Wednesday that “the talks are being held at the request of the US”.

And the commerce ministry framed it as a favour to Washington, saying it was answering the “calls of US businesses and consumers”.

The Trump administration, however, claims it’s Chinese officials who “want to do business very much” because “their economy is collapsing”.

“They said we initiated? Well, I think they ought to go back and study their files,” Trump said at the White House on Wednesday.

But as the talks drew closer, the president struck a more diplomatic note: “We can all play games. Who made the first call, who didn’t make the – it doesn’t matter,” he told reporters on Thursday. “It only matters what happens in that room.”

The timing is also key for Beijing because it’s during Xi’s visit to Moscow. He was a guest of honour on Friday at Moscow’s Victory Day parade to commemorate the 80th anniversary of the World War Two victory over Nazi Germany.

Xi stood alongside leaders from across the Global South – a reminder to Trump’s administration that China not only has other options for trade, but it is also presenting itself as an alternative global leader.

This allows Beijing to project strength even as it heads to the negotiating table.

Trump insists that the tariffs will make America stronger, and Beijing has vowed to “fight till the end”- but the fact is the levies are hurting both countries.

Factory output in China has taken a hit, according to government data. Manufacturing activity in April dipped to the lowest level since December 2023. And a survey by news outlet Caixin this week showed that services activity has reached a seven-month low.

The BBC found that Chinese exporters have been reeling from the steep tariffs, with stock piling up in warehouses, even as they strike a defiant note and look for markets beyond the US.

“I think [China] realises that a deal is better than no deal,” says Bert Hofman, a professor at the East Asian Institute in National University Singapore.

“So they’ve taken a pragmatic view and said, ‘OK, well we need to get these talks going.'”

And so with the major May Day holiday in China over, officials in Beijing have decided the time is right to talk.

On the other side, the uncertainty caused by tariffs led to the US economy contracting for the first time in three years.

And industries that have long depended on Chinese-made goods are especially worried. A Los Angeles toy company owner told the BBC that they were “looking at the total implosion of the supply chain”.

Trump himself has acknowledged that US consumers will feel the sting.

American children may “have two dolls instead of 30 dolls”, he said at a cabinet meeting this month, “and maybe the two dolls will cost a couple bucks more than they would normally”.

Trump’s approval ratings have also slid over fears of inflation and a possible recession, with more than 60% of Americans saying he was focusing too much on tariffs.

“Both countries are feeling pressure to provide a bit of reassurance to increasingly nervous markets, businesses, and domestic constituencies,” Mr Olson says.

“A couple of days of meetings in Geneva will serve that purpose.”

While the talks have been met with optimism, a deal may take a while to materialise.

The talks will mostly be about “touching base”, Mr Hofman said, adding that this could look like an “exchange of positions” and, if things go well, “an agenda [will be] set for future talks”.

The negotiations on the whole are expected to take months, much like what happened during Trump’s first term.

After nearly two years of tit-for-tat tariffs, the US and China signed a “phase one” deal in early 2020 to suspend or reduce some levies. Even then, it did not include thornier issues, such as Chinese government subsidies for key industries or a timeline for scrapping the remaining tariffs.

In fact, many of them stayed in place through Joe Biden’s presidency, and Trump’s latest tariffs add to those older levies.

What could emerge this time is a “phase one deal on steroids”, Mr Olson said: that is, it would go beyond the earlier deal and try to address flashpoints. There are many, from the illegal fentanyl trade which Washington wants China to crack down harder on to Beijing’s relationship with Moscow.

But all of that is far down the line, experts warn.

“The systemic frictions that bedevil the US-China trade relationship will not be solved any time soon,” Mr Olson adds.

“Geneva will only produce anodyne statements about ‘frank dialogues’ and the desire to keep talking.”

Part of a Soviet-era spacecraft is likely to have re-entered the Earth’s atmosphere after being stuck in orbit for more than half a century, the European Space Agency said.

Kosmos 482, which launched in 1972 on a mission to Venus, never made it out of Earth’s orbit and instead broke into four pieces that have been circling the planet for more than five decades.

The EU Space Surveillance and Tracking centre (SST) said one fragment – believed to be the lander – “most likely” re-entered the atmosphere at about 06:16 GMT (07:16 BST) on Saturday.

It is unclear whether the object fell to the ground or burned up in the atmosphere.

It is also unclear exactly where the object re-entered the atmosphere.

While there is much experts do not know about the object’s re-entry, 70% of Earth is covered by sea so it is unlikely to have caused significant damage.

“It’s much more likely that you win the lottery than that you get impacted by this piece of space debris,” Stijn Lemmens, a senior analyst at the European Space Agency, said.

Kosmos 482’s lander capsule was built to survive the extreme heat and pressure of Venus’s atmosphere, meaning it had a robust heat shield and durable structure.

This is why experts think it may have survived an uncontrolled descent through Earth’s atmosphere.

However, Kosmos 482’s parachute system, originally intended to slow the lander’s descent towards Venus, is likely to have degraded after more than 50 years in space.

Mr Lemmens explained that the “re-entry of human-made objects into Earth’s atmosphere occurs quite frequently”. He said it happens weekly for bigger spacecraft and daily for smaller ones.

Objects typically burn up in the earth’s atmosphere before they reach the ground.

China’s Long March 5B booster re-entered over the Indian Ocean in 2022, and the Tiangong-1 space station mostly burned up over the Pacific in 2018.

Kosmos 482 is now being closely tracked by international space agencies.

Mr Lemmens said that future spacecraft “should be designed in such a way that they can take themselves out of orbit safely, preferably by doing controlled re-entries”.

This would allow for precise predictions of landing locations, reducing the risk of any debris impacting populated areas and protecting people and property while “managing the environmental impact of space debris”.

Taylor Swift’s representatives have told the BBC she is being brought into a legal row between Justin Baldoni and Blake Lively to create “tabloid clickbait”.

The 35-year-old singer was summoned to a US court after it was alleged she encouraged Baldoni to accept script re-writes by Lively for It Ends With Us, a film that both starred in and is the centre of a sexual harassment case.

Baldoni says he was invited to Lively’s New York home in 2023 to discuss script changes, where Lively’s husband, Ryan Reynolds, and Swift were there to serve as her “dragons”.

Representatives for Swift said “she was not involved in any casting or creative decision” and “never saw an edit or made any notes on the film”.

Lively, 37, sued Baldoni, 41, in December 2024, accusing him of sexual harassment and a smear campaign. Baldoni is counter-suing Lively and her husband, the actor Ryan Reynolds, on claims of civil extortion, defamation and invasion of privacy.

Lively and Baldoni have been locked in a dispute since the film, which is an adaption of a Colleen Hoover novel, was released last summer.

According to Baldoni, there were tensions over the 2023 re-write of the scene, at which he was surprised to find Reynolds and Swift present.

He alleges Lively wrote in a text to him: “If you ever get around to watching Game of Thrones, you’ll appreciate that I’m Khaleesi, and like her, I happen to have a few dragons. For better or worse, but usually better. Because my dragons also protect those I fight for.”

Baldoni says he responded supportively, writing: “I really love what you did. It really does help a lot. Makes it so much more fun and interesting. (And I would have felt that way without Ryan and Taylor).

“You really are a talent across the board. Really excited and grateful to do this together.”

It is also alleged that Swift was involved in the casting of Isabela Ferrer in the film, who played a younger version of Lively’s character, Lily Bloom.

Speaking at the New York premiere of It Ends With Us, Ferrer said: “She [Taylor Swift] was a helpful part of the audition, which I found out later when I got it, and that rocked my world.”

But Swift’s representatives said the only involvement she had in the film was permitting the use of her song, My Tears Ricochet, noting that she was among 20 artists featured in the film.

Swift “never set foot on the set of this movie, she was not involved in any casting or creative decisions, she did not score the film, [and] she never saw an edit or made any notes on the film”, they said.

They added that Swift did not see It Ends With Us until “weeks after its release” as she was “travelling around the globe” on tour at the time.

The popstar’s spokespeople argued that the subpoena “designed to use Taylor Swift’s name to draw public interest by creating tabloid clickbait instead of focusing on the facts of the case”.

European leaders have urged Russia to agree to an unconditional 30-day ceasefire with Ukraine starting on Monday.

The call was issued at a meeting of the “coalition of the willing” in Kyiv. The leaders of France, Germany, the UK and Poland were hosted by Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky, while others joined remotely.

They made the announcement after discussing the plan by phone with US President Donald Trump – who initially mooted an unconditional ceasefire. The leaders threatened Russia with “massive” sanctions if it does not comply.

The Kremlin said it was considering the proposal but would not respond to pressure.

After Saturday’s meeting in Kyiv, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer said: “All of us here together with the US are calling [Russian President Vladimir] Putin out. If he is serious about peace, then he has a chance to show it.”

He was speaking alongside Zelensky, French President Emmanuel Macron, Polish PM Donald Tusk and the new German Chancellor Friedrich Merz.

Zelensky said: “Thank you all for standing with us. Today we will focus on how to build and guarantee real and lasting security.”

Russia has so far insisted that before considering a ceasefire, the West must first halt its military aid to Ukraine.

However, Zelenksy said that the ceasefire should be unconditional.

“Attempts to put forward any conditions would be evidence of an intention to prolong the war and undermine diplomacy,” he added.

Macron said the planned truce would be monitored mainly by the US, with help from European countries. He said in the event of violation, “massive sanctions would be prepared and co-ordinated between Europeans and Americans”.

Merz said the war – which began with the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 – was “solely a war of aggression by Russia, in violation of international law”.

The Kyiv meeting was a symbolic response to the more than 20 leaders who joined Putin in Moscow a day earlier.

Other leaders who joined the Kyiv meeting remotely included Italy’s Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, Canadian PM Mark Carney, President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen, and Mark Rutte, the secretary-general of Nato.

• Ukraine in maps: Tracking the war with Russia
• Putin leads Victory Day celebration in Moscow

A 30-hour ceasefire, called on Friday by Putin to mark Russia’s Victory Day, is due to end later on Saturday. It has seen a decrease in fighting but both sides have accused the other of breaches.

The coalition of the willing was formed to reinforce any eventual peace agreement with security guarantees, including the possibility of placing troops in Ukraine.

Trump earlier reiterated the call for an unconditional 30-day ceasefire after a phone call with Zelensky.

“If the ceasefire is not respected, the US and its partners will impose further sanctions,” he wrote on social media.

In response, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov accused the Europeans of making contradictory statements that “are generally confrontational in nature rather than aimed at trying to revive our relations”.

Russian state media later quoted Peskov as saying: “We have to think this through. But trying to pressure us is quite useless.”

Reports of Russian attacks across Ukraine continue, despite Russia’s claims of a temporary ceasefire.

In the northern Sumy region, an 85-year-old woman was killed, three others were injured, 19 residential homes and 10 other buildings were destroyed or damaged, Ukrainian police said.

In Kostyantynivka, eastern Donetsk region, one person was injured and two apartment blocks caught fire after Russian attacks, Ukrainian state emergency service DSNS said.

And in the southern city of Kherson, a 58-year-old local resident sought medical help after being attacked by a Russian drone carrying explosives, the regional administration said.

Being sealed off from the world in the conclave to choose the new Pope was “immensely peaceful”, England and Wales’s most senior Roman Catholic has told the BBC.

Cardinal Vincent Nichols, leader of the Roman Catholic Church in England and Wales, was one of 133 cardinals who were shut into the Vatican’s Sistine Chapel and later elected Pope Leo XIV on Thursday.

He told BBC Breakfast on Saturday that nobody in the highly secretive meeting was saying who to vote for or who to not vote for, adding that there was “no rancour” or “politicking” among the cardinals.

“It was a much calmer process than that and I found it actually a rather wonderful experience,” he added.

Conclaves have taken place in the Sistine Chapel since the 15th Century and cardinals must have no communication with the outside world until a new Pope is elected. The recent conclave came after the death of Pope Francis on 21 April.

Cardinal Nichols, the Archbishop of Westminster, said that his mobile phone was taken off him, adding that he found he had “more time on my hands just to be prayerful, just to reflect, just to be still, rather than being constantly agitated… or prompted by what might be coming in” on his phone.

“For me, one of the experiences of these last few days was to learn a bit of patience, to just take this step by step,” he said.

“There was a calmness, a bit of solemnity,” he continued, adding that everyone he spoke to when in it was “peaceful and just wanting to do this well”.

At 79 years old, Cardinal Nichols was one of the oldest cardinals in the conclave as they must be under 80 to be eligible to vote.

There is no timescale on how long it takes for a conclave to elect a new Pope, with previous ones in 2005 and 2013 lasting two days. The conclave that elected Pope Leo lasted for one day.

“I think it was a short conclave in part because Pope Francis left us with a good inheritance,” the cardinal said.

“He left a college of cardinals who were dedicated, who had this desire for the church to be more missionary, and that led us forward actually very, very easily to the decision that we made.”

Pope Leo will be formally inaugurated at a mass in St Peter’s Square on 18 May, which delegations from countries around the world will attend.

The Duke of Edinburgh, Prince Edward, will attend on behalf of King Charles, Buckingham Palace confirmed on Saturday.

Speaking about the new Pope, Cardinal Nichols said Pope Leo is “very decisive” in a “quiet way”, adding that he has seen him “make decisions which disappoint people but don’t destroy them”.

“A good thing about a pope is if he’s able to say, ‘No’, to you when he thinks something is not right and then give you a hug so you don’t go away offended, and I think he’s got that ability to do both those things, which is very important.”

Catholicism has rarely been more prominent in US politics as the Trump administration openly embraces advisers and officials who proudly say faith has shaped their views.

But any jubilation on the American Make America Great Again right about the new Pope this week quickly dissipated as key voices from Donald Trump’s Maga movement came to a disappointed conclusion: the first American Pope does not appear to be “America first”.

Little is known about the political leanings of Pope Leo XIV, born Robert Francis Prevost in Chicago.

He has voiced concerns for the poor and immigrants, chosen a name that may reference more liberal church leadership, and he appears to have both supported the liberal-leaning Pope Francis and criticised the US president’s policies on social media.

But the president so far has said only that Leo’s election was a “great honour” for the US. Still, some of Trump’s most prominent supporters were quick to attack Pope Leo, lambasting him as a possible challenge to Trump and on the perception that he will follow Pope Francis in areas like immigration.

“I mean it’s kind of jaw-dropping,” Trump’s former chief strategist Steve Bannon told the BBC on Friday, speaking of Leo’s election.

“It is shocking to me that a guy could be selected to be the Pope that had had the Twitter feed and the statements he’s had against American senior politicians,” said Bannon, a hard-right Trump loyalist, practising Catholic and former altar boy.

And he predicted that there’s “definitely going to be friction” between Leo and Trump.

• Pope Leo XIV calls Church ‘a beacon to illuminate dark nights’ in first Mass
• Pope’s first speech in full
• Who is Robert Prevost, the new Pope Leo XIV?

The Pope’s brother, John Prevost, told The New York Times that he thinks his brother would voice his disagreements with the president.

“I know he’s not happy with what’s going on with immigration,” he said. “I know that for a fact. How far he’ll go with it is only one’s guess, but he won’t just sit back. I don’t think he’ll be the silent one.”

Recent survey data shows that about 20% of Americans identify as Catholic, according to the non-partisan Pew Research Center.

About 53% identify with or lean towards the Republican Party, though there’s plenty of nuance, too: America’s two Catholic presidents, John F Kennedy and Joe Biden, were both Democrats. And nearly two-thirds of US Catholics believe abortion should be legal in all or most circumstances – a departure from the Church’s current stance.

US Catholics also broadly supported Pope Francis: 78% of those surveyed in February viewed him favorably, including a majority of Catholic Republicans.

A number of Catholics in the new Pope’s home city of Chicago on Thursday aired disappointment with President Trump and said they hoped Pope Leo XIV would follow the path of his predecessor.

“We hope he’ll continue with Francis’s agenda going forward,” said Rick Stevens, a Catholic deacon from New Jersey who happened to be visiting Chicago when he heard the news.

The US Conference of Catholic Bishops, which leads and coordinates US Catholic activities, celebrated Pope Leo’s election and the message it sends.

“Certainly, we rejoice that a son of this nation has been chosen by the cardinals, but we recognise that he now belongs to all Catholics and to all people of good will,” the conference said in a statement. “His words advocating peace, unity, and missionary activity already indicate a path forward.”

Though Maga supporters represent a small subset of US Catholics, it’s one with outsized access to conservative media and Trump’s ear.

On Bannon’s War Room podcast – known for its hard-right, pro-Trump bent – one guest after another heaped criticism on the new Pope.

“This guy has been massively embraced by the liberals and the progressives,” said Ben Harnwell, a journalist who led Bannon’s efforts to establish what he calls a “gladiator school” for the “Judeo-Christian West” outside of Rome.

“He is one of their own… he has [Pope] Francis’s DNA in him,” Harnwell said.

Jack Posobiec, another Maga commentator dialing in from Rome, was blunt: “This choice of the American cardinal was done as a response, as a message to President Trump.”

The full picture of what led to Pope Leo’s selection on Thursday is still emerging and church decisions don’t map neatly onto US politics. Still, watchers around the world have pored over Pope Leo’s social media profiles in search of clues about his leanings and beliefs.

An X account under his name, with tweets going as far back as 2015, shares links to criticism of Trump’s approach to immigration and hints at other political views, such as stricter gun control.

In February, the account sharply rebuked the US vice-president by posting a link to an opinion piece titled “JD Vance is wrong: Jesus doesn’t ask us to rank our love for others”.

The account also posted a link to a letter from Pope Francis after he clashed with Vance over church doctrine and immigration. Vance – a Catholic convert – had given an interview in defence of the Trump administration’s immigration policies.

Vance has routinely invoked his faith in defense of the administration, particularly immigration policies, which the White House has said put “America first”.

“There is a Christian concept that you love your family and then you love your neighbour, and then you love your community, and then you love your fellow citizens, and then after that, prioritise the rest of the world. A lot of the far left has completely inverted that,” Vance told Fox News.

• What is behind the new Pope’s chosen name, Leo?
• Reaction: ‘I flipped out, I said no way!’ – Chicago celebrates hometown Pope
• Analysis: Continuity the key for Pope seen as unifier in the Church

But US Democrats were not spared either on the account, which has more than a decade of posts. They appear to support Catholic employers who refuse to pay for contraceptives via employee health plans, and following the 2016 US presidential election, one post links to an article accusing Democrat Hillary Clinton of ignoring pro-life Catholic voters.

The BBC asked the Vatican to confirm the account was Leo’s, but did not receive a response.

Vice-President Vance told conservative broadcaster Hugh Hewitt on Friday: “I try not to play the politicisation of the Pope game.

“I’m sure he’s going to say a lot of things that I love. I’m sure he’ll say some things that I disagree with, but I’ll continue to pray for him and the Church despite it all and through it all, and that’ll be the way that I handle it.”

The new Pope’s LGBTQ views are also unclear, but some groups, including the conservative College of Cardinals, believe he may be less supportive than Pope Francis.

Matt Walsh, a commentator with the conservative Daily Wire, wrote: “There are some good signs and bad signs with this new Pope. I want to see what he actually does with his papacy before I pass any kind of judgment.”

But some of the most dedicated Maga supporters already have made up their minds.

Laura Loomer, a far-right influencer who has Trump’s ear, swaying the president on top personnel decisions, called the new Pope “anti-Trump, anti-Maga, pro-open Borders, and a total Marxist like Pope Francis”.

Bannon, who had suggested Leo as a dark horse for the papacy, predicted tensions between the White House and Vatican – and said they could even tear apart American Catholics.

“Remember, President Trump was not shy about taking a shot at Pope Francis,” he said.

“So if this Pope – which he will do – tries to come between President Trump and his implementation of the mass deportation programme, I would stand by.”

Rohit Sharma’s abrupt retirement from Test cricket has jolted Indian fans, leaving the team without its captain and most seasoned opener just weeks before a pivotal five-Test series starts in England.

India haven’t won a Test rubber in England since 2007. To lose their captain and most experienced opening batter will compel a rethink of selection strategy for the tour.

A charismatic leader and dashing batter, Sharma is widely regarded as a modern day great.

His stats in Test cricket – 4,301 runs in 67 matches at an average of 40.57 are not imposing.

But the aplomb and authority, tactical acumen and lead-from-the-front derring-do which he has displayed has won him admiration and respect all over the cricket world.

Sharma’s decision to retire from Test cricket, announced via a subdued Instagram post, has sparked widespread speculation. While various factors may have influenced his choice, his prolonged slump in Test form appears to be the primary catalyst.

In his last six Tests – three against New Zealand at home, three against Australia Down Under – Sharma’s form was woeful. In 10 innings in these matches, he could muster a paltry 122 runs.

To compound the problem, India lost all these Tests. Being whitewashed by New Zealand 3-0 at home – unprecedented in Indian cricket – put Sharma under harsh scrutiny in the ensuing Border-Gavaskar series in which too he found no relief. He took the laudable, but extreme step of dropping himself from the playing XI for the last Test at Sydney.

Since then, India won the ODI Champions Trophy in which Sharma’s form was impressive.

The first few weeks of the ongoing IPL were disappointing but Sharma rediscovered his touch, playing important knocks to put his team Mumbai Indians strongly in the running for a place in the knockouts. But success in white-ball cricket is not necessarily an index to similar form being replicated in red-ball cricket.

Sharma is 38. His recent Test form has been ungratifying. The next World Test Championship cycle would take two years to complete. Did he have the physical wherewithal, the mental bandwidth, motivation and mojo to continue playing Test cricket? Questions he likely asked himself before calling it quits.

Sharma was the first among a clutch of talented batters emerging from the Under-19 pipeline in the first decade of this century.

The others were Shikhar Dhawan, Virat Kohli, Cheteshwar Pujara and Ajinkya Rahane. These four were to take over the mantle of India’s batting responsibility from Sachin Tendulkar, Rahul Dravid, VVS Laxman, Saurav Ganguly and Virender Sehwag.

Ironically, while Sharma got the India cap first, in an ODI against Ireland in 2007, he was the last among this quartet to play Test cricket.

He was part of MS Dhoni’s team which won the inaugural T20 World Cup in 2007, but a Test place, which came relatively easily to Kohli, Pujara, Dhawan and Rahane, eluded him until Tendulkar’s farewell series in 2013.

On debut at the Eden Gardens, Sharma made 177. In Tendulkar’s swan song next match at the Wankhede, he made 111. These centuries were obscured by the overflowing of sentiment for Tendulkar, but Sharma’s sublime skills, which often raised batsmanship to an art form, was not lost on experts.

Ravi Shastri, who was to have a huge influence on his Test career later by making him opener, likened him to a “Swiss Watch” for the precision timing in his strokeplay. Dilip Vengsarkar, former India captain who spotted him for India, highlights his ability to play late which helps in judging length of the ball quicker and better and also enables improvisation.

The style and finesse which made the likes of VVS Laxman and Mark Waugh so wonderful to watch were manifest in Sharma’s batting from his earliest days as Test player.

Weaned on the “Bombay School” of batting which boasts exemplars of orthodox technique like Sunil Gavaskar and Sachin Tendulkar, Sharma’s batting carries that strain.

But growing up in a post-modern milieu when risk-taking has become fundamental to batting in every format, Sharma shifted into higher gears far quicker, often from the start in Tests too once he was secure of his place.

He did not exhibit the bravado of a Sehwag, but when in full flow, he has often shown up the destructive ability of Viv Richards, especially when playing horizontal bat shots like hook, pull and cut.

It was not until 2019, when the then chief coach Ravi Shastri and captain Virat Kohli coaxed and cajoled him to open the innings that Sharma’s career in red-ball cricket bloomed.

By this time, he had smashed three ODI double centuries – apart from a spate of match-winning scores in T20 – establishing him as a Goliath in white-ball cricket.

When he became India captain in 2021, Sharma set his sights on bagging a hat-trick of ICC trophies, and recast the team’s playing strategy for each format accordingly.

A genial, fun-loving bearing, marked by endearing earthiness helped him bond with his players easily and strongly. But he was no lax or loose on the field. He was astute, perceptive, intuitive in reading match situations, and particularly good in handling bowlers.

Five IPL titles for Mumbai Indians bespoke his leadership credentials even before he got the job for the national team.

Under Sharma, India reached the World Test Championship final in 2023, only to lose to Australia.

In the ODI World Cup the same year, his blazing batting as opener, and his strategy of “total attack” in which the batsmen would go after runs unrelentingly, took India into to the final where their dreams were dashed by an inspired Australian side. Winning the T20 World Cup a few months later, was some recompense, but not complete redemption.

It is pertinent that Sharma, who quit T20 cricket after winning the World Cup last year, hasn’t retired from ODI cricket yet.

Not being part of an ODI World Cup winning team has been festering in him since 2011 when he was not selected in the squad under Dhoni that was to bring India glory after 28 years.

In an interview with podcaster Vimal Kumar released a few days back, he said that his desire to be part of an ODI World Cup winning team remains alive.

The next ODI World Cup is in 2027. Whether Sharma can sustain fitness and form over the two years will be followed with interest in the cricket world.

But that is hardly the concern of India’s selectors. Right now, their worry is to find an opener and a captain to step into Sharma’s big boots.

Donald Trump has ordered the Department of Homeland Security to add at least 20,000 officers to enforce his deportation policies.

The directive was issued on Friday and forms part of the administration’s plan to incentivise undocumented immigrants to self-deport.

In a video, Trump said he was making it “as easy as possible” for them to leave the US.

The federal government will fund flights out of the US for undocumented people who choose to leave voluntarily, and provide an “exit bonus,” the executive order stated.

The order did not specify how the increase in staffing at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) would be funded.

Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (Ice), the sub-agency that primarily deals with illegal immigration, currently has more than 21,000 employees.

Of those, Ice has 6,100 deportation officers and more than 750 enforcement removal assistants, according to the agency website.

Trump has long called for local and state law enforcement, as well as the National Guard, to assist with border enforcement.

The order calls on the DHS to supplement it’s current efforts “by deputising and contracting with State and local law enforcement officers, former federal officers, officers and personnel within other federal agencies.”

The president’s call to increase staff comes as his administration pursues multiple pathways to force undocumented immigrants to leave the US.

Trump has called for individuals to self deport, using a government app known as CPB Home. This week, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem announced $1,000 (£751) bonuses and paid travel for people who leave the US voluntarily.

Other deportation methods have been challenged or blocked federal courts, including Trump’s use of the 18th century Alien Enemies Act to deport Venezuelan migrants it accused of gang activity.

Earlier this month, US District Judge Fernando Rodriguez, a Trump-appointed judge in Texas, found that the administration’s use of the act was “unlawful.” A second federal judge in New York later reached the same conclusion.

Trump dubbed his self-deportation initiative as “Project Homecoming.”

“Illegal aliens who stay in America face punishments, including significant jail time, enormous financial penalties confiscation of all property garnishment of all wages, imprisonment, and incarceration and sudden deportation, in a place, and manner, solely of our discretion,” Trump said.

Families of Israeli hostages taken to Gaza in the 7 October attacks have expressed their increasing concern about the fates of loved ones, as doubts grow about how many are still alive.

One family said the hostages were at risk “every day” they continued to be held captive by Hamas.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said this week there was “uncertainty” over the condition of three of the 24 hostages previously believed to be alive.

He was reacting to US President Donald Trump’s statement on Tuesday that only 21 of those taken in the Hamas-led attacks were still alive.

The BBC spoke to two families – including the brother of a hostage released by Hamas this year – after Israel’s security cabinet approved an expanded offensive in Gaza.

Netanyahu said ministers had decided on a “forceful operation” to destroy Hamas and rescue the hostages, and that Gaza’s 2.1 million population “will be moved, to protect it”.

One family told the BBC they hoped the troops would only be used to help with the aim of freeing the hostages, not for any other reasons.

Liran Berman’s twin brothers Gali and Ziv have been held by Hamas for 19 months after they were kidnapped from their home in Kibbutz Kfar Aza on 7 October 2023.

About 1,200 people were killed by Hamas-led gunmen that day, while Gali and Ziv were among 251 others who were taken hostage.

More than 52,780 people have been killed in Gaza during the ensuing war, according to the territory’s Hamas-run health ministry.

Israel cut off all deliveries of aid and other supplies on 2 March and resumed its offensive two weeks later after it broke a two-month ceasefire that saw 33 Israeli and five Thai hostages released in exchange for about 1,900 Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails.

Following news of Israel’s plan to expand its military operation in Gaza using thousands more troops unless Hamas agreed a new ceasefire and released the remaining hostages, Liran Berman told BBC News: “I hope that Israel is sending the forces to put pressure on Hamas to sit down.

“When Hamas was feeling threatened, they did the deals. I hope they are not sending the troops to conquer or for revenge.”

Mr Berman said his 27-year-old brothers were “at risk every single day”.

“We know they are alive. The released hostages saw them.”

He said he believed Gali and Ziv had been injured when they were seized but that he worried their mental condition was “not good” after so long in captivity.

With the release of emaciated and frail hostages in February, Mr Berman said he was worried about his brothers’ conditions.

“We need to pressure Hamas and its enablers.”

For 491 days, Or Levy was held by Hamas not knowing whether his wife Einav had survived the 7 October attack on the Nova music festival where he was taken.

She didn’t and for more than a year his three-year-old son Almog was without both his parents. In February, Or, weak and painfully thin, was released by Hamas.

His brother, Michael Levy, told BBC News he was worried about the impact on the hostages if Israel sent more troops into Gaza.

“I’m concerned it will affect the hostages, that the terrorists can decide to do something to them,” he said. “I do believe the army knows what it’s doing and they will make sure the hostages aren’t affected, but it’s always a concern.”

But he said he wanted more pressure applied to get them released.

“There is a crime against humanity and everyone including President Trump needs to do more in order to bring them back.”

He said his brother did not receive enough food while he was held hostage in Hamas’s underground tunnels in Gaza and “didn’t see sunlight”. He said he showered “every two months or so”.

“My brother worries about the fact the rest of the hostages will end up dying in captivity because that was his worst fear about himself and it’s now his worst fear about those he left behind.”

Of the 251 people taken hostage on 7 October – and the four other captives held by Hamas for around a decade before the attacks – 59 now remain in Gaza.

The Israeli government has publicly confirmed the deaths of 35, leaving 24 hostages. There is now uncertainty about the fate of three of them.

All 59 were kidnapped in the 7 October attack apart from one – the soldier Hadar Goldin who was killed in combat in Gaza during a previous war in 2014.

The living hostages are men in their 20s or 30s, apart from Omri Miran who turned 48 in April.

Of the 35 whose bodies Israel has confirmed are being held in Gaza, nearly all are men who were between 19 and 86 years old when they died. Three are women.

Since the spate of releases earlier this year, former hostages have been speaking to the media and others about their time in captivity.

Tal Shoham, 49, released in February after 505 days, told a UN event last month: “There were many times that we received just one pita bread for an entire day… Traumatised by hunger, we collected crumb after crumb.”

Eliya Cohen, 28, who was also held for 505 days, told Israel’s Channel 12 that once a week Hamas gunmen would make him and other hostages take off all their clothes and would tell them: “You you’re not quite there, you’re not thin enough… I’m thinking about cutting the food even more.”

Ilana Gritzewsky was released during another ceasefire in November 2023. Her partner Matan Zangauker is still a hostage.

The 31-year-old told the New York Times in March that as she was kidnapped from her home she was molested by one of the kidnappers.

The article says she believes she was also sexually assaulted in Gaza. “When she came to, she said, she found herself on the floor in a dilapidated building, clearly in Gaza, her shirt up baring her breasts and pants pulled down, with seven gunmen standing over her.”

Ron Krivoi, a sound engineer, was kidnapped from the Nova music festival.

Last month, The Times of Israel quoted a Channel 12 interview in which he described the tunnels.

“We were inside a very, very small cage… and we had to lie down and rest in it – you couldn’t stand. No height, no toilets, no food. We were five people.”

The 2025 Eurovision Song Contest pops its cork on Sunday, with a “turquoise carpet” parade featuring competitors from all 37 nations.

But the competition really begins on Tuesday, when the first semi-final will see five countries unceremoniously kicked out.

Another six will lose their place at the second semi-final on Thursday, before the Grand Final takes place in Basel, Switzerland, on Saturday, 17 May.

This year’s entrants include two returning contestants, one professional opera singer, a thinly veiled allusion to sexual emissions and a dance anthem about a dead space dog.

It’s a lot to take in.

To help you prepare, here’s a guide to all 37 songs in the contest, which I’ve sorted into rough musical categories, mainly for my own sanity (it didn’t work).

Win or lose, UK contestants Remember Monday have given headline writers a gift with the title of their entry: What The Hell Just Happened?

A souped-up, full throttle pop anthem, it cherry-picks the best bits of Queen, Andrew Lloyd Webber and the Beatles, presumably to remind voters of Britain’s rich musical heritage.

With eight tempo changes, it could prove tricky for voters to grasp, but the band’s stellar harmonies and sparkling personalities should carry them through.

Crucially, the song avoids the Eurovision cliches of jackhammer dance anthems and windswept balladry – something Remember Monday have in common with this year’s favourites.

Sweating it out at the top are Swedish representatives KAJ, whose song Bara Bada Bastu is an ode to the restorative powers of the sauna, complete with dancers in skimpy towels.

Unreasonably catchy, it’s won the approval of Abba’s Bjorn Ulvaeus, whose been singing the track in his own private sauna. As you do.

Stiff competition comes from Austrian singer JJ, and his operatic ballad Wasted Love.

A timeworn story of unrequited love, it leans on his training as a counter-tenor, before exploding into an unexpected techno breakdown.

A favourite with the bookies, the song’s only Achilles heel is its similarity to last year’s winner, Nemo.

Distinctive in a different way is Ireland’s entry, Laika Party – a 90s trance-pop anthem about a dog who was sent to space by Russia and left to die there.

Singer Emmy aims for a hopeful spin on a tragic story but, despite a peppy performance, it’s a bit of a downer.

More palatable is Luxembourg’s Laura Thorn, whose La Poupée Monte Le Son is a callback to France Gall’s 1965 winning entry, Poupée De Cire, Poupée De Son.

Where the original was about a “fashion doll” operated by songwriter Serge Gainsbourg, Thorn’s response is all about taking control.

“,” she scolds. Yeouch.

Rome must be blushing. This year features not one, but two, songs about the vibrant culture of Il Bel Paese.

The first comes, not surprisingly, from San Marino – the independent microstate that nestles inside north-central Italy.

Titled Tutta L’Italia, it celebrates everything from the county’s football team and its vineyards, to the Mona Lisa (under her Italian name Gioconda).

Written by Gabry Ponte – one of the brains behind Eiffel 65’s Blue (Da Ba Dee) – it’s a slight, but fun, mixture of dance beats, traditional accordion playing and the folk dances of Calabria.

The staging could be its downfall, though, with Gabry marooned behind his DJ decks while the singers, who for some reason wish to remain anonymous, obscure their faces with masks.

More memorable, but definitely more unhinged, is Estonia’s Espresso Macchiato.

Performed by Tommy Cash (the only Eurovision contestant to have appeared on a Charli XCX record) it’s an affectionate-ish caricature of Italian stereotypes, featuring the indelible lyric: “”.

I’m trying to give up sexual innuendo, but Eurovision is making it har… difficult.

A trio of artists are trying to sneak smut past the censors, led by Malta’s Miriana Conte, with a throbbing club track called Serving.

In its original form, the song’s chorus revolved around the phrase “serving kant” – the word kant being Maltese for “singing” and a homophone for an English term that definitely mean singing.

It’s a reference to a well-known phrase in the drag / ballroom world; but several countries complained it broke broadcasting guidelines, prompting a hasty re-write.

If the stunt was meant to generate headlines it worked, but now that Miriana has our attention, she’s not letting go.

Her performance, featuring a giant disco ball pursed between two red lips, is gloriously OTT, and she has an enviable set of pipes. Too bad the song is riddled with Europop cliche.

Another contestant doubling his entendres is Australia’s Go-Jo, who wants us to “take a sip” of milkshake from his “special cup”. Interpret that how you want but I’d be wary of hitching a lift in his ice cream van, if I were you.

With a smattering of Electric Six’s saucy disco funk, Milkshake Man is tasty enough to get Australia back in the finals after only achieving a semi last year.

Finally, we have Finland’s Erika Vikman, whose song Ich Komme is billed as a “joyous message of pleasure, ecstasy and a state of trance”.

Structured to mimic the pneumatic realities of lovemaking, it recalls iconic gay anthems such as Kylie’s Your Disco Needs You and Donna Summer’s Hot Stuff – and ends with Erika shooting into the sky astride a massive gold microphone that’s definitely not a stand-in for a phallus.

Little in life is more devastating than the phrase “I’m afraid it’s cancer”.

The disease will affect one in two of us and, although survival rates have dramatically improved, the impact can be devastating.

This year, three separate Eurovision contestants have been touched by cancer, inspiring songs of unmatched heartbreak and reflection.

French singer Louane captures it best. Her song Maman, is an intimate conversation with her mother, who died when she was just 17 years old.

Over three verses, Louane describes the “emptiness” she was felt; and how she filled the void with bad behaviour and meaningless love affairs. But, as the song progresses, she tells her mum she’s settled down and found purpose… by becoming a mother herself.

She sings it beautifully, with a mixture of regret and strength. And when her daughter’s voice appears in the final moments of the song, it would take a steely heart not to shed a tear.

Over in Norway, 19-year-old Kyle Alessandro shared a similar story, when his mother was diagnosed with cancer in autumn 2023. Thankfully, she’s now in remission, but something she said during her treatment inspired his Eurovision entry: “Never lose your light.”

Kyle took that phrase and turned it into a thumping pop song about surviving adversity. “Nothing can burn me now,” he sings. “I’m my own Lighter.”

Klemen Slakonja, meanwhile, is a comedian best known in Slovenia for his impressions of Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin – but his ballad, How Much Time Do We Have Left was written after his wife, actress Mojca Fatur, was diagnosed with bone marrow cancer.

As he sings, Klemen’s dancers raise him into the air and hold him upside down, to represent the disorientation the family felt.

“When she read her diagnosis, our world turned upside down and I felt that rush of blood in my head, the same one I feel whenever I am upside down in the performance,” he told Eurovision World.

Defying the odds, Mojca survived, and joins him on stage at Eurovision. It’s a deeply intimate and moving moment.

Listening to this year’s line-up, it’s like the contestants all heard Cascada’s Evacuate the Dancefloor and went, “Nah, we’re good, thanks”.

There are club bangers everywhere, with Belgium’s Red Sebastian (named after the crab in The Little Mermaid, bless him) submitting an entire song about the loved-up liberation of an all-night rave.

“.”

A favourite with fans, the 90s rave elements of Strobe Lights feel a little dated to me, but his meticulously-choreographed performance is a treat.

Denmark’s Sissal takes a similar sound, with a throwback Euro-bop called Hallucination that effortlessly evokes two-time Eurovision winner Loreen.

Sissal said her biggest goal was for the audience to feel they couldn’t sit down during the song. Mission accomplished.

Germany, meanwhile, are pitching for a home run with Baller, a super-catchy trance anthem that wouldn’t sound out of place at Berlin superclub Berghain.

Performed by Austrian siblings Abor & Tynna, it’s languishing in the middle of the field, after Tynna developed laryngitis, robbing the duo of the chance to impress fans at Eurovision’s various pre-parties. But now that she’s recovered, the song could rise up the rankings.

That’s less likely for Væb, aka the Icelandic Jedward. Their energetic dance-rap song, Roá, is all about rowing from Iceland to the Faroe Islands, “because no matter what happens in life you just keep on rowing through the waves”.

Sadly, it’s not as deep as it sounds.

Spanish star Melody fares better with Esa Diva, a pumping house track with a sprinkling of flamenco guitar, that documents her journey to fame.

And Azerbaijan’s Mamagama go all Maroon 5 on Run With U, a smooth pop song elevated by a twinkling riff on the saz – a long-necked plucked instrument similar to the lute.

OK, so I’ve stolen that description from Shkodra Elektronike.

They’re an Albanian duo living in Italy, who fuse the ethnic music of their hometown, Shkodër, to a progressive electronic sound.

Their song Zjerm (Fire) imagines a time when cross-cultural understanding would lead to peace and harmony – a world without a need for soldiers and ambulances, and where “oil would smell like lilac” (no, me neither).

Greece’s entry, Asteromáta, is also rooted in history and memory, as Klavdia describes the unbreakable bond that refugees share with their homeland.

“” she sings, in a haunting ballad that blends traditional Greek and Pontic elements with soaring strings.

Taking a more upbeat approach is Dutch singer Claude. A refugee from the bloody civil war in the Democratic Republic of Congo, he moved to the Netherlands at the age of nine and fell in love with Eurovision while waiting in the refugee centre.

His song, C’est La Vie, is a tribute to his mum, who taught him to see the positive in their situation.

Fizzing with freedom and joy, it combines elements of chanson and French-Caribbean zouk, and looks set for a top 10 placing.

The success of “goth gremlin witch” Bambie Thug at last year’s Eurovision has conjured a veritable coven of imitators in 2025.

Polish singer Justyna Steczkowska, representing her country for the second time, even includes a Slavic magic spell in her song, Gaja – summoning the spirit of the mother Earth to “cleanse” her of a toxic relationship.

It’s a suitably intense performance, with Justyna singing long sustained notes and playing a furious violin solo, before being hoiked into the rafters on a pair ropes.

What a time to be alive.

Marko Bošnjak, meanwhile, is cooking up a Poison Cake to feed to his tormentors – chiefly the people who bombarded him with homophobic hate messages after he was selected to represent Croatia.

The criticism was so intense that he lost his voice and couldn’t leave the house for five days.

His song is suitably melodramatic, replete with guttural synths and creepy playground chants. It’s a little overbaked, but should still sail through to the finals.

Taking a more ethereal approach are Latvian group Tautumeitas, whose song Bur Man Laimi translates as “a chant for happiness”.

Reminiscent of Bjork and Enya, its overlapping folk harmonies are based on traditional Latvian wedding songs, making it one of this year’s most captivating entries. I fear it may be too subtle to score well, though.

Further mystery is provided by, Theo Evan, Cyprus’s answer to Nick Jonas. The lyrics to his song, Shh, are a riddle, written by former tennis player Elke Tiel, whose “hidden truth will only be revealed on the Eurovision stage in May”.

He opens his performance perched between two pieces of scaffolding in a recreation of Leonardo da Vinci’s famous Vitruvian Man sketch – so there’s a clue.

Shh is one of a number of gothic pop songs, sung by brooding young men with interesting hair.

Among the best is Kiss Kiss Goodbye, by Czechia’s Adonxs, who divebombs from an angelic falsetto to an unsettling baritone as he confronts his absent father.

Lithuanian band Katarsis are an interesting experiment, with a deliberately downbeat rock song that declares “the foundations of everything have begun to rot”.

Titled Tavo Akys (your eyes), it builds to a compelling climax, but it’s hard to see it being a vote-winner, unless Eurovision suddenly attracts an audience of depressed emo teens.

Rounding out the field are Armenian singer Parg, with the Imagine Dragons-inspired Survivor and Serbia’s Princ, whose overwrought ballad is called Mila.

Both performers give it their all, but the songs don’t feel strong enough to survive the semi-finals.

Four years after Måneskin’s victory, Eurovision’s rock revival continues apace.

Italy are back at it again, thanks to Lucio Corsi – think David Bowie as Pierrot – and his glam rock ballad Volevo Essere Un Duro (I wanted to be tough).

A delicate anthem for people who feel they don’t fit in, it recalls how Lucio was bullied as a kid, and how he’s grown to embrace his fragility. At one point, he sings: “Instead of a star, [I’m] just a sneeze.”

It’s a timeless bit of songwriting that pulls off that crucial Eurovision trick of sounding new and familiar all at once.

Portuguese indie band Napa also have a 70s vibe, channelling Paul McCartney’s Wings on the soft rock tear-jerker Deslocado (out of place).

It’s another song about migration, written after the band were forced to relocate from Madeira to the Portuguese mainland due to the economic crisis.

“Even though we’ve been here for a few years we always have that desire to go back, and that anguish of saying goodbye to family,” said singer Guilherme Gomes.

Last but not least are Ukraine’s Ziferblat, who continue the country’s astonishing run of high-quality entries in the midst of a war with Russia.

Their song, Bird Of Pray, is an unexpected mix of 70s new wave band Cars, birdsong and the guitar riff from Rachel Stevens’ Sweet Dreams My LA Ex – while the lyrics are full of hope for a peaceful reunion with their loved ones.

It’s better than that makes it sound.

Where would Eurovision be without a raven-haired woman bellowing into a wind machine set to “hurricane”?

Israel has strong form in this category, and sets the bar again with New Day Will Rise, a melancholy piano ballad sung in a mixture of English, French and Hebrew.

The song’s performed by Yuval Raphael, a 24-year-old who narrowly escaped with her life at the 2023 Nova music festival, where an attack by Hamas claimed the lives of 378 people and triggered Israel’s ongoing offensive in Gaza.

It’s hard not to interpret her lyrics as a response to those events – “everyone cries, don’t cry alone”. As a result, her participation hasn’t received the same level of criticism as Eden Golan, who represented Israel last year.

That can’t be said for Georgia’s contestant, Mariam Shengelia, who has been booed during pre-Eurovision appearances for her alleged support of the country’s authoritarian, pro-Russian, anti-LGBT ruling party, Georgian Dream.

Shengelia has denied the accusations, pointing out that her song – a stirring, quasi-militaristic ballad called Freedom – is about “freedom of choice, freedom to love, freedom to live as you want to live”.

“No amount of manufactured hate will change that,” she told the Eurovision fan site Wiwibloggs.

Montenegro’s Nina Žižić tackles domestic abuse in Dobrodošli, a brooding and refined orchestral ballad.

The singer, who previously entered Eurovision in 2013 with the cyborg pop oddity Igranka, delivers her lyrics with passion and sincerity, but somehow the song never quite takes off.

Last but not least, we have defending champions Switzerland, represented by 24-year-old Zoë Më, who describes herself as a “little fairy”.

Appropriately enough, her self-penned song, Voyage is delicate as a fairy’s wings, fluttering with a soft-spoken plea to treat each other with kindness.

Automatically qualifying for the final, it’s a welcome oasis of calm amidst the steamy sauna sessions, moody goth haircuts and thrusting innuendo.

But that’s Eurovision for you. All human life is here. See you in Basel!

When 68 million Filipinos head to the polls on Monday, Sara Duterte’s name will not be on the ballot.

But the results of the election, which includes 12 senate races, will have a huge impact on her political future.

They will affect both her role as the Philippines’ current vice-president and any hopes she might have of running for the country’s presidency one day, as she faces the prospect of a ban from politics – decided by lawmakers in the Senate.

The 46-year-old is the eldest daughter of the Philippines’ former President Rodrigo Duterte. She trained as a lawyer before entering politics in 2007, when she was elected as her father’s vice-mayor in their family’s hometown Davao.

Rodrigo Duterte has described her as the “alpha” character of the family, who always gets her way.

The younger Duterte was previously filmed punching a court official in the face after he refused her request, leading one local news outlet to bestow the nickname of “the slugger” upon her.

She and her father are known to share similar traits, as well as a shared passion for riding big motorbikes.

As one cable from the US embassy in Manila in 2009, leaked by Wikileaks, described her: “A tough-minded individual who, like her father, is difficult to engage.”

In 2010, she succeeded her father to become the first female mayor of Davao. But it was only in 2021 that she decided to make her way to national politics.

The next year she ran on a joint ticket with the scion of another political dynasty – Ferdinand Marcos Jr. He was going for the top job, with Duterte as his deputy.

The assumption was that she would then be in a prime position to contest the next presidential election in 2028, as presidents are limited only to one six-year term in the Philippines.

The strategy proved effective and the duo won by a landslide.

But then it quickly started to unravel.

Cracks started to emerge in their alliance even before the euphoria of their election win faded. Duterte publicly expressed her preference to be defence secretary but she was instead handed the education portfolio.

The House of Representatives soon after scrutinised Duterte’s request for confidential funds – millions of pesos that she could spend without stringent documentation.

Then, Rodrigo Duterte spoke at a late night rally, accusing President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos of being a junkie and a weak leader.

Soon after, First Lady Liza Marcos snubbed Sara Duterte at an event, in full view of news cameras. She admitted that it was intentional, saying Duterte should not have stayed silent in the background while her father accused the president of drug use.

After Duterte resigned from the cabinet in July last year, her language became increasingly inflammatory.

She said she had “talked to someone” to “go kill” Marcos, his wife and his cousin, who is also the speaker of the House. She also told reporters her relationship with Marcos had become toxic and she dreamed of cutting off his head.

Such remarks are shocking for someone who is not acquainted with Philippine politics. But Duterte’s strong personality has only endeared her to the public and she remains popular in the south, as well as among the millions of overseas Filipino workers.

But in February this year, lawmakers in the lower house of parliament voted to impeach Duterte, accusing her of misusing public funds and threatening to have President Marcos assassinated.

She will be tried by the Senate and, if found guilty, removed from office and banned from running in future elections.

Duterte has denied the charges and alleges she is the victim of a political vendetta.

But whether or not she will be impeached hinges a lot on the upcoming election – and the composition of the Senate thereafter.

For her to be impeached, two-thirds of the Senate would need to vote for this. The make-up of the upcoming Senate will be determined in Monday’s election, with both Marcos and Duterte backing competing candidates.

For Durterte, the election will also be a barometer of support for her family, and whether she can capitalise on this for her presidential run in 2028.

But for now, her fate hangs in the balance.

A massive increase in the price of water is just one consequence of a week of aerial attacks on the Red Sea city of Port Sudan.

Once seen as a relatively safe haven from Sudan’s devastating civil war, Port Sudan is now reeling from days of bombardment from the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) paramilitary group.

After six days of drone attacks, smoke is still rising from three fuel depots which were targeted. Rescue teams are gathered around the destroyed sites, but they are struggling to put the fires out.

The conflict, which began as a struggle between the leaders of the RSF and the army more than two years ago, has created one of the world’s worst humanitarian crises and forced more than 12 million people from their homes.

One of those who fled to Port Sudan is 26-year-old Mutasim, who did not want his second name published for safety reasons.

The BBC spoke to him after he had waited hours for a water vendor to turn up.

The vital commodity has become scarce. The explosions at the fuel depots have left Port Sudan without the diesel used to power the pumps that bring up the groundwater.

• A simple guide to what is happening in Sudan
• BBC finds fear, loss and hope in Sudan’s ruined capital after army victory
• How war devastated Sudan’s museums

Mutasim told the BBC that whereas a day’s supply of water cost him 2,000 Sudanese pounds ($3.30; £2.50) a week ago, he is now being charged five times that amount.

It leaves him and the seven other members of his family without much water for cooking, cleaning and bathing.

“Soon, we won’t be able to afford it,” he said explaining that he gets money from buying and selling basic goods in the market.

Water is not the only challenge in Port Sudan.

Daily life is going back to normal, markets and shops are open, but there are crowds of cars outside the city’s petrol stations as people desperately wait for fuel.

“It could take me five hours to get petrol,” said Mutasim.

It is a situation that many Sudanese have faced before, but not in this city.

Until last week, Port Sudan was one of the few places in the country that was considered protected from the worst of the civil war.

“We came here two years ago from Omdurman,” Mutasim said, referring to the city that sits on the other side of the River Nile from the capital, Khartoum.

It cost the family their entire savings – $3,000 (£2,250) – to set up in a new place.

“We were forced to leave our home by the RSF, so it was a relief to come here. Life was starting to go back to normal.”

“We were thinking about moving because it is no longer safe here, but it’s so expensive – and where do we go?”

Port Sudan has been experiencing blackouts for the past two weeks, which have been made worse by the latest attacks.

“My auntie is over 70 years old, she is struggling with the heat and humidity because there is no electricity for fans at night,” Mutasim said.

“We can’t sleep.”

Hawa Mustafa, a teacher from el-Geneina in Darfur, in the west of the country, also sought refuge in Port Sudan.

She has been living with her four children in a shelter for displaced people for over two years. She said this week’s attacks left her “living in fear”.

“The drones came to us and we returned to a state of war and the lack of safety,” she told the BBC.

“The sounds of the drones and the anti-aircraft missiles remind me of the first days of the war in el-Geneina.”

Hawa lives without her husband, who has been unable to leave their home due to the deteriorating security situation. She is now responsible for her family.

“I don’t know where to go if things get worse in Port Sudan. I was planning to go to one of the neighbouring countries, but it seems that this dream will no longer come true.”

Another person living in the city, Mariam Atta, told the BBC that “life has changed completely”.

“We are struggling to cope,” she said. “The fear is constant.”

Since Sudan’s civil war started in 2023, humanitarian agencies have depended on Port Sudan as a gateway to bring in aid, because of its port and the country’s only functional international airport.

It has been used by organisations such as the UN’s World Food Programme to deliver food assistance.

“Port Sudan is our main humanitarian hub,” says Leni Kinzli, WFP spokesperson for Sudan.

“In March, we had almost 20,000 metric tonnes of food distributed, and I would say definitely more than half of that came through Port Sudan,” she told the BBC.

The WFP has said that there is currently famine in 10 regions of the country, with 17 more at risk.

Many aid agencies are now concerned these attacks could block the flow of aid, making the humanitarian situation even worse.

“I think this is going to severely constrain the delivery of life-saving food and medical supplies, which will risk further deterioration of the already critical situation,” Shashwat Saraf, country director for the Norwegian Refugee Council, told the BBC.

He added that while agencies will look for other routes into the country, it will be challenging.

At night the city is quiet.

Before the attacks, people would gather at the coast and some would watch football in local cafes. But the electricity blackout has left the city in the dark and residents are choosing to stay at home for security reasons.

• Inside Khartoum, a city left in ruins after two years of war
• ‘Child in arms, luggage on my head, I fled Sudan camp for safety’
• Sudan’s years of war – BBC smuggles in phones to reveal hunger and fear

“Lights, camera… tariff?” – that’s the question a scrambling movie industry has been asking this week after an unexpected intervention from US President Donald Trump.

Writing on his Truth Social platform last Sunday, Trump announced plans to hit movies made in foreign countries with 100% tariffs, as he attempts to stop Hollywood dying “a very fast death”.

His threat comes as studios increasingly shift productions abroad to places such as the UK.

The White House has since clarified that “no final decision” has been made and that they’re “exploring all options” for revitalising the US film industry.

But Trump’s suggestion alone has sent shockwaves through the industry – from Hollywood to Hertfordshire – so what might all of this mean in practice?

In 2014, Star Wars: The Force Awakens was shot by Disney at Pinewood Studios in Buckinghamshire, and Hollywood has kept growing closer to the UK since.

Last year alone, the British Film Institute says 65% of UK production spend came from the five major US film studios and three US streaming giants – Netflix, Apple and Amazon. This amounted to £1.37bn ($1.71bn), a near 50% jump on 2023.

In Hollywood, by contrast, film and television production in Los Angeles has dropped by nearly 40% over the past decade.

The reason? Well largely, it’s cheaper to make films in the UK. That’s thanks to generous tax incentives such as the Film Tax Relief, which offers a 25% tax rebate – as well as lower labour costs and centralised national funding for film.

As British actor Brian Cox told Times Radio on Tuesday: “The reality is films go where they can afford.”

For Universal’s blockbuster Jurassic World: Dominion, these incentives delivered a reported £89.1m ($111.38m) in savings.

In the US, tax incentives operate on a state level – and Hollywood has relatively poor tax breaks – not only compared with the UK, which can offer 10% more, but other states such as New York and Georgia, too.

Fixing that is no easy task. Trump has appointed Golden Globe Award-winning actor Jon Voight, 86, as a special ambassador to Hollywood, and met with him a day before dropping his light-on-detail proposal.

But it’s not exactly clear how tariffs would solve the internal tax problem in the US. A possible solution, raised by Voight, is a federal tax incentive to mirror the UK.

The Wrap’s film reporter Jeremy Fuster tells the BBC it is “unlikely”, in the current highly-charged climate, that Republicans would “support a federal tax incentive that can easily be portrayed as a handout to ‘woke Hollywood'”.

And what would the impact be on moviegoers if the levy goes ahead?

Fuster says costs, like any other tariffed good, would be passed onto audiences through ticket prices, premium on-demand increases or subscription rates.

How exactly this would take form is “something nobody knows”.

It’s not all about the money, because while a boost to US production could benefit parts of the industry, some projects will still need to shoot abroad. “Amazon isn’t going to make the next James Bond entirely in America,” Fuster notes.

Culture minister Sir Chris Bryant has said the UK government is in “active discussions with the top of the US administration” on the “very fluid” situation.

With all this in mind, do you know which films have been made in the UK in recent years? BBC News has looked at some below – and they might be closer to home than you think.

Warner Bros Leavesden studio in Hertfordshire, best known for producing the Harry Potter films, has been used as the set for numerous Hollywood blockbusters including Barbie, Mickey 17, Venom: The Last Dance and Beetlejuice Beetlejuice.

The nearby Sky Studios Elstree in Borehamwood was turned into the magical world of Oz in 2023 as it welcomed its first production, Wicked.

Beyond Hertfordshire, cities such as Glasgow have long been used as a filming hub for Hollywood movies.

The opening scene of Brad Pitt’s zombie thriller, World War Z, may look like Philadelphia, but the film was actually shot in George Square in the Scottish city.

In November, the city was transformed into a dystopian New York as Glen Powell was spotted filming for forthcoming thriller The Running Man.

It’s not just dystopian films that are shot in Glasgow – in 2021, star-spangled banners, bunting and vintage shop fronts decorated the streets of Glasgow city centre for Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny.

The city was used for a parade scene which appears to capture 1960s New York as Apollo astronauts return home.

The latest Indiana Jones movie was also shot in Northern England with Bamburgh Castle in Northumberland being used in the opening scenes.

The castle doubled up for 1944 war-torn Nazi Germany.

Other scenes were shot along the North York Moors railway line in Grosmont, and the Leaderfoot Viaduct, over the River Tweed, near Melrose, in the Scottish Borders.

In 2022, The Batman used Glasgow Cathedral, the Necropolis and the Bridge of Sighs to create Gotham City, which is based on New York.

Speaking to the BBC in 2022 about the choice in filming location, director Matt Reeves said it was important to film in a location where there was “beautiful Gothic architecture”.

“I wanted this to feel like a Gothic American city, but one that you’d never been to,” he said. “So we went to Glasgow and honestly it was so beautiful.”

The film’s lead actor, Robert Pattinson, said: “It looks great as Gotham, who would’ve thought of all the cities in the world, Glasgow as Gotham?”

• The Batman: How Liverpool, Glasgow and London helped create Gotham City

Central Saint Martins art school in London was also used as a building in Gotham City, as was some parts of Liverpool.

Keen-eyed fans will spot that Gotham City Police Department is actually the Liver Building’s clock tower, although the giant Liver Bird was airbrushed out.

Spider-Man spin-off Morbius was filmed in Manchester’s Northern Quarter and in 2010, the city became 1940s Brooklyn for Captain America: The First Avenger, starring Chris Evans.

Liverpool’s early 20th Century buildings has also made it a popular stand-in for New York’s older skyscrapers. Liverpool was transformed into 1920s New York for Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, which sees Eddie Redmayne search the city for his escaped magical beasts.

Disney’s recent live-action Snow White movie was almost entirely filmed in the UK, with Pinewood Studios used for many indoor scenes and sets.

A quarry in the Lake District, a beach in Pembrokshire, Wales and a nature reserve in Burnham were all also used as shooting locations.

As well as Snow White, Netflix’s new thriller Havoc, starring Tom Hardy and set in an unnamed US city, was filmed in Wales.

The film’s Welsh director Gareth Evans, said it was “challenging” to recreate a US city in south Wales, but he wanted to bring more work to the area.

Swansea’s Brangwyn Hall doubled up as the exterior of a fictional city police station while Cardiff’s Bute Street was turned into a US boulevard with 30cm (12in) of fake snow for one of Havoc’s night-time scenes.

Other recent Hollywood blockbusters that have seen the majority of their filming – known as principal photography – in the UK, include:

• Jurassic World Rebirth (2025)
• Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning (2025)
• Back in Action (2025)
• A Quiet Place: Day One (2024)
• Sonic the Hedgehog 3 (2024)
• Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom (2023)

Richard Monetti was aged just 20 when he was flying home to New York from London for the Christmas holidays, after studying abroad as one of 35 students from Syracuse University.

But he and everyone else on the plane never made it home.

They lost their lives in the UK’s most deadly terror atrocity, when a bomb in the hold of their flight, Pan Am 103, exploded above the Scottish town of Lockerbie.

It killed 270 people from 21 countries, including 11 people on the ground, and this devastating event has now been dramatised in an upcoming BBC drama series, The Bombing of Pan Am 103.

Kara Weipz still recalls how she and her family found out her brother Richard was among the dead – they heard it for the first time on a news report about the bombing.

As well as adding to their trauma, she says it also highlighted faults in the response system for victims’ families.

“I think it was very important to make sure those lessons were learned – like families had to be notified before names could be released,” she tells BBC News.

“We didn’t have that luxury in 1988, when names were released before we were notified. So that’s something that came out of it, and changed as a result.”

As president of the Victims of Pan Am Flight 103 group, a role she took on from her father Bob Monetti, she says it’s crucial that relatives “know what rights they have”, while stressing the group’s role in “educating those who deal with victims”.

Those lessons went on to improve how victims’ families were treated in the aftermath of 9/11, when four planes flying over the eastern US were seized simultaneously by hijackers, killing 2,977 people.

Screenwriter Gillian Roger Park, who was born just a couple of days before the Lockerbie bombing and grew up not far from the Scottish town, is a co-writer on the series.

It dramatises the Scots-US investigation into the attack, the effect it had on victims’ families and how it impacted Lockerbie’s locals.

Roger Park says the families “made history”, by speaking out about flaws in the system.

“After their lobbying and campaigning, a lot of the protocols introduced in the aftermath of 9/11 were based on what they campaigned for,” she says.

Airlines also benefited from their experiences.

“A lot of Pan Am 103 family members trained airlines on how to deal with victims,” she adds.

Kathryn Turman, played in the series by Severance actress Merritt Wever, was head of the Office for Victims of Crime, for the US Department of Justice.

Turman arranged travel for family members plus secure closed-circuit viewing in the US, for the trial of two bombing suspects in the Netherlands, in 2000. The FBI notes this was unprecedented at the time.

Weipz adds: “We have victim services in the FBI, in the Department of Justice, in the US Attorney’s office. Why? Well, because of Kathryn, but also because of the Pan Am 103 families.”

Turman’s character poignantly says in one of the episodes: “The families should have been protected and prioritised from the start… we can’t make that mistake again.”

The drama also highlights that lobbying by UK and US-based family groups resulted in “key reforms, from strengthening travel warning systems and tighter baggage screening, to people-centred responses to major disasters”.

For the series’ lead writer Jonathan Lee, creating a factual drama 37 years later was also a way of exploring the human stories behind the horror.

A co-production with Netflix, the show shines a light on “the story of these small, but heroic acts of connective humanity, in the wake of this bomb that tried to blast things apart”, he says.

For such a dark topic, it has some surprisingly uplifting moments.

We witness the strength of bonds forged between people, in the wake of the bombing.

“Collaboration between families, countries and law enforcement agencies gets us from the worst of humanity to the best of it”, former lawyer Lee tells the BBC.

“We piece things together by working together.”

The series is something of a jigsaw – we see the police and FBI painstakingly process thousands of fragments of evidence, in the build-up to Abdulbaset Al Megrahi being convicted over the bombing in 2001.

Two years later, Libyan leader Colonel Muammar Gaddafi accepted his country’s responsibility for the bombing, and paid compensation to the victims’ families.

The other pieces in the TV drama’s puzzle focus on the lives of the people of Lockerbie and beyond, with volunteers stepping up to help traumatised families.

Weipz recalled one scene in the drama, where her father tries to reach a financial settlement for his son’s death with the Pan Am insurance panel.

“That was one of the worst days of my life… hearing your brother really had no value because he was 20 years old, and was an assistant manager at a swim club and mowed lawns…

“Watching it, you see how horrifying it was.”

We also see women from Lockerbie, who made endless cakes for the investigators, washed victims’ clothes before they were returned to families and showed relatives the spot where their loved ones died.

“It was important to flesh out those emotional, human stories, to bring the Scottish stories to life,” says Roger Park about the volunteers.

“They did such hard work and it wasn’t their jobs, they were just locals who felt a moral obligation to help.

“Those women are just like my gran, I know those types of women, and I just think we rarely centre on those kinds of domestic stories.

“And what strong stuff you’d have to be made of to do what they did. I just love that they used the tools of their domestic lives to do such heroic work.”

New York-based Michelle Lipkin, whose father Frank Ciulla was killed on the flight, speaks fondly about “the women who laundered the clothes”, including Ella Ramsden and Moira Shearer.

“My mother was close to Ella and Moira, and we see Moira when we go to Scotland,” she says.

“There’s no words to describe the gratitude we have for them, because our loved ones were murdered.

“It’s the most evil of evil, and so every piece of clothing they laundered, every meal they made for the searchers – that just brought back what is possible, and the human spirit and kindness.”

Weipz also speaks about the “compassion” shown by the people of Lockerbie in the hours after the bombing.

“People slept outside with the bodies too. They didn’t want them to be alone. It just overwhelms me at the times when I think about it,” she says.

Scottish actress Lauren Lyle plays June, the wife of Det Sgt Ed McCusker, one of the lead Scottish police officers.

She says although the investigation was a “male-heavy story because it was the 80s”, she also thinks “the women just stepped right up”, often behind the scenes.

Lyle spoke to the real-life Ed McCusker to research her role, and says: “About five years ago, June got cancer, and she knew she was going to die. And she said to Eddie, ‘One thing I want you to do is make sure you tell this story’.

“She sounded like a really formidable woman who held the family together, and I think she represents the people of Lockerbie.”

Weipz adds: “Maybe people watching this will take some of the compassion they see, and pay it forward – we need some more of that in the world these days.”

“Whatever I was doing – maybe cleaning up or doing homework – when I heard the ‘oooh-oooh-oooooh’,” Adesoji Kukoyi says, mimicking the iconic Doctor Who theme tune, “I dropped everything and ran straight to the television.”

As a child growing up in 1980s Nigeria, Mr Kukoyi was infatuated with sci-fi sensation Doctor Who. British shows like Allo Allo and Fawlty Towers aired regularly as a cultural hangover from the colonial era, but none captured Mr Kukoyi’s imagination like the time-travelling Doctor did.

“He always spoke to me,” 44-year-old Mr Kukoyi, who currently has a vintage Doctor Who theme as the ringtone on his phone, tells the BBC.

“Like there’s somebody watching out for us… yes, we make mistakes, but we do our best, especially if we have a teacher that will lead us on the right path.”

Mr Kukoyi has been watching Doctor Who for decades, so when he heard that on Saturday an episode will, for the very first time, be set in Nigeria, he was elated.

“I was watching last week’s episode with my wife and the preview [for the following week] said: ‘Welcome to Lagos, Nigeria’. I screamed like a little girl!” Mr Kukoyi says.

The setting is momentous not just for Mr Kukoyi – a native of Nigeria’s biggest and liveliest city Lagos – but for the show too. Saturday’s adventure will be the first primarily set in Africa.

It is fitting that the producers chose Nigeria for this milestone – in 2013, fans worldwide were delighted when nine lost Doctor Who episodes from the 1960s were unearthed in a Nigerian TV facility.

Ariyon Bakare, who in the upcoming episode plays the mysterious Barber, says fans can expect “a time-bending cultural ancestral collision” and “hair, lots of hair”.

The preview also teases a vibrant barber shop, a brimming Lagos market and a towering, monstrous-looking spider.

Fans speculate that this creature is Anansi, a legendary character in West African and Caribbean folktales, but scriptwriter Inua Ellams is keeping specifics under wraps.

As for why the show has enjoyed such popularity in Nigeria, he says: “There’s something Nigerian about the Doctor. Nigerians are sort of loud, gregarious people… the Doctor is mysterious, boisterous, sort of over-confident but somehow manages to save the day.”

Ellams, who moved from Nigeria to the UK as a child, also considers why in 62 years, a character known to traverse the universe has barely spent any time in Africa.

It could be that no writer has felt confident enough to produce an authentic African story, he says, or it might be down to the Doctor’s need to “blend into his environment and be inconspicuous”.

“Ncuti Gatwa [who plays the Doctor] being an actor of African descent means that we can tell new stories with the Doctor and negotiate in different spaces because of his appearance.

“And this is the brilliance of the show – every Doctor creates new opportunities to tell new stories in different ways,” Ellams tells the BBC.

But these fresh Doctor Who stories have a smaller reach than the old ones did, as the show is no longer broadcast on Nigerian public TV. If you are in the country and want to catch up on the Doctor’s exploits, you would have to subscribe to streaming service Disney Plus.

Regardless, Mr Kukoyi insists that a dedicated troop of Nigerian Doctor Who lovers will be sitting transfixed on their sofas on Saturday evening, bearing witness to the Tardis materialising in Lagos.

“I’m waiting with baited breath,” he says. “Finally, he is coming!”

Mr Kukoyi – whose first experience of the Doctor was one played by a stripy scarf-wearing Tom Baker – says his young daughters are not so taken with his beloved show.

He is “trying to get them onboard”, he says.

Perhaps seeing the Doctor wearing traditional Nigerian clothing, squeezing his way through a quintessential Lagos market and getting caught up in local folklore will help them fall in love with the show the way their father once did.

• Nuzo Onoh – the Queen of African horror who is terrified of ghosts
• The Nigerian teenagers who became sci-fi sensations
• Why black science fiction ‘can’t be ignored’

For Jenny Watt, death is a key part of her life.

The 31-year-old spends two or three nights a week chatting to people – whether familiar faces or strangers she’s met for the first time – about everything connected with death, from working through grief to the ideal song for a funeral.

Jenny runs a handful of death cafés across Glasgow – community spaces that aim to encourage conversation and discussion about a topic few people like to raise.

BBC Scotland News attended one of the weekly gatherings, which Jenny believes can help break down taboos about the subject.

But what makes a person want to spend time talking about the end of life?

Jenny estimates around half the attendees at her groups are there to process grief in some way, whether for a recent loss or from 20 or 30 years ago.

“The same way people are called to nursing or religion, I’ve always been interested in death,” she explains.

“It’s going to happen to everybody. It might be unique for you and the relationships you are grieving but if you feel it just by yourself it can be a lonely experience.

“When you start talking about it you realise it’s not so scary.”

Jenny first attended a death café online during the coronavirus pandemic, and notes she wasn’t looking to work through any “traumatic bereavement” – she was simply interested in the subject.

As face-to-face meetings resumed, she could not find any local groups offering discussions about grief around Glasgow.

Taking the plunge, she set up her own meeting space around two and-a-half years ago in the Battlefield area of Glasgow, panicking that no-one would turn up.

However people did – sometimes just occasionally, others more consistently – to have some tea and a slice of cake while discussing mortality and life.

On the night BBC Scotland visited Jenny’s café, the attendees were a mix of regulars and first timers, drawn to the meeting for various reasons.

As well as those processing grief, Jenny believes another 25% or so would be people diagnosed with a serious condition or caring for someone. The remainder tends to be people simply interested in the topic.

“Whatever people want to talk about, nothing is off limits,” says Jenny.

“People laugh, they’ll cry and at the end I think everyone learns something, whether that’s reflecting on their own experience or suddenly realising they should get power of attorney.”

That sentiment is shared by Nicola Smith, one of the more regular attendees at the Battlefield meetings.

She came along to one of the sessions the same day a close friend of hers had died, and “the tears flowed”.

But letting her emotions pour out is not the only reason that Nicola keeps attending.

“It’s such an intrinsic part of our life and living, and yet we don’t talk about it,” she told BBC Scotland.

“We don’t know how to deal with it, because we don’t do enough talking about it. I lost a very dear relative when my children were very small, and it was the first time my daughter had seen me cry.

“She asked me why my face was wet, and it was the time to explain it was OK to cry and this is what happens when you lose someone you love. It’s not a weakness, it’s not something you hush up.”

Nicola added she believed the topic had become more taboo among modern generations due to the growth of hospice care since the 1960s, meaning a decrease in people dying at home.

Those trends could explain the growth in death cafés – the first in the UK was held in 2011 in London, and now there are 3,794 across the UK.

In Scotland there are dozens, from Ullapool to Kirkcudbright, but mostly clustered in cities like Glasgow and Edinburgh.

Discussion topics bounce around at the meetings, from practical advice on wills and power of attorney to more emotional reflections on personal experiences.

They form part of a wider conversation on loss and care, exemplified by May’s Demystifying Death week that aims to help people support each other during traumatic experiences.

Another visitor in Jenny’s group, John Mackay, wrote his PHD about death and the mourning process. He was attending his first death café in Glasgow with the intention of discussing the subject more.

“There’s such a taboo about death, but you can take a lighter look at it,” he says.

“The problem is that people don’t talk about it. If you see funerals from other cultures it’s very loud and very expressive, but in this country it’s very reserved.

“You have to make sure you don’t say the wrong thing and that you wear the right clothes – it would be good to loosen it up as well.”

Others suggest the greatest benefit of the café is more simple – in that it provides perspective on life.

Spencer Mason previously attempted to end their life, but is currently coping with the end-of-life care of a person close to them.

“I think the more we discuss death then surely the more appreciative you become of life,” they say.

“In circumstances where I’ve become close to death, I’ve come out of them wanting life more than ever.”

Daniel Graham and Adam Carruthers were best mates when they illegally felled the much-loved Sycamore Gap tree together. How did they end up turning on each other?

It is hard to imagine they were once friends.

Daniel Graham and Adam Carruthers used to phone each other every day and met up several times a week but, as they stood in the dock at Newcastle Crown Court, waiting for the verdicts to be returned, they looked like complete strangers.

The prosecution called them “the odd couple” who did everything together.

They became friends about four years ago.

Carruthers was a mechanic and did Graham “a good turn” by fixing his dad’s Land Rover, making a special job of it so it could be used for Graham’s father’s funeral.

Graham was a ground worker and he enlisted the man he called his “best pal” to help him on jobs, with tasks including the felling of trees for which they split the cash 50/50.

Then one night, during Storm Agnes in 2023, the friends went to Sycamore Gap.

Under the cover of darkness, they trekked across marshland in winds of up to 60mph and used their experience to mark the trunk, cut a wedge out of it so they knew which direction it would fall and then cut it down with a chainsaw.

They filmed it and watched the sycamore crashing to the ground.

What they didn’t realise is that the phone and vehicle they used would be tracked and the conversations they had would be discovered.

As the police questioning began, their stories unravelled and so did their friendship.

Graham’s phone was used to film the felling.

Road and CCTV cameras captured his Range Rover going to and from Steel Rigg, the nearest public car park to the tree.

He told the court his car and phone were used by other people, including Adam Carruthers “who didn’t need to ask”.

Prosecutor Richard Wright KC was incredulous at his claims, telling jurors: “According to Graham he didn’t go out all night and Carruthers took his car and phone while he slept in blissful ignorance, and his large dog let out not so much as a growl.”

It wasn’t the only story that was mocked in court.

Carruthers’ phone had been traced to Northumberland the day the tree was felled.

It was suggested to him he was scoping the area out.

He told the court he was taking his partner out on a three-hour round trip for a meal at the Metrocentre in Gateshead after she’d recently given birth, but their baby started crying so they turned the car around at a spot that just happened to be near the tree.

Christopher Knox, Graham’s barrister, said: “You’re telling the jury in spite of the fact she wasn’t well enough to lift a baby, you were going 65 miles with [your partner] and a new-born?”

Mr Wright asked Carruthers why they didn’t just go for dinner in Carlisle, a short drive from their home.

Carruthers agreed there were restaurants in the Cumbrian city but they were “not the best”.

He claimed he was at home all night, fixing the roof of his shed and washing some clothes.

Since that night, the court heard the pair had fallen out spectacularly.

Carruthers’ barrister Andrew Gurney said Graham named his former friend as the culprit because he needed a scapegoat.

“Having found himself in the dock, [Graham’s] reached desperately for a lifeline,” Mr Gurney said, adding: “He tried to throw Adam Carruthers under the bus to save his own skin.”

Graham initially told police he knew who had cut down the tree but would not “grass” as the culprit had young children, a not so subtle nod towards his friend.

When he felt police were still paying too much attention to him and not enough to Carruthers, he showed officers a picture of his friend holding some owls while standing next to a box of chainsaws.

In August 2024, some 11 months after the felling, he made an anonymous call to police to name Carruthers outright.

Officers recognised Graham’s voice immediately and he was forced to admit to jurors he had indeed made the call.

Both men said the friendship ended abruptly one night in the aftermath of the felling and their arrests.

Graham drove to Carruthers’ home and said they each had to go their own way, and that was that.

Mr Knox said his client had been accused of being “stroppy” while giving evidence in court, engaging in heated clashes with Mr Wright.

“Does that make him the Sycamore Gap tree murderer?” he asked the jury , or “does it mean exactly what he said in his police interviews – he’s been dropped in this?”

Jurors clearly thought the former.

Emotions were running high right to the very end of the trial when the judge told them both to expect a significant period of time in custody.

As Graham was led away from the dock, he had an angry exchange with a member of the public.

We still don’t know which of the pair cut down the tree and which filmed it.

The prosecution said it didn’t matter, that they were “in it together, from first to last”.

They might have fallen out but they were side by side again in court, united by the two things they will forever share – guilt at destroying a globally-beloved landmark and too much cowardice to admit it.

Earlier this year, Deborah Grushkin, an enthusiastic online shopper from New Jersey, “freaked out”.

US President Donald Trump had signed an order to stop allowing packages from China worth less than $800 (£601) to enter the country free of import taxes and customs procedures.

It was a move, backed by traditional retailers, that had been discussed in Washington for years amid an explosion of packages slipping into the US under the limit.

Many countries, including the UK, are considering similar measures, spurred in part by the rapid ascent of Shein and Temu.

But in the US, Trump’s decision to end the carve-out while ordering a blitz of new trade tariffs, including import taxes of at least 145% on goods from China, has delivered a one-two punch that has left businesses and shoppers reeling.

US-based e-commerce brands, which were set up around the system, are warning the changes could spark failures of smaller firms, while shoppers like Deborah brace for price hikes and shortages.

With the 2 May deadline bearing down, the 36-year-old last month rushed in some $400 worth of items from Shein – including stickers, T-shirts, sweatshirts, Mother’s Days gifts and 20 tubes of liquid eyeliner.

“I felt like maybe it was my last sort of hurrah,” she says.

Use of rules known as “de minimis”, which allow low-value packages to avoid tariffs, customs inspections and other regulatory requirements, has surged over the last decade.

Take-up accelerated during Trump’s first term in office, when he raised tariffs on many Chinese goods.

By 2023, such shipments represented more than 7% of consumer imports, up from less than 0.01% a decade earlier. Last year, nearly 1.4 billion packages entered the country using the exemption – more than 3.7 million a day.

Advocates of the carve-out, which include shipping firms, say the system has streamlined trade, leading to lower prices and more options for customers.

Those in favour of change, a group that includes lawmakers from both parties, say businesses are abusing rules intended to ease gifts between family and friends, and the rise has made it easier to slip products that are illegal, counterfeit or violate safety standards and other rules into the country.

Trump recently called de minimis a “scam”, brushing off concerns about higher costs. “Maybe the children will have two dolls instead of 30 dolls,” he said.

However, polls suggest concerns about his economic policies are rising as the changes start to hit home.

Krystal DuFrene, a retired 57-year-old from Mississippi who relies on disability payments for her income, says she has nervously been checking prices on Temu for weeks, recently cancelling an order for curtains after seeing the price more than triple.

Though she eventually found the same item for the original price in the platform’s US warehouse network, she says the cost of her husband’s fishing nets had more than doubled.

“I don’t know who pays the tariff except the customer,” she says. “Everywhere is selling cheap stuff from China so I actually prefer being able to order directly.”

When the rules around de minimis changed last week, Temu said it would stop selling goods imported from China in the US directly to customers from its platform, and that all sales would now be handled by “locally based sellers”, with orders fulfilled from within the US.

Even without the latest tariffs, economists Pablo Fajgelbaum and Amit Khandelwal had estimated that ending de minimis would lead to at least $10.9bn in new costs, which they found would be disproportionately borne by lower income and minority households.

“It does kind of feel like the end of an era,” says Gee Davis, a 40-year-old author from Missouri, who used Temu during a recent house move to buy small items such as an electric can opener and kitchen cabinet organisers.

She says it was a relief to be able to easily afford the extras and the new rules felt like a “money grab” by the government to benefit big, entrenched American retailers like Amazon and Walmart that sell similar products – but at a bigger mark-up.

“I don’t think it’s right or fair that little treats should be [restricted] to people who are richer.

“It just would be a real bummer if everyone who was under a certain household income threshold was just no longer able to afford anything for themselves.”

As with other Trump policy changes, questions remain about the significance of the shift.

The president was already forced to suspend the policy once before, as packages began piling up at the border.

Lori Wallach, director at Rethink Trade, which supports ending de minimis for consumer safety reasons, says the end of the exemption is significant “on paper”, but she fears the administration is taking steps that will weaken its implementation.

She points to a recent customs notice, which said products affected by many of the new tariffs could enter the country through the informal process, a move that eases some regulatory requirements.

“Practically, because all of this stuff can come though informal entry, it’s going to be extremely hard to collect tariffs or to be able to inspect really very much more than before the change happened,” she says.

Customs and Border Protection deny the move will undermine enforcement, noting that firms are still required to supply more information than before.

Businesses have indicated they are taking the changes seriously.

Both Shein and Temu last month warned customers that prices would rise, while Temu says it is rapidly expanding its network of US-based sellers and warehouses to protect its low prices.

Other business groups say many smaller, less high-profile American brands that manufacture abroad for US customers are struggling – and may not survive.

“If the tariffs weren’t in place, it would be like taking a little bit of bitter medicine,” says Alex Beller, board member of the Ecommerce Innovation Alliance, a business lobby group and a co-founder of Postscript, which works with thousands of smaller businesses on text messaging marketing.

“But paired with the other tariffs, especially for brands that manufacture in China, it just becomes an insurmountable shift.”

In a letter to the government last month, men’s clothing company Indochino, known for its custom suits made-to-order in China, warned that ending de minimis posed a “significant threat to the viability” of its business and other mid-size American firms like it.

Steven Borelli is the chief executive of the athleisure clothing firm CUTS, which manufactures outside the US, shipping products to a warehouse in Mexico, from where packages are mailed to customers in the US.

His firm has been pushing to reduce its reliance on China, halting orders in the country months ago. Still, he says he is now considering price increases and job cuts.

He says his business has room to manoeuvre, since it caters to higher income customers, but he expects “thousands” of other brands to die without changes to the situation.

“We want more time,” he says. “The speed at which everything is happening is too fast for businesses to adjust.”

The US-China trade war could be letting up, with the world’s two largest economies beginning talks in Switzerland.

Top trade officials from both sides met on Saturday in the first high-level meeting since US President Donald Trump hit China with tariffs in January.

Beijing retaliated immediately and a tense stand-off ensued as the two countries heaped levies on each other. New US tariffs on Chinese imports stand at 145%, and some US exports to China face duties of 125%.

There have been weeks of stern, and sometimes fiery, rhetoric where each side sought to paint the other as the more desperate party.

And yet this weekend they face each other over the negotiating table.

So why now?

Despite multiple rounds of tit-for-tat tariffs, both sides have been sending signals that they want to break the deadlock. Except it wasn’t clear who would blink first.

“Neither side wants to appear to be backing down,” said Stephen Olson, senior visiting fellow at Singapore’s ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute and a former US trade negotiator.

“The talks are taking place now because both countries have judged that they can move forward without appearing to have caved in to the other side.”

Still, China’s foreign ministry spokesperson Lin Jian emphasised on Wednesday that “the talks are being held at the request of the US”.

And the commerce ministry framed it as a favour to Washington, saying it was answering the “calls of US businesses and consumers”.

The Trump administration, however, claims it’s Chinese officials who “want to do business very much” because “their economy is collapsing”.

“They said we initiated? Well, I think they ought to go back and study their files,” Trump said at the White House on Wednesday.

But as the talks drew closer, the president struck a more diplomatic note: “We can all play games. Who made the first call, who didn’t make the – it doesn’t matter,” he told reporters on Thursday. “It only matters what happens in that room.”

The timing is also key for Beijing because it’s during Xi’s visit to Moscow. He was a guest of honour on Friday at Moscow’s Victory Day parade to commemorate the 80th anniversary of the World War Two victory over Nazi Germany.

Xi stood alongside leaders from across the Global South – a reminder to Trump’s administration that China not only has other options for trade, but it is also presenting itself as an alternative global leader.

This allows Beijing to project strength even as it heads to the negotiating table.

Trump insists that the tariffs will make America stronger, and Beijing has vowed to “fight till the end”- but the fact is the levies are hurting both countries.

Factory output in China has taken a hit, according to government data. Manufacturing activity in April dipped to the lowest level since December 2023. And a survey by news outlet Caixin this week showed that services activity has reached a seven-month low.

The BBC found that Chinese exporters have been reeling from the steep tariffs, with stock piling up in warehouses, even as they strike a defiant note and look for markets beyond the US.

“I think [China] realises that a deal is better than no deal,” says Bert Hofman, a professor at the East Asian Institute in National University Singapore.

“So they’ve taken a pragmatic view and said, ‘OK, well we need to get these talks going.'”

And so with the major May Day holiday in China over, officials in Beijing have decided the time is right to talk.

On the other side, the uncertainty caused by tariffs led to the US economy contracting for the first time in three years.

And industries that have long depended on Chinese-made goods are especially worried. A Los Angeles toy company owner told the BBC that they were “looking at the total implosion of the supply chain”.

Trump himself has acknowledged that US consumers will feel the sting.

American children may “have two dolls instead of 30 dolls”, he said at a cabinet meeting this month, “and maybe the two dolls will cost a couple bucks more than they would normally”.

Trump’s approval ratings have also slid over fears of inflation and a possible recession, with more than 60% of Americans saying he was focusing too much on tariffs.

“Both countries are feeling pressure to provide a bit of reassurance to increasingly nervous markets, businesses, and domestic constituencies,” Mr Olson says.

“A couple of days of meetings in Geneva will serve that purpose.”

While the talks have been met with optimism, a deal may take a while to materialise.

The talks will mostly be about “touching base”, Mr Hofman said, adding that this could look like an “exchange of positions” and, if things go well, “an agenda [will be] set for future talks”.

The negotiations on the whole are expected to take months, much like what happened during Trump’s first term.

After nearly two years of tit-for-tat tariffs, the US and China signed a “phase one” deal in early 2020 to suspend or reduce some levies. Even then, it did not include thornier issues, such as Chinese government subsidies for key industries or a timeline for scrapping the remaining tariffs.

In fact, many of them stayed in place through Joe Biden’s presidency, and Trump’s latest tariffs add to those older levies.

What could emerge this time is a “phase one deal on steroids”, Mr Olson said: that is, it would go beyond the earlier deal and try to address flashpoints. There are many, from the illegal fentanyl trade which Washington wants China to crack down harder on to Beijing’s relationship with Moscow.

But all of that is far down the line, experts warn.

“The systemic frictions that bedevil the US-China trade relationship will not be solved any time soon,” Mr Olson adds.

“Geneva will only produce anodyne statements about ‘frank dialogues’ and the desire to keep talking.”

Former British Army officer and mercenary Simon Mann, who was part of a coup attempt in Equatorial Guinea in 2004, has died of a heart attack while exercising, friends confirmed.

The 72-year-old made millions of pounds from protecting businesses in conflict zones before he took part in the failed attempt to overthrow the west African nation’s ruler.

Mann was sentenced to 34 years in prison on arms charges and later said he had been the “manager, not the architect” of the scheme.

In 2009, the ex-SAS commando was pardoned, released and given 48 hours to leave the country.

The plot had been an attempt to overthrow President Teodoro Obiang Nguema – at the time Mann and co-conspirators said the aim was to install exiled opposition leader Severo Moto.

It was uncovered after police in Zimbabwe’s capital Harare impounded a plane which had flown in from South Africa.

Mann and more than 60 others were arrested, amid claims they were mercenaries.

They said they were providing security for a mine in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Mann attended private boys’ school Eton before studying at Sandhurst Royal Military Academy and then joining the Scots Guards.

He became a member of the SAS – the army’s special forces unit – and rose through the ranks to become a commander.

In 2011, he said the attempted coup in Equatorial Guinea – which saw him arrested with fellow mercenaries after trying to load weapons onto a plane in Zimbabwe – was foiled by the CIA.

After serving three years of his 34-year sentence in Zimbabwe, he was moved to Black Beach Prison in Equatorial Guinea.

Speaking in 2011 about that move, he said “friends, family, and enemies” had told him “if that happens, you have had it, you’re a dead man”.

After being pardoned and released, he expressed regret for what he had done, saying that “however good the money is”, the moral case “has to stack up”.

The US has confirmed that a new system for providing humanitarian aid to Palestinians in Gaza through private companies is being prepared, as Israel’s blockade continues for a third month.

US ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee said “distribution centres” protected by security contractors would provide food and other supplies to over a million people initially, as part of an effort to prevent Hamas stealing aid.

He denied Israel would take part in aid delivery or distribution, but said its forces would secure the centres’ perimeters.

It comes as details emerged about the controversial plan, which UN agencies have reiterated they will not co-operate with because it appears to “weaponise” aid.

“We will not participate,” the spokesman for the UN’s Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), Jens Laerke, told the BBC in Geneva, “only in efforts that are in line with our principles”.

He added: “There is no reason to put in place a system that is at odds with the DNA of any principled humanitarian organisation.”

Since early March, Israel has cut off all supplies from reaching Gaza – including food, shelters, medicines and fuel – leading to a humanitarian crisis for its 2.1 million residents.

A third of the community kitchens in Gaza – one of the territory’s last remaining lifelines – have been forced to shut down over the past two weeks due to shortages of food and fuel, according to OCHA.

Among them were the last two field kitchens of World Central Kitchen, a US-based charity which had been providing 133,000 meals daily before it ran out of ingredients on Tuesday.

Prices of basic foodstuffs have also skyrocketed at local markets, with a 25kg (55lb) bag of flour now selling for $415 (£313) in Gaza City – a 30-fold increase compared to the end of February, OCHA says.

Huckabee told journalists in Jerusalem that US President Donald Trump saw aid for Gaza as an urgent matter and that his team was tasked “to do everything possible to accelerate that and to as expeditiously as possible get humanitarian aid into the people”.

Israel and the US accuse Hamas of diverting aid. “Previous actions have often been met with Hamas stealing the food that was intended for hungry people,” the ambassador said.

The UN and other agencies say they have strong supervisory mechanisms and that when aid has surged into Gaza, incidents of looting have largely halted. The World Health Organization says none of its medical supplies have been looted during the war.

The Trump administration is trying to build momentum behind the new aid initiative ahead of the president’s trip next week to wealthy Arab Gulf countries that could help to fund it.

It says that a non-governmental organisation has been set up and that aid delivery will not be under Israeli military control.

Huckabee said: “The Israelis are going to be involved in providing necessary security because this is a war zone. But they will not be involved in the distribution of the food, or even the bringing of food into Gaza.”

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt was asked on Friday whether the plan would “militarise” aid distribution in the region.

“I would reject that characterisation,” she responded.

The newly registered Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) appears to have been set up for this purpose.

A 14-page document from GHF, seen by the BBC, promises to set up four distribution sites, giving out food, water and hygiene kits initially for 1.2 million people – less than 60% of the population. It says the project aims to reach all Gazans eventually.

Aimed at potential donors, the paper states that “months of conflict have collapsed traditional relief channels in Gaza”.

It goes on: “GHF was established to restore that vital lifeline through an independent, rigorously-audited model that gets assistance directly – and only – to those in need.”

The document maintains that GHF is “guided by the humanitarian principles of humanity, neutrality, impartiality and independence”.

Its boards of directors and advisors are said to include a former chief executive of World Central Kitchen, along with the American former head of the UN’s World Food Programme, David Beasley – though his participation is not yet confirmed.

Full details of how the aid mechanism will work on the ground are not given.

The Gaza war was triggered by the Hamas-led attacks on southern Israel on 7 October 2023, which saw about 1,200 people killed and more than 250 taken hostage. Some 59 are still held captive, up to 24 of whom are believed to be alive.

Israel’s military campaign has killed more than 52,700 people in Gaza, mostly women, children and the elderly, according to the Hamas-run health ministry.

Last Sunday, Israel’s security cabinet approved an intensified military offensive against Hamas in Gaza which could involve forcibly displacing the population to the south, seizing the entire territory indefinitely, and controlling aid.

This was quickly met with widespread international condemnation. Many of Israel’s allies pointed out that it was bound under international law to allow the unhindered passage of humanitarian aid.

The UK’s Minister for the Middle East, Hamish Falconer, told Parliament on Monday that the British government was gravely concerned that the Israeli announcements could lead to the 19-month-long war in Gaza entering “a dangerous new phase”.

On the subject of aid, he said: “As the UN has said, it is hard to see how, if implemented, the new Israeli plan to deliver aid through private companies would be consistent with humanitarian principles and meet the scale of the need. We need urgent clarity from the Israeli government on their intentions.

“We must remember what is at stake. These humanitarian principles matter for every conflict around the world. They should be applied consistently in every war zone.”

This week, the US Special Envoy for the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, briefed members of the UN Security Council – which includes the UK – behind closed doors about the new plan to resume the delivery of aid.

The Council’s five European members – the UK, France, Denmark, Greece and Slovenia – have requested an urgent meeting to discuss the humanitarian situation in Gaza, likely to be scheduled for Tuesday.

The UK delegation said Israel’s blockade was “inexcusable”, adding that the only way to end the suffering of both Palestinians and Israelis was to return to a ceasefire, secure the release of all hostages and “surge” aid into Gaza.

Meanwhile, Israeli media reported that Israeli forces were already setting up distribution hubs in Rafah, in southern Gaza, in “a sterile zone” designed to be free of any Hamas presence.

According to reports, Israel expects that aid will be distributed to security-screened representatives from each Gazan family who would be allowed to take supplies for his or her relatives only. They would be allowed into the hubs only on foot.

The Israeli defence establishment was said to have assessed that the average quantity of aid that would have to be distributed as 70kg (154lb) per family per week.

The Israeli military would ultimately be stationed outside the distribution hubs, allowing aid workers to hand out food without soldiers being directly involved, the reports say.

Israel and the US argue that the new system would prevent Hamas from being able to steal food for its own benefit. By preventing its access to aid and involvement in security for convoys, they hope to reduce the group’s influence over the Gazan population.

However, there are major questions over the plan’s feasibility. The current UN system uses some 400 points of aid distribution, while the situation in Gaza is now at a crisis point, with warnings that mass starvation is imminent.

At a UN briefing in Geneva, aid officials said they had carried out “careful analysis” before deciding they could not participate in the US-Israeli scheme. They said they had not been formally presented with the GHF document that is currently circulating.

James Elder, spokesman for the UN’s children’s agency Unicef, said the plan that had been laid out would lead to more children suffering, not fewer. He noted that civilians would have to travel to militarised zones to receive aid, meaning the most vulnerable – children and the elderly – would struggle to get there.

He said the decision to locate all the distribution points in the south appeared designed to use aid as “a bait” to forcibly displace Gazans once again. The UN says 90% of the population has been displaced during the war, often many times.

The plan that has been discussed with UN agencies envisages just 60 lorry loads of aid entering each day – far less than they say is needed to meet growing needs, and a tenth of the number that went in daily during the recent two-month ceasefire.

OCHA’s Jens Laerke said that in short, the proposals from Israel “do not meet the minimum bar for principled humanitarian support”.

Analysts say that the current impasse over aid for Gaza is not only an existential threat to the UN’s vast humanitarian operation in the Palestinian territory but could also have implications for its future work.

If it was to agree to a scheme accommodating the demands of the military on one side in a conflict, it could dent perceptions of the UN’s neutrality and impartiality, and set a dangerous precedent leading to similar demands in other war zones where it operates.

The UN and other aid agencies also point out that they currently have tonnes of supplies piled up near Gaza’s border crossings, ready to enter, if Israel would allow it.

Without an end to the blockade, the risk of famine is expected to grow.

In Jabalia, in northern Gaza, which has already been the focus of Israeli military operations against Hamas, Palestinian families told the BBC of their growing despair as they waited for a food handout at a takia, or community kitchen, which turned into a chaotic scramble.

“Every day I come here and wait with my cooking pot to feed my children,” Umm Ahmed said. “The pot doesn’t fill us up. We have been suffering for two months. There’s no flour or anything. Open the borders so we can eat properly.”

She said she would not comply with Israeli efforts to force her to move south to Rafah to receive aid.

“We don’t have money for transport, we don’t have money to eat!” she exclaimed. “I don’t want to evacuate from here, I’d rather die than leave.”

“The takia is our last source of food,” said Mohammed, who had been waiting for five hours in line. “My wife is pregnant and sick, and I’m unable to get her to the hospital. How am I supposed to get to Rafah?”

Sweden’s new national security adviser quit hours after taking up the role as sensitive pictures of him on the dating app Grindr were sent anonymously to the government.

Tobias Thyberg, who took up the job on Thursday and resigned on Friday morning, had omitted the information during security background checks, the government said.

“These are old pictures from an account I previously had on the dating site Grindr. I should have informed about this, but I did not,” he told newspaper Dagens Nyheter.

Thyberg had been due to be in Norway on Friday with the prime minister for a meeting of northern European leaders, but the adviser’s participation was cancelled.

According to information provided to Swedish newspaper Expressen, the government received several images of a sexual nature from an anonymous sender.

It happened shortly after a press release announcing Thyberg taking up the national security adviser job had been issued.

On Friday Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson said the information should have come to light during the vetting process, according to Reuters.

“It is a systemic failure that this kind of information has not been brought forward,” Kristersson told reporters in Oslo.

The resignation comes just months after Thyberg’s predecessor in the high-profile job stepped down and was charged with negligent handling of classified information.

Henrik Landerholm announced his resignation in January as police opened an investigation after he allegedly left classified documents in an unlocked safe at a hotel during a conference.

In March Landerholm was charged with careless handling of secret information.

Prosecutors said in the indictment that Landerholm had through negligence disclosed “information relating to conditions of a secret nature and whose disclosure to a foreign power could cause harm to Sweden’s security”.

According to Swedish media, his lawyer has previously said that Landerholm believes he is not guilty.

Mexico is suing Google for ignoring repeated requests not to rename the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of America for US users on its maps service, Claudia Sheinbaum has said.

The Mexican president did not say where the lawsuit had been filed. Google did not respond to the BBC’s request for comment.

On Thursday, the Republican-led House of Representatives voted to officially rename the Gulf for federal agencies.

US President Donald Trump signed an executive order on his first day in office in January calling for the body of water to be renamed, arguing the change was justified because the US “do most of the work there, and it’s ours”.

However, Sheinbaum’s government contends that Trump’s order applies only to the US portion of the continental shelf.

“All we want is for the decree issued by the US government to be complied with,” she said, asserting that the US lacks the authority to rename the entire gulf.

Sheinbaum wrote a letter to Google in January asking the firm to reconsider its decision to rename the Gulf of Mexico for US users. The following month, she threatened legal action.

At the time, Google said it made the change as part of “a longstanding practice” of following name changes when updated by official government sources.

It said the gulf – which is bordered by the US, Cuba and Mexico – would not be changed for people using the app in Mexico, and users elsewhere in the world will see the label: “Gulf of Mexico (Gulf of America)”.

The Associated Press (AP) news agency’s refusal to use the Gulf of America name led to a months-long conflict with the White House, which restricted AP’s access to certain events.

A federal judge ordered the White House in April to stop sidelining the outlet.

Trump hinted on Wednesday that he may recommend changing the way the US refers to another body of water.

During an upcoming visit to Saudi Arabia, he plans to announce that the US will henceforth refer to the Persian Gulf as the Arabian Gulf or the Gulf of Arabia, AP reported.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi has responded by saying he hopes the “absurd rumours” are “no more than a disinformation campaign” and that such a move would “bring the wrath of all Iranians”.

US President Donald Trump has appointed Fox News host and former New York prosecutor Jeanine Pirro as interim US attorney for Washington DC.

The announcement comes after Trump withdrew his first pick for the job after he lost key Republican support in the Senate, which votes on such positions.

After Trump’s 2020 loss to Joe Biden, Pirro made false statements about the election that were part of a lawsuit against Fox News by a company that makes voting machines. The case was settled for more than $787m (£594m).

Trump called Pirro “a powerful crusader for victims of crime” in a social media post announcing his selection. Meanwhile, critics described her as unqualified.

The president did not indicate whether Pirro, 73, would serve in the job permanently, which requires Senate confirmation, or how long her term would last.

In the Truth Social post on Thursday night, Trump noted that she previously served as a Republican district attorney in Westchester, New York, as well as a judge. He also touted her roles on various shows on Fox News, including on The Five, which he called “one of the Highest Rated Shows on Television”.

Pirro has been a close ally of Trump for decades. In one of his last actions during his first term, he issued a pardon to her husband, who had been convicted of tax evasion decades earlier.

Democrats were quick to criticise the appointment of Pirro, the second Fox News host with to receive a high-profile federal job after Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth, raising questions about her credentials for the role and about her career outside of broadcasting.

“Which Fox News host will get the next federal appointment,” Jimmy Gomez, a Democrat representative from California, wrote on X.

The Democratic National Committee wrote in a statement: “Jeanine Pirro is yet another unqualified TV personality with a history of putting Trump and violent insurrectionists above the rule of law.”

Republicans, like South Carolina Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, celebrated the news on social media. He called Pirro a “grand slam, home run” choice.

“She is exactly the right person at the right time to take on this responsibility,” Graham said on X.

Pirro replaces current interim US attorney Ed Martin, a former conservative podcaster who Trump appointed this January.

He was let go after North Carolina Republican Senator Thom Tillis, a key swing vote, said he would refuse to confirm Martin for the role on a permanent basis, citing “friction” over how Martin viewed those involved in the 6 January 2021 riots at the US Capitol.

Tillis told reporters this week that he had “no tolerance for anybody who entered the building on January 6”.

Martin has been a staunch critic of the investigation into the Capitol riots. While serving in the role on an interim basis, he fired prosecutors who oversaw prosecutions of alleged and convicted rioters.

Trump said Martin will remain at the US Justice Department and serve as director of the “weaponization working group”, which looks into officials who investigated Trump, the president said in another post on social media.

Since taking office, Trump has issued pardons and ended prosecutions against 6 January rioters who stormed the US Capitol in an effort to block Biden’s election win over Trump in the 2020 election.

South Africa has criticised the US as reports emerge suggesting Washington could receive white Afrikaners as refugees as early as next week.

A document seen by the BBC’s US partner CBS describes the potential resettlement as a “priority” for President Donald Trump’s government, however the timing has not been publicly confirmed by the White House.

In a statement published on Friday, South Africa’s foreign ministry described the purported move as “politically motivated” and designed to undermine South Africa’s “constitutional democracy”.

In February, Trump described Afrikaners as victims of “racial discrimination” in an executive order, opening up the prospect for them to resettle in the US.

The South African authorities said they would not block the departures of those chosen for resettlement, but said they had sought assurances from the US that those selected had been fully vetted and did not have pending criminal charges.

The statement added that allegations of discrimination against the country’s white minority were unfounded, and that crime statistics did not indicate that any racial group had been targeted in violent crimes on farms.

Some groups representing the rights of white farmers have said they are being deliberately killed because of their race.

A spokesperson for the US state department told the BBC they were interviewing individuals interested in resettling in the US and prioritising “Afrikaners in South Africa who are victims of unjust racial discrimination”.

They did not confirm when the resettlement would begin.

The Trump administration has also accused South Africa of seizing land from white farmers without compensation, something Pretoria has repeatedly denied.

Elon Musk, a top adviser in the Trump administration who grew up in South Africa during apartheid, has been critical of Pretoria, claiming that it is leading a “genocide” against white farmers.

US officials have planned a press event on Monday at Dulles airport in Virginia to welcome the group, the documents seen by CBS show.

According to US media, 54 Afrikaners will arrive as part of the first group.

The decision to accept South Africans as refugees comes as the Trump administration has halted nearly all migrant asylum claims.

In February, South Africa criticised Trump’s executive order opening the US up to the resettlement of white Afrikaners, saying in a statement that “it is ironic” the US is open to accepting a group “that remains amongst the most economically privileged” while denying vulnerable people from other parts of the world asylum.

• Almost 70,000 South Africans interested in US asylum
• Race policies or Israel – what’s really driving Trump’s fury with South Africa?
• The expelled envoy at the heart of the latest US-South Africa row

Donald Trump’s administration is “actively looking at” suspending habeas corpus – the right of a person to challenge their detention in court – one of the US president’s top aides has said.

Stephen Miller, the White House deputy chief of staff, told reporters on Friday that the US Constitution allowed for the legal liberty to be suspended in times of “rebellion or invasion”.

His comments come as judges have sought to challenge some recent detentions made by the Trump administration in an effort to combat illegal immigration, as well as remove dissenting foreign students.

“A lot of it depends on whether the courts do the right thing or not,” Miller said.

There are several pending civil cases against the Trump administration’s deportation of undocumented migrants based on habeaus corpus.

Most recently, a federal judge ordered the release of a Turkish university student who had been detained for six weeks after writing an article that was critical of Israel.

Last week, another judge ordered a Columbia University student detained over his advocacy for Palestinians be released after a petition on habeas corpus grounds.

However, other judges have sided with the Trump administration in such disputes.

Miller described habeas corpus as a “privilege”, and said Congress had already passed a law stripping judicial courts of jurisdiction over immigration cases.

Legal experts and critics have questioned the veracity of his interpretation of US law.

“Congress has the authority to suspend habeas corpus – not Stephen Miller, not the president,” Marc Elias, an attorney for the Democratic Party, told MSNBC.

One of Trump’s key campaign pledges was to deport millions of immigrants from the US, and his administration has pursued different means of expediting deportations since returning to the White House.

In March, a federal judge’s order prevented the Trump administration from invoking a centuries-old wartime law to justify deporting more than 200 Venezuelans, despite the flights going ahead.

But deportations have lagged behind detentions – while one person has been deported erroneously.

• Trump’s first 100 days in office

CNN reported, citing unnamed sources, that Trump was personally involved in the discussions around suspending habeas corpus.

Trump himself has not mentioned the suspension of habeas corpus, but has said he would take steps to combat injunctions against his actions on deportation.

• Listen: The President’s Path: Doubling Down on Deportations

“There are ways to mitigate it and there’s some very strong ways,” he said in April.

“There’s one way that’s been used by three very highly respected presidents, but we hope we don’t have to go that route.”

Habeas corpus – which literally means “you should have the body” – allows for a person to be brought before a judge so the legality of their detention can be decided by a judge.

The legal right has been suspended four times in US history: during the American Civil War under Abraham Lincoln, in Hawaii following the 1941 Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbour, in the Philippines during US ownership in 1905, and while combat the activities of the white supremacist Ku Klux Klan group in the 19th Century.

The section of the US Constitution which includes the suspension of habeas corpus grants its powers to Congress and not the president.

Catholicism has rarely been more prominent in US politics as the Trump administration openly embraces advisers and officials who proudly say faith has shaped their views.

But any jubilation on the American Make America Great Again right about the new Pope this week quickly dissipated as key voices from Donald Trump’s Maga movement came to a disappointed conclusion: the first American Pope does not appear to be “America first”.

Little is known about the political leanings of Pope Leo XIV, born Robert Francis Prevost in Chicago.

He has voiced concerns for the poor and immigrants, chosen a name that may reference more liberal church leadership, and he appears to have both supported the liberal-leaning Pope Francis and criticised the US president’s policies on social media.

But the president so far has said only that Leo’s election was a “great honour” for the US. Still, some of Trump’s most prominent supporters were quick to attack Pope Leo, lambasting him as a possible challenge to Trump and on the perception that he will follow Pope Francis in areas like immigration.

“I mean it’s kind of jaw-dropping,” Trump’s former chief strategist Steve Bannon told the BBC on Friday, speaking of Leo’s election.

“It is shocking to me that a guy could be selected to be the Pope that had had the Twitter feed and the statements he’s had against American senior politicians,” said Bannon, a hard-right Trump loyalist, practising Catholic and former altar boy.

And he predicted that there’s “definitely going to be friction” between Leo and Trump.

• Pope Leo XIV calls Church ‘a beacon to illuminate dark nights’ in first Mass
• Pope’s first speech in full
• Who is Robert Prevost, the new Pope Leo XIV?

The Pope’s brother, John Prevost, told The New York Times that he thinks his brother would voice his disagreements with the president.

“I know he’s not happy with what’s going on with immigration,” he said. “I know that for a fact. How far he’ll go with it is only one’s guess, but he won’t just sit back. I don’t think he’ll be the silent one.”

Recent survey data shows that about 20% of Americans identify as Catholic, according to the non-partisan Pew Research Center.

About 53% identify with or lean towards the Republican Party, though there’s plenty of nuance, too: America’s two Catholic presidents, John F Kennedy and Joe Biden, were both Democrats. And nearly two-thirds of US Catholics believe abortion should be legal in all or most circumstances – a departure from the Church’s current stance.

US Catholics also broadly supported Pope Francis: 78% of those surveyed in February viewed him favorably, including a majority of Catholic Republicans.

A number of Catholics in the new Pope’s home city of Chicago on Thursday aired disappointment with President Trump and said they hoped Pope Leo XIV would follow the path of his predecessor.

“We hope he’ll continue with Francis’s agenda going forward,” said Rick Stevens, a Catholic deacon from New Jersey who happened to be visiting Chicago when he heard the news.

The US Conference of Catholic Bishops, which leads and coordinates US Catholic activities, celebrated Pope Leo’s election and the message it sends.

“Certainly, we rejoice that a son of this nation has been chosen by the cardinals, but we recognise that he now belongs to all Catholics and to all people of good will,” the conference said in a statement. “His words advocating peace, unity, and missionary activity already indicate a path forward.”

Though Maga supporters represent a small subset of US Catholics, it’s one with outsized access to conservative media and Trump’s ear.

On Bannon’s War Room podcast – known for its hard-right, pro-Trump bent – one guest after another heaped criticism on the new Pope.

“This guy has been massively embraced by the liberals and the progressives,” said Ben Harnwell, a journalist who led Bannon’s efforts to establish what he calls a “gladiator school” for the “Judeo-Christian West” outside of Rome.

“He is one of their own… he has [Pope] Francis’s DNA in him,” Harnwell said.

Jack Posobiec, another Maga commentator dialing in from Rome, was blunt: “This choice of the American cardinal was done as a response, as a message to President Trump.”

The full picture of what led to Pope Leo’s selection on Thursday is still emerging and church decisions don’t map neatly onto US politics. Still, watchers around the world have pored over Pope Leo’s social media profiles in search of clues about his leanings and beliefs.

An X account under his name, with tweets going as far back as 2015, shares links to criticism of Trump’s approach to immigration and hints at other political views, such as stricter gun control.

In February, the account sharply rebuked the US vice-president by posting a link to an opinion piece titled “JD Vance is wrong: Jesus doesn’t ask us to rank our love for others”.

The account also posted a link to a letter from Pope Francis after he clashed with Vance over church doctrine and immigration. Vance – a Catholic convert – had given an interview in defence of the Trump administration’s immigration policies.

Vance has routinely invoked his faith in defense of the administration, particularly immigration policies, which the White House has said put “America first”.

“There is a Christian concept that you love your family and then you love your neighbour, and then you love your community, and then you love your fellow citizens, and then after that, prioritise the rest of the world. A lot of the far left has completely inverted that,” Vance told Fox News.

• What is behind the new Pope’s chosen name, Leo?
• Reaction: ‘I flipped out, I said no way!’ – Chicago celebrates hometown Pope
• Analysis: Continuity the key for Pope seen as unifier in the Church

But US Democrats were not spared either on the account, which has more than a decade of posts. They appear to support Catholic employers who refuse to pay for contraceptives via employee health plans, and following the 2016 US presidential election, one post links to an article accusing Democrat Hillary Clinton of ignoring pro-life Catholic voters.

The BBC asked the Vatican to confirm the account was Leo’s, but did not receive a response.

Vice-President Vance told conservative broadcaster Hugh Hewitt on Friday: “I try not to play the politicisation of the Pope game.

“I’m sure he’s going to say a lot of things that I love. I’m sure he’ll say some things that I disagree with, but I’ll continue to pray for him and the Church despite it all and through it all, and that’ll be the way that I handle it.”

The new Pope’s LGBTQ views are also unclear, but some groups, including the conservative College of Cardinals, believe he may be less supportive than Pope Francis.

Matt Walsh, a commentator with the conservative Daily Wire, wrote: “There are some good signs and bad signs with this new Pope. I want to see what he actually does with his papacy before I pass any kind of judgment.”

But some of the most dedicated Maga supporters already have made up their minds.

Laura Loomer, a far-right influencer who has Trump’s ear, swaying the president on top personnel decisions, called the new Pope “anti-Trump, anti-Maga, pro-open Borders, and a total Marxist like Pope Francis”.

Bannon, who had suggested Leo as a dark horse for the papacy, predicted tensions between the White House and Vatican – and said they could even tear apart American Catholics.

“Remember, President Trump was not shy about taking a shot at Pope Francis,” he said.

“So if this Pope – which he will do – tries to come between President Trump and his implementation of the mass deportation programme, I would stand by.”

Taylor Swift’s representatives have told the BBC she is being brought into a legal row between Justin Baldoni and Blake Lively to create “tabloid clickbait”.

The 35-year-old singer was summoned to a US court after it was alleged she encouraged Baldoni to accept script re-writes by Lively for It Ends With Us, a film that both starred in and is the centre of a sexual harassment case.

Baldoni says he was invited to Lively’s New York home in 2023 to discuss script changes, where Lively’s husband, Ryan Reynolds, and Swift were there to serve as her “dragons”.

Representatives for Swift said “she was not involved in any casting or creative decision” and “never saw an edit or made any notes on the film”.

Lively, 37, sued Baldoni, 41, in December 2024, accusing him of sexual harassment and a smear campaign. Baldoni is counter-suing Lively and her husband, the actor Ryan Reynolds, on claims of civil extortion, defamation and invasion of privacy.

Lively and Baldoni have been locked in a dispute since the film, which is an adaption of a Colleen Hoover novel, was released last summer.

According to Baldoni, there were tensions over the 2023 re-write of the scene, at which he was surprised to find Reynolds and Swift present.

He alleges Lively wrote in a text to him: “If you ever get around to watching Game of Thrones, you’ll appreciate that I’m Khaleesi, and like her, I happen to have a few dragons. For better or worse, but usually better. Because my dragons also protect those I fight for.”

Baldoni says he responded supportively, writing: “I really love what you did. It really does help a lot. Makes it so much more fun and interesting. (And I would have felt that way without Ryan and Taylor).

“You really are a talent across the board. Really excited and grateful to do this together.”

It is also alleged that Swift was involved in the casting of Isabela Ferrer in the film, who played a younger version of Lively’s character, Lily Bloom.

Speaking at the New York premiere of It Ends With Us, Ferrer said: “She [Taylor Swift] was a helpful part of the audition, which I found out later when I got it, and that rocked my world.”

But Swift’s representatives said the only involvement she had in the film was permitting the use of her song, My Tears Ricochet, noting that she was among 20 artists featured in the film.

Swift “never set foot on the set of this movie, she was not involved in any casting or creative decisions, she did not score the film, [and] she never saw an edit or made any notes on the film”, they said.

They added that Swift did not see It Ends With Us until “weeks after its release” as she was “travelling around the globe” on tour at the time.

The popstar’s spokespeople argued that the subpoena “designed to use Taylor Swift’s name to draw public interest by creating tabloid clickbait instead of focusing on the facts of the case”.

European leaders have urged Russia to agree to an unconditional 30-day ceasefire with Ukraine starting on Monday.

The call was issued at a meeting of the “coalition of the willing” in Kyiv. The leaders of France, Germany, the UK and Poland were hosted by Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky, while others joined remotely.

They made the announcement after discussing the plan by phone with US President Donald Trump – who initially mooted an unconditional ceasefire. The leaders threatened Russia with “massive” sanctions if it does not comply.

The Kremlin said it was considering the proposal but would not respond to pressure.

After Saturday’s meeting in Kyiv, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer said: “All of us here together with the US are calling [Russian President Vladimir] Putin out. If he is serious about peace, then he has a chance to show it.”

He was speaking alongside Zelensky, French President Emmanuel Macron, Polish PM Donald Tusk and the new German Chancellor Friedrich Merz.

Zelensky said: “Thank you all for standing with us. Today we will focus on how to build and guarantee real and lasting security.”

Russia has so far insisted that before considering a ceasefire, the West must first halt its military aid to Ukraine.

However, Zelenksy said that the ceasefire should be unconditional.

“Attempts to put forward any conditions would be evidence of an intention to prolong the war and undermine diplomacy,” he added.

Macron said the planned truce would be monitored mainly by the US, with help from European countries. He said in the event of violation, “massive sanctions would be prepared and co-ordinated between Europeans and Americans”.

Merz said the war – which began with the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 – was “solely a war of aggression by Russia, in violation of international law”.

The Kyiv meeting was a symbolic response to the more than 20 leaders who joined Putin in Moscow a day earlier.

Other leaders who joined the Kyiv meeting remotely included Italy’s Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, Canadian PM Mark Carney, President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen, and Mark Rutte, the secretary-general of Nato.

• Ukraine in maps: Tracking the war with Russia
• Putin leads Victory Day celebration in Moscow

A 30-hour ceasefire, called on Friday by Putin to mark Russia’s Victory Day, is due to end later on Saturday. It has seen a decrease in fighting but both sides have accused the other of breaches.

The coalition of the willing was formed to reinforce any eventual peace agreement with security guarantees, including the possibility of placing troops in Ukraine.

Trump earlier reiterated the call for an unconditional 30-day ceasefire after a phone call with Zelensky.

“If the ceasefire is not respected, the US and its partners will impose further sanctions,” he wrote on social media.

In response, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov accused the Europeans of making contradictory statements that “are generally confrontational in nature rather than aimed at trying to revive our relations”.

Russian state media later quoted Peskov as saying: “We have to think this through. But trying to pressure us is quite useless.”

Reports of Russian attacks across Ukraine continue, despite Russia’s claims of a temporary ceasefire.

In the northern Sumy region, an 85-year-old woman was killed, three others were injured, 19 residential homes and 10 other buildings were destroyed or damaged, Ukrainian police said.

In Kostyantynivka, eastern Donetsk region, one person was injured and two apartment blocks caught fire after Russian attacks, Ukrainian state emergency service DSNS said.

And in the southern city of Kherson, a 58-year-old local resident sought medical help after being attacked by a Russian drone carrying explosives, the regional administration said.

Part of a Soviet-era spacecraft is likely to have re-entered the Earth’s atmosphere after being stuck in orbit for more than half a century, the European Space Agency said.

Kosmos 482, which launched in 1972 on a mission to Venus, never made it out of Earth’s orbit and instead broke into four pieces that have been circling the planet for more than five decades.

The EU Space Surveillance and Tracking centre (SST) said one fragment – believed to be the lander – “most likely” re-entered the atmosphere at about 06:16 GMT (07:16 BST) on Saturday.

It is unclear whether the object fell to the ground or burned up in the atmosphere.

It is also unclear exactly where the object re-entered the atmosphere.

While there is much experts do not know about the object’s re-entry, 70% of Earth is covered by sea so it is unlikely to have caused significant damage.

“It’s much more likely that you win the lottery than that you get impacted by this piece of space debris,” Stijn Lemmens, a senior analyst at the European Space Agency, said.

Kosmos 482’s lander capsule was built to survive the extreme heat and pressure of Venus’s atmosphere, meaning it had a robust heat shield and durable structure.

This is why experts think it may have survived an uncontrolled descent through Earth’s atmosphere.

However, Kosmos 482’s parachute system, originally intended to slow the lander’s descent towards Venus, is likely to have degraded after more than 50 years in space.

Mr Lemmens explained that the “re-entry of human-made objects into Earth’s atmosphere occurs quite frequently”. He said it happens weekly for bigger spacecraft and daily for smaller ones.

Objects typically burn up in the earth’s atmosphere before they reach the ground.

China’s Long March 5B booster re-entered over the Indian Ocean in 2022, and the Tiangong-1 space station mostly burned up over the Pacific in 2018.

Kosmos 482 is now being closely tracked by international space agencies.

Mr Lemmens said that future spacecraft “should be designed in such a way that they can take themselves out of orbit safely, preferably by doing controlled re-entries”.

This would allow for precise predictions of landing locations, reducing the risk of any debris impacting populated areas and protecting people and property while “managing the environmental impact of space debris”.

Being sealed off from the world in the conclave to choose the new Pope was “immensely peaceful”, England and Wales’s most senior Roman Catholic has told the BBC.

Cardinal Vincent Nichols, leader of the Roman Catholic Church in England and Wales, was one of 133 cardinals who were shut into the Vatican’s Sistine Chapel and later elected Pope Leo XIV on Thursday.

He told BBC Breakfast on Saturday that nobody in the highly secretive meeting was saying who to vote for or who to not vote for, adding that there was “no rancour” or “politicking” among the cardinals.

“It was a much calmer process than that and I found it actually a rather wonderful experience,” he added.

Conclaves have taken place in the Sistine Chapel since the 15th Century and cardinals must have no communication with the outside world until a new Pope is elected. The recent conclave came after the death of Pope Francis on 21 April.

Cardinal Nichols, the Archbishop of Westminster, said that his mobile phone was taken off him, adding that he found he had “more time on my hands just to be prayerful, just to reflect, just to be still, rather than being constantly agitated… or prompted by what might be coming in” on his phone.

“For me, one of the experiences of these last few days was to learn a bit of patience, to just take this step by step,” he said.

“There was a calmness, a bit of solemnity,” he continued, adding that everyone he spoke to when in it was “peaceful and just wanting to do this well”.

At 79 years old, Cardinal Nichols was one of the oldest cardinals in the conclave as they must be under 80 to be eligible to vote.

There is no timescale on how long it takes for a conclave to elect a new Pope, with previous ones in 2005 and 2013 lasting two days. The conclave that elected Pope Leo lasted for one day.

“I think it was a short conclave in part because Pope Francis left us with a good inheritance,” the cardinal said.

“He left a college of cardinals who were dedicated, who had this desire for the church to be more missionary, and that led us forward actually very, very easily to the decision that we made.”

Pope Leo will be formally inaugurated at a mass in St Peter’s Square on 18 May, which delegations from countries around the world will attend.

The Duke of Edinburgh, Prince Edward, will attend on behalf of King Charles, Buckingham Palace confirmed on Saturday.

Speaking about the new Pope, Cardinal Nichols said Pope Leo is “very decisive” in a “quiet way”, adding that he has seen him “make decisions which disappoint people but don’t destroy them”.

“A good thing about a pope is if he’s able to say, ‘No’, to you when he thinks something is not right and then give you a hug so you don’t go away offended, and I think he’s got that ability to do both those things, which is very important.”

The US-China trade war could be letting up, with the world’s two largest economies beginning talks in Switzerland.

Top trade officials from both sides met on Saturday in the first high-level meeting since US President Donald Trump hit China with tariffs in January.

Beijing retaliated immediately and a tense stand-off ensued as the two countries heaped levies on each other. New US tariffs on Chinese imports stand at 145%, and some US exports to China face duties of 125%.

There have been weeks of stern, and sometimes fiery, rhetoric where each side sought to paint the other as the more desperate party.

And yet this weekend they face each other over the negotiating table.

So why now?

Despite multiple rounds of tit-for-tat tariffs, both sides have been sending signals that they want to break the deadlock. Except it wasn’t clear who would blink first.

“Neither side wants to appear to be backing down,” said Stephen Olson, senior visiting fellow at Singapore’s ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute and a former US trade negotiator.

“The talks are taking place now because both countries have judged that they can move forward without appearing to have caved in to the other side.”

Still, China’s foreign ministry spokesperson Lin Jian emphasised on Wednesday that “the talks are being held at the request of the US”.

And the commerce ministry framed it as a favour to Washington, saying it was answering the “calls of US businesses and consumers”.

The Trump administration, however, claims it’s Chinese officials who “want to do business very much” because “their economy is collapsing”.

“They said we initiated? Well, I think they ought to go back and study their files,” Trump said at the White House on Wednesday.

But as the talks drew closer, the president struck a more diplomatic note: “We can all play games. Who made the first call, who didn’t make the – it doesn’t matter,” he told reporters on Thursday. “It only matters what happens in that room.”

The timing is also key for Beijing because it’s during Xi’s visit to Moscow. He was a guest of honour on Friday at Moscow’s Victory Day parade to commemorate the 80th anniversary of the World War Two victory over Nazi Germany.

Xi stood alongside leaders from across the Global South – a reminder to Trump’s administration that China not only has other options for trade, but it is also presenting itself as an alternative global leader.

This allows Beijing to project strength even as it heads to the negotiating table.

Trump insists that the tariffs will make America stronger, and Beijing has vowed to “fight till the end”- but the fact is the levies are hurting both countries.

Factory output in China has taken a hit, according to government data. Manufacturing activity in April dipped to the lowest level since December 2023. And a survey by news outlet Caixin this week showed that services activity has reached a seven-month low.

The BBC found that Chinese exporters have been reeling from the steep tariffs, with stock piling up in warehouses, even as they strike a defiant note and look for markets beyond the US.

“I think [China] realises that a deal is better than no deal,” says Bert Hofman, a professor at the East Asian Institute in National University Singapore.

“So they’ve taken a pragmatic view and said, ‘OK, well we need to get these talks going.'”

And so with the major May Day holiday in China over, officials in Beijing have decided the time is right to talk.

On the other side, the uncertainty caused by tariffs led to the US economy contracting for the first time in three years.

And industries that have long depended on Chinese-made goods are especially worried. A Los Angeles toy company owner told the BBC that they were “looking at the total implosion of the supply chain”.

Trump himself has acknowledged that US consumers will feel the sting.

American children may “have two dolls instead of 30 dolls”, he said at a cabinet meeting this month, “and maybe the two dolls will cost a couple bucks more than they would normally”.

Trump’s approval ratings have also slid over fears of inflation and a possible recession, with more than 60% of Americans saying he was focusing too much on tariffs.

“Both countries are feeling pressure to provide a bit of reassurance to increasingly nervous markets, businesses, and domestic constituencies,” Mr Olson says.

“A couple of days of meetings in Geneva will serve that purpose.”

While the talks have been met with optimism, a deal may take a while to materialise.

The talks will mostly be about “touching base”, Mr Hofman said, adding that this could look like an “exchange of positions” and, if things go well, “an agenda [will be] set for future talks”.

The negotiations on the whole are expected to take months, much like what happened during Trump’s first term.

After nearly two years of tit-for-tat tariffs, the US and China signed a “phase one” deal in early 2020 to suspend or reduce some levies. Even then, it did not include thornier issues, such as Chinese government subsidies for key industries or a timeline for scrapping the remaining tariffs.

In fact, many of them stayed in place through Joe Biden’s presidency, and Trump’s latest tariffs add to those older levies.

What could emerge this time is a “phase one deal on steroids”, Mr Olson said: that is, it would go beyond the earlier deal and try to address flashpoints. There are many, from the illegal fentanyl trade which Washington wants China to crack down harder on to Beijing’s relationship with Moscow.

But all of that is far down the line, experts warn.

“The systemic frictions that bedevil the US-China trade relationship will not be solved any time soon,” Mr Olson adds.

“Geneva will only produce anodyne statements about ‘frank dialogues’ and the desire to keep talking.”

Ofcom has launched investigations into two pornographic websites it believes may be falling foul of the UK’s newly introduced child safety rules.

The regulator said Itai Tech Ltd – which operates a so-called “nudifying” site – and Score Internet Group LLC had failed to detail how they were preventing children from accessing their platforms.

Ofcom announced in January that, in order to comply with the Online Safety Act, all websites on which pornographic material could be found must introduce “robust” age-checking techniques from July.

It said the two services it was investigating did not appear to have any effective age checking mechanisms.

Firms found to be in breach of the Act face huge fines.

The regulator said on Friday that many services publishing their own porn content had, as required, provided details of “highly effective age assurance methods” they were planning to implement.

• What the Online Safety Act is – and how to keep children safe online

They added that this “reassuringly” included some of the largest services that fall under the rules.

It said a small number of services had also blocked UK users entirely to prevent children accessing them.

Itai Tech Ltd and Score Internet Group LLC did not respond to its request for information or show they had plans to introduce age checks, it added.

The “nudifying” technology that one of the company’s platforms features involves the use of artificial intelligence (AI) to create the impression of having removed a person’s clothing in an image or video.

The Children’s Commissioner recently called on the government to introduce a total ban on such AI apps that could be used to create sexually explicit images of children.

Under the Online Safety Act, platforms that publish their own pornographic content were required to take steps to implement age checks from January.

These can include requiring UK users to provide photo ID or running credit card checks.

But all websites where a user might encounter pornographic material are also required to demonstrate the robustness of the measures they are taking to verify the age of users.

These could even apply to some social media platforms, Ofcom told the BBC in January.

The rules are expected to change the way many UK adults will use or encounter some digital services, such as porn sites.

“As age checks start to roll out in the coming months, adults will start to notice a difference in how they access certain online services,” said Dame Melanie Dawes, Ofcom’s chief executive, in January.

In April, Discord said it would start testing face-scanning as a way to verify some users’ ages in the UK and Australia.

Experts said it marked “the start of a bigger shift” for platforms as lawmakers worldwide look to impose strict internet safety rules.

Critics suggest such measures risk pushing young people to “darker corners” of the internet where there are smaller, less regulated sites hosting more violent or explicit material.

India and Pakistan have accused each other of “violations” hours after the two nations said they had agreed to a ceasefire following days of cross-border military strikes.

After sounds of explosions were heard in Indian-administered Kashmir, India’s Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri said there had been “repeated violations of the understanding we arrived at”.

A short while later, Pakistan’s foreign ministry said it remained “committed to faithful implementation of a ceasefire…notwithstanding the violations being committed by India in some areas”.

The fighting between India and Pakistan over the last four days has been the worst military confrontation between the two rivals in decades.

The use of drones, missiles and artillery started when India struck targets in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir in response to a deadly militant attack in Pahalgam last month. Pakistan had denied any involvement.

After four days of cross-border strikes, India and Pakistan said they had agreed on a full and immediate ceasfire.

US President Donald Trump announced the news on his Truth Social Platform on Saturday morning. He said it had been brokered by the US.

Pakistan’s Foreign Minister later confirmed the agreement had been reached by the two countries, adding that “three dozen countries” were involved in the diplomacy.

But hours after the announcement, residents – and BBC reporters – in the main Indian-administered Kashmiri cities of Srinagar and Jammu reported hearing the sounds of explosions and seeing flashes in the sky.

Indian Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri said: “For the last few hours, there have been repeated violations of the understanding we arrived at earlier this evening.

“This is a breach of the understanding arrived at earlier today.”

Misri said India’s armed forces was “giving an appropriate response” and he concluded his briefing by “calling upon Pakistan to address these violations”.

In response, a spokesman for Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said: “Pakistan remains committed to faithful implementation of ceasefire between Pakistan and India, announced earlier today.

“Notwithstanding the violations being committed by India in some areas, our forces are handling the situation with responsibility and restraint.

“We believe that any issues in smooth implementation of the ceasefire should be addressed through communication at appropriate levels.

“The troops on ground should also exercise restraint.”

Kashmir is claimed in full by India and Pakistan, but administered only in part by each since they were partitioned following independence from Britain in 1947.

It has been a flashpoint between the two nuclear-armed nations and they have fought two wars over it.

Confirming the ceasefire, India’s external affairs minister S Jaishankar said the two nations had “worked out an understanding on stoppage of firing and military action”.

“India has consistently maintained a firm and uncompromising stance against terrorism in all its forms and manifestations. It will continue to do so,” he added.

Later, in an address to the nation, Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif said the ceasefire had been reached “for the benefit of everybody”.

Speaking after the ceasefire announcement, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said India and Pakistan had agreed to start talks on a broad set of issues at a neutral site.

He said he and US Vice-President JD Vance had spent 48 hours with senior Indian and Pakistani officials, including their respective Prime Ministers Narendra Modi and Shehbaz Sharif.

UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres said he welcomed “all efforts to de-escalate the conflict”.

UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said Britain has been “engaged” in talks for “some days”, with Foreign Secretary David Lammy speaking to both sides.

“I’m pleased to see today that there’s a ceasefire,” Sir Keir said. “The task now is to make sure that that is enduring and is lasting.”

The recent fighting came after two weeks of tension following the killing of 26 tourists in the resort town of Pahalgam.

Survivors of the 22 April attack in Indian-administered Kashmir, which killed 25 Indians and one Nepali national, said the militants were singling out Hindu men.

The Indian defence ministry said its strikes this week were part of a “commitment” to hold “accountable” those responsible for the attack. Pakistan described them as “unprovoked”.

Pakistan said Indian air strikes and cross-border fire since Wednesday had killed 36 people in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir, while India’s army reported at least 21 civilians deaths from Pakistani shelling.

Fighting intensified overnight on Friday, with both countries accusing each other of targeting airbases and other military sites.

Earlier this year, Deborah Grushkin, an enthusiastic online shopper from New Jersey, “freaked out”.

US President Donald Trump had signed an order to stop allowing packages from China worth less than $800 (£601) to enter the country free of import taxes and customs procedures.

It was a move, backed by traditional retailers, that had been discussed in Washington for years amid an explosion of packages slipping into the US under the limit.

Many countries, including the UK, are considering similar measures, spurred in part by the rapid ascent of Shein and Temu.

But in the US, Trump’s decision to end the carve-out while ordering a blitz of new trade tariffs, including import taxes of at least 145% on goods from China, has delivered a one-two punch that has left businesses and shoppers reeling.

US-based e-commerce brands, which were set up around the system, are warning the changes could spark failures of smaller firms, while shoppers like Deborah brace for price hikes and shortages.

With the 2 May deadline bearing down, the 36-year-old last month rushed in some $400 worth of items from Shein – including stickers, T-shirts, sweatshirts, Mother’s Days gifts and 20 tubes of liquid eyeliner.

“I felt like maybe it was my last sort of hurrah,” she says.

Use of rules known as “de minimis”, which allow low-value packages to avoid tariffs, customs inspections and other regulatory requirements, has surged over the last decade.

Take-up accelerated during Trump’s first term in office, when he raised tariffs on many Chinese goods.

By 2023, such shipments represented more than 7% of consumer imports, up from less than 0.01% a decade earlier. Last year, nearly 1.4 billion packages entered the country using the exemption – more than 3.7 million a day.

Advocates of the carve-out, which include shipping firms, say the system has streamlined trade, leading to lower prices and more options for customers.

Those in favour of change, a group that includes lawmakers from both parties, say businesses are abusing rules intended to ease gifts between family and friends, and the rise has made it easier to slip products that are illegal, counterfeit or violate safety standards and other rules into the country.

Trump recently called de minimis a “scam”, brushing off concerns about higher costs. “Maybe the children will have two dolls instead of 30 dolls,” he said.

However, polls suggest concerns about his economic policies are rising as the changes start to hit home.

Krystal DuFrene, a retired 57-year-old from Mississippi who relies on disability payments for her income, says she has nervously been checking prices on Temu for weeks, recently cancelling an order for curtains after seeing the price more than triple.

Though she eventually found the same item for the original price in the platform’s US warehouse network, she says the cost of her husband’s fishing nets had more than doubled.

“I don’t know who pays the tariff except the customer,” she says. “Everywhere is selling cheap stuff from China so I actually prefer being able to order directly.”

When the rules around de minimis changed last week, Temu said it would stop selling goods imported from China in the US directly to customers from its platform, and that all sales would now be handled by “locally based sellers”, with orders fulfilled from within the US.

Even without the latest tariffs, economists Pablo Fajgelbaum and Amit Khandelwal had estimated that ending de minimis would lead to at least $10.9bn in new costs, which they found would be disproportionately borne by lower income and minority households.

“It does kind of feel like the end of an era,” says Gee Davis, a 40-year-old author from Missouri, who used Temu during a recent house move to buy small items such as an electric can opener and kitchen cabinet organisers.

She says it was a relief to be able to easily afford the extras and the new rules felt like a “money grab” by the government to benefit big, entrenched American retailers like Amazon and Walmart that sell similar products – but at a bigger mark-up.

“I don’t think it’s right or fair that little treats should be [restricted] to people who are richer.

“It just would be a real bummer if everyone who was under a certain household income threshold was just no longer able to afford anything for themselves.”

As with other Trump policy changes, questions remain about the significance of the shift.

The president was already forced to suspend the policy once before, as packages began piling up at the border.

Lori Wallach, director at Rethink Trade, which supports ending de minimis for consumer safety reasons, says the end of the exemption is significant “on paper”, but she fears the administration is taking steps that will weaken its implementation.

She points to a recent customs notice, which said products affected by many of the new tariffs could enter the country through the informal process, a move that eases some regulatory requirements.

“Practically, because all of this stuff can come though informal entry, it’s going to be extremely hard to collect tariffs or to be able to inspect really very much more than before the change happened,” she says.

Customs and Border Protection deny the move will undermine enforcement, noting that firms are still required to supply more information than before.

Businesses have indicated they are taking the changes seriously.

Both Shein and Temu last month warned customers that prices would rise, while Temu says it is rapidly expanding its network of US-based sellers and warehouses to protect its low prices.

Other business groups say many smaller, less high-profile American brands that manufacture abroad for US customers are struggling – and may not survive.

“If the tariffs weren’t in place, it would be like taking a little bit of bitter medicine,” says Alex Beller, board member of the Ecommerce Innovation Alliance, a business lobby group and a co-founder of Postscript, which works with thousands of smaller businesses on text messaging marketing.

“But paired with the other tariffs, especially for brands that manufacture in China, it just becomes an insurmountable shift.”

In a letter to the government last month, men’s clothing company Indochino, known for its custom suits made-to-order in China, warned that ending de minimis posed a “significant threat to the viability” of its business and other mid-size American firms like it.

Steven Borelli is the chief executive of the athleisure clothing firm CUTS, which manufactures outside the US, shipping products to a warehouse in Mexico, from where packages are mailed to customers in the US.

His firm has been pushing to reduce its reliance on China, halting orders in the country months ago. Still, he says he is now considering price increases and job cuts.

He says his business has room to manoeuvre, since it caters to higher income customers, but he expects “thousands” of other brands to die without changes to the situation.

“We want more time,” he says. “The speed at which everything is happening is too fast for businesses to adjust.”