Volodymyr Zelensky has given a cautious and diplomatic response to Vladimir Putin’s late-night offer of direct talks in Istanbul next Thursday.

The Ukrainian leader might have been expected to slam his opposite number in Moscow for not committing to a 30-day ceasefire, as demanded by Kyiv and its Western allies on Saturday.

Instead, writing on X, Zelensky called it “a positive sign that the Russians have finally begun to consider ending the war”.

Zelensky added that Ukraine expected Russia to confirm it would abide by the proposed 30-day ceasefire, starting on Monday.

It’s hard to tell if Zelensky really sees Putin’s offer of direct talks as a “positive sign”. This is as much about optics as anything else.

Neither Putin nor Zelensky want to be seen by US President Donald Trump as the obstacle to peace.

Follow live updates

Trump’s reaction was markedly upbeat. Writing on his Truth Social platform earlier, he hinted once again that this war was close to ending. He wrote: “A potentially great day for Russia and Ukraine!”

Putin said he wants to address what he calls “the root causes of the conflict”.

From his perspective, that means Ukraine’s unacceptable ambition to be part of a prosperous, democratic Europe rather than returning to Moscow’s orbit and become a pliant, satellite nation like Belarus.

He will also want a firm undertaking that Ukraine will never join Nato.

Moscow demanded on Saturday that, before any ceasefire can start, the West must stop arming Ukraine.

That of course would leave this country that much less able to fend off Russia’s gradual advances on the frontline – or, worse, a new full-scale offensive to take more land.

What Ukraine badly needs from its allies is an uninterrupted flow of air defences to fend off the ever-growing numbers of drones and missiles being fired across the common border at Kyiv and other major cities.

Shortly after dawn on Sunday, we were woken by an air raid alert and sirens went off as more Russian drones were launched.

On 9 May, the US Embassy in Kyiv issued a warning to its citizens that there was “a significant risk of air raids in the coming days”.

One of the biggest concerns is that the Kremlin may launch another Oreshnik hypersonic ballistic missile like the one its forces fired at a factory in Dnipro last November.

With its velocity approaching 10 times the speed of sound, Russia boasts that this missile is “unstoppable”.

So now the key question is what Trump does next – and this could go either way.

He could decide that his opposite number in Moscow is simply stringing him along, finding one excuse after another not to agree to a ceasefire.

Or, given his historic warm relations with Putin, will he throw the Russian leader a diplomatic lifeline and put pressure on Ukraine instead to sit down in Istanbul and listen to Moscow’s demands, irrespective of whether there is a ceasefire come Monday?

The Eurovision Song Contest was watched by around 163 million people last year – meaning there are potentially 163 million different opinions on what makes a perfect entrant.

Do you go for a soulful ballad, guaranteed to leave Europe misty-eyed and full of love and peace?

Or do you opt for a cheesy extravaganza, complete with saucy takes on regional costumes and eye-popping staging that will have the entire continent (and Australia) raving in their living rooms?

Forensic musicologist at Boston’s Berklee College of Music Joe Bennett has analysed hundreds of Eurovision finalists, identifying two dominant musical styles.

One is the “Euro-banger” – high-energy, 120+ BPM songs with kick drums and synth-heavy production, like Sweden’s winning entries Euphoria (Loreen, 2012) and Heroes (Måns Zelmerlöw, 2015).

The other is the slow-burning ballad – typically around 70 BPM, such as Portugal’s Amar Pelos Dois (Salvador Sobral, 2017) and the Netherlands’ Arcade (Duncan Laurence, 2019).

There is a cliché that Eurovision songs are only about love and peace – reinforced by a song performed during the 2016 contest’s interval about writing a perfect Eurovision song, called Love Love Peace Peace.

According to Bennett, there is some validity to this, with every Eurovision song falling under six broad lyrical themes: “love, unity, self-assertion, partying, history and songs about making music”.

He adds that “songs of self-assertion or lyrical self-empowerment do very well” – as seen with Austria’s 2014 winner Rise Like a Phoenix (Conchita Wurst).

Acts might be tempted to go over the top on staging, but this may not be the way to secure victory, according to our experts.

Songwriter Thomas Stengaard co-wrote Denmark’s 2013 winner Only Teardrops (as well as this year’s UK entry What the Hell Just Happened by Remember Monday). He puts his success down, in part, to its simple staging, which he says made it easy to remember.

“If you asked a kid to draw that staging, they could. It was a girl with no shoes on, two guys playing the drums and a flute guy. Very simple, but it worked.”

Vocal coach Carrie Grant, who led the UK’s jury in 2014 and came sixth in the contest as part of Sweet Dreams in 1983, agrees.

“There is nothing worse than having an artist whose stage has lots of money but their performance doesn’t warrant it,” she says. “It makes that performance seem worse.”

The 2014 winner (and Carrie’s personal favourite) was Conchita Wurst – the first act to win the contest without backing singers or dancers on stage since 1970.

What made Conchita stand out was that she was a bearded drag queen. Carrie believes Eurovision fans love things that are quirky and that “embrace the LGBT community”.

But she adds that Conchita wasn’t a gimmick but instead “a brilliant singer who could deliver what we call in vocal coaching ‘money moments'”.

Minor-key songs increasingly dominate Eurovision.

Bennett debunks the idea that “major equals happy, minor equals sad”, adding that “minor keys are more a shorthand for emotional depth”.

In 2023, 85% of finalists performed in minor keys, according to the Press Association. In the last 20 years, only two major-key songs have won – 2011’s Running Scared (for Azerbaijan) and 2017’s Amar Pelos Dois.

Professor Elizabeth Hellmuth Margulis, a researcher in music cognition at Princeton, highlights source sensitivity – our instinct to associate a song’s sound with its intended context. A few bars of a techno song, for example, and we have a mental image of a dark nightclub, and of the sort of DJ who might perform there.

This means certain minor keys now immediately signal “Eurovision-ness” to audiences.

Remember Monday’s What the Hell Just Happened was written at a songwriting camp, with multiple songwriters working together at a countryside retreat to write the perfect song for this year’s UK act.

The song was intentionally written in a major key to stand out in a sea of minor-key songs – similar to the UK’s 2022 second-place entry, Spaceman by Sam Ryder (B Major).

• Witchcraft, innuendo and moody goth boys: Your guide to all 37 of this year’s Eurovision songs

Repetition is important to make a song stick in the mind, says Margulis. But songs should avoid being too repetitive. Margulis says that what particularly makes a song catchy is “not only when they are heard repeatedly, but also when they throw in some kind of surprise twist”.

Bucks Fizz’s 1981 winner for the UK, Making Your Mind Up, is a classic example. First, the song changes key, quickly followed by a memorable costume change in which the female singers’ skirts were ripped off to reveal shorter skirts – a joint visual and musical twist.

Earlier Eurovision winners were often mocked for their nonsense lyrics, like Sweden’s 1984 winner Diggi-Loo Diggi-Ley, but Bennett argues this highlights Eurovision’s strong focus on melody.

“Eurovision really needs big melodic hooks. You want people across Europe to be singing that melody. The need for a very accessible, catchy chorus is essential.”

Key changes have long been a way to introduce novelty into Eurovision songs. The 2000s saw multiple winners follow this formula, including Olsen Brothers’ Fly on the Wings of Love for Norway (2000), and Serbia’s Molitva in 2007.

But as Bennett points out, though they are still present in around a fifth of finalists, no song with a final chorus key change has won since Molitva almost 20 years ago.

Stengaard’s song for this year’s UK act Remember Monday is certainly full of surprises. BBC music correspondent Mark Savage said the song featured “a dizzying array of key changes and tempo shifts”.

The song is the songwriter’s answer to the question he asks himself whenever he writes for Eurovision: “How do you stand out in a contest where everyone wants to stand out?”

When Charlie Hopkins thinks back to the three years he spent in one of America’s most famous prisons, he remembers the “deathly quiet” the most.

In 1955, Hopkins was sent to Alcatraz – a famed prison on an isolated island off the coast of San Francisco – after causing trouble at other prisons to serve a 17-year sentence for kidnapping and robbery.

Falling asleep at night in his cell on the remote island, he said, the only sound was the whistle of ships passing.

“That’s a lonely sound,” Hopkins said. “It reminds you of Hank Williams singing that song, ‘I’m so lonesome I could cry.'”

Now 93 and living in Florida, Hopkins said the San Francisco National Archives informed him that he is likely the last surviving former Alcatraz inmate. The BBC could not independently verify this.

In an interview with the BBC this week, Hopkins described life at Alcatraz – which formed the setting for the 1996 film The Rock – where he made friends with gangsters and once helped plan an unsuccessful escape.

Although it closed decades ago, US President Donald Trump recently claimed that he wants to re-open it as a federal prison.

When Hopkins was transferred to the high-security prison in 1955, from an Atlanta facility, he remembers it being clean, but barren. And there were few distractions – no radio at the time, and few books, he said.

“There was nothing to do,” he said. “You could walk back and forth in your cell or do push-ups.”

Hopkins kept busy part of the time with his job cleaning Alcatraz, sweeping the floors and buffing them “until they shined”, he said.

He was sent to prison in 1952 in Jacksonville, Florida, for his role in a series of robberies and kidnappings. He was part of a group that took hostages to get through roadblocks and steal cars, he said.

• The men who broke out of Alcatraz with a spoon

At Alcatraz, Hopkins had some infamous neighbours. The facility housed many violent criminals over its 30 years – Al Capone; Robert Stroud, a murderer known as the “Birdman of Alcatraz”; and crime boss James “Whitey” Bulger – making it the subject of a host of films and television shows.

A 22-acre island, 1.25 miles (2km) off San Francisco and surrounded by freezing waters with strong currents, Alcatraz was originally a naval defence fort. It was rebuilt in the early 20th century as a military prison. The US Justice Department took it over in the 1930s, transforming the facility into a federal prison to address rampant organised crime at the time.

Even in the high-security prison, Hopkins said he still managed to get into trouble and spent many days in the facility’s “D Block” – solitary confinement where inmates who misbehaved were held and rarely let out of their cells.

His longest stint there – six months – came after he tried to help several other prisoners, including notorious bank robber Forrest Tucker, escape Alcatraz, Hopkins said. He helped steal hacksaw blades from the prison’s electric shop to cut the prison bars in the basement kitchen.

The plan didn’t work – prison guards discovered the blades in other inmates’ cells, Hopkins said. “A few days after they locked them up, they locked me up,” he said.

But that did not stop one of the inmates.

In 1956, when Tucker was taken to a hospital for a kidney operation, he stabbed his ankle with a pencil so prison guards would have to remove his leg irons, Tucker told the New Yorker. Then, as he was taken to get an X-ray, he overpowered hospital orderlies and ran away, he said.

He was captured in a hospital gown in a cornfield hours later.

As more prisoners attempted to escape Alcatraz over the years, officials ramped up security, Hopkins said.

“When I left there in 1958, the security was so tight you couldn’t breathe,” he said.

All told, there were 14 separate attempts over the years involving 36 inmates, according to the National Park Service.

One of the most famous involved Frank Morris, and brothers Clarence and John Anglin, who escaped in June 1962 by placing papier-mâché heads in their beds and breaking out through ventilation ducts. They were never found, but the FBI concluded that they drowned in the cold waters surrounding the island.

A year later, the prison shut down after the government determined it would be more cost-effective to build new prisons than to keep the remote island facility in operation.

Now it’s a publicly run museum visited by millions each year that generates about $60m (£45m) a year in revenue for park partners.

The building is decrepit, with peeling paint, rusted pipes, and crumbling toilets in each cramped cell. Construction on the main prison facility began in 1907, and more than a century of exposure to the elements has rendered the place all but uninhabitable.

Trump said this week, however, that he wants his government to re-open and expand the island prison for the country’s “most ruthless and violent offenders”.

Alcatraz “represents something very strong, very powerful” – law and order, Trump said.

But experts and historians said Trump’s proposal to re-establish the prison is far-fetched, as it would cost billions to repair and bring up to date with other federal facilities.

Hopkins agrees. “It would be so expensive,” he said.

“Back then, the sewage system went into the ocean,” he added. “They’d have to come up with another way of handling that.”

Hopkins left Alcatraz five years before it closed down for good. He had been transferred to a prison in Springfield, Missouri and given psychiatric medication that improved his behaviour and helped him heal psychological issues, he said.

But the avid Trump supporter said he does not believe the president’s proposal is serious.

“He don’t really want to open that place,” Hopkins said, adding that Trump was trying to “get a point across to the public” about punishing criminals and those who enter the US illegally.

Hopkins was released in 1963, working first at a truck stop before taking on other jobs. He went back to his home state of Florida, where now he has a daughter and grandson.

After several decades reflecting on his crimes and life in Alcatraz, he wrote a 1,000-page memoir, with nearly half of the book detailing his troubled behaviour, he said.

“You wouldn’t believe the trouble I caused them when I was there,” he said. “I can see now, looking back, that I had problems.”

Pope Leo XIV appealed for “no more war” in a message to world powers during his first Sunday address at the Vatican.

Reflecting on current conflicts, the newly selected pontiff called for a “lasting peace” in the war in Ukraine, a ceasefire in Gaza, and welcomed Saturday’s agreement to end recent hostilities between India and Pakistan.

He said he was “deeply hurt” by events in Gaza, expressed hope for a “lasting accord” between India and Pakistan, and wished for a “authentic, true and lasting peace” in Ukraine.

The Pope also recited the Regina Caeli prayer, in honour of the Virgin Mary, to the crowd in St Peter’s Square.

Pope Leo was chosen as the new leader of the Catholic Church on Thursday, following a two-day conclave in Vatican City and the death of his predecessor, Pope Francis.

On Saturday, he visited a shrine outside Rome and then prayed before Francis’ tomb inside the basilica of Santa Maria Maggiore.

Pope Leo will be formally inaugurated at a mass in St Peter’s Square next week on 18 May.

Speaking from the central balcony of St Peter’s Basilica, he said: “The immense tragedy of the Second World War ended 80 years ago… now we’re facing the tragedy of a third world war in pieces.

“I would also like to address the powerful people of the world, repeating the always-current call: ‘no more war’.”

The pontiff continued: “I carry in my heart the suffering of the beloved Ukrainian people.

“May whatever is possible be done to reach an authentic, true and lasting peace as quickly as possible. May all the prisoners be freed. May children return to their families.

“And I am deeply hurt by what is happening in the Gaza strip.

“May a ceasefire immediately come into effect. May humanitarian aid be allowed into the civilian population and may all hostages be freed.

He went on: “I was happy to hear on the other hand that there was a ceasefire between India and Pakistan, and I hope that through the coming negotiations we might soon come to a lasting accord.”

His remarks comes as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin set out competing plans for a peace process to bring the three-year invasion of Ukraine to an end.

In the Middle East, Israel has cut off all humanitarian aid entering Gaza and resumed its military offensive in the Palestinian territory following the collapse of a two-month ceasefire and hostage exchange agreement.

Meanwhile, India and Pakistan agreed to a tentative ceasefire on Saturday after days cross-border military strikes that followed an attack on tourists in Indian-administered Kashmir on 22 April.

It has been a busy week for the pontiff, who held his first Mass as Pope in the Sistine chapel on Friday before speaking to cardinals on Saturday.

During this meeting, he described himself as an unworthy choice for Pope, and vowed to continue the “precious legacy” of his predecessor.

He highlighted the importance of missionary work and discussion – as well as care for those he called the “least and the rejected”.

He explained he had chosen the name Leo after a 19th-century Pope known for his teaching on social justice.

The new Pope also suggested the development of artificial intelligence and other advances meant the church was necessary today for the defence of human dignity and justice.

He is due to hold an audience with the media on Monday ahead of his inauguration next Sunday.

As part of that mass he will deliver a homily in the presence of numerous heads of state and dignitaries.

The 69-year-old is the 267th occupant of the throne of St Peter, and the first American to become a pontiff. He will lead members of the Catholic Church’s global community of 1.4bn people.

Born Robert Francis Prevost in Chicago, he worked for many years as a missionary in Peru before being made an archbishop there. He also has Peruvian nationality.

Although Leo was born in the US, the Vatican described him as the second pope from the Americas. Pope Francis, from Argentina, was the first.

Pope Leo is widely seen as a moderate who can offer “continuity” and “unity” following the death of his predecessor last month.

The new pontiff is believed to have shared Francis’ views on migrants, the poor and the environment.

In his first speech he told the crowds he wanted “to walk together with you as a united Church searching all together for peace and justice”.

In a dramatic turn of events, US President Donald Trump took to social media on Saturday to announce that India and Pakistan – after four tense days of cross-border clashes – had agreed to a “full and immediate ceasefire”.

Behind the scenes, US mediators, alongside diplomatic backchannels and regional players, proved critical in pulling the nuclear-armed rivals back from the brink, experts say.

However, hours after a ceasefire deal, India and Pakistan were trading accusations of fresh violations – underscoring its fragility.

India accused Pakistan of “repeated violations” while Pakistan insisted it remained committed to the ceasefire, with its forces showing “responsibility and restraint.”

Before Trump’s ceasefire announcement, India and Pakistan were spiralling towards what many feared could become a full-blown conflict.

After a deadly militant attack killed 26 tourists in Indian-administered Kashmir last month, India launched air strikes inside Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir – triggering days of aerial clashes, artillery duels and, by Saturday morning, accusations from both sides of missile strikes on each other’s airbases.

The rhetoric escalated sharply, with each country claiming to have inflicted heavy damage while foiling the other’s attacks.

• Why India and Pakistan fight over Kashmir
• Drone war opens a new chapter in India-Pakistan conflict

Tanvi Madan, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington DC, says US Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s call to Pakistani Army Chief Asim Munir on 9 May “might have been the crucial point”.

“There’s still much we don’t know about the roles of various international actors, but it’s clear over the past three days that at least three countries were working to de-escalate – the US, of course, but also the UK and Saudi Arabia,” she says.

Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar told Pakistani media that “three dozen countries” were involved in the diplomacy – including Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the US.

“One question is whether, if this call had come earlier – right after the initial Indian strikes, when Pakistan was already claiming some Indian losses and an off-ramp was available – it might have prevented further escalation,” Ms Madan says.

This isn’t the first time US mediation has helped defuse an India–Pakistan crisis.

In his memoir, former US secretary of state Mike Pompeo claimed he was woken up to speak with an unnamed “Indian counterpart”, who feared Pakistan was preparing nuclear weapons during the 2019 standoff.

Former Indian High Commissioner to Pakistan Ajay Bisaria later wrote that Pompeo overstated both the risk of nuclear escalation and the US role in calming the conflict.

But diplomats say there is little doubt the US played an important role in defusing the crisis this time.

“The US was the most prominent external player. Last time, Pompeo claimed they averted nuclear war. While they’ll likely exaggerate, they may have played the primary diplomatic role, perhaps amplifying Delhi’s positions in Islamabad,” Mr Bisaria told the BBC on Saturday.

Yet at the outset, the US appeared strikingly standoffish.

As tensions flared, US Vice President JD Vance said on Thursday that the US was not going to get involved in a war that’s “fundamentally none of our business”.

“We can’t control these countries though. Fundamentally, India has its gripes with Pakistan… America can’t tell the Indians to lay down their arms. We can’t tell the Pakistanis to lay down their arms. And so we’re going to continue to pursue this thing through diplomatic channels, ” he said in a television interview.

Meanwhile, President Trump said earlier this week: “I know both [leaders of India and Pakistan] very well, and I want to see them work it out… I want to see them stop, and hopefully they can stop now”.

Ejaz Haider, a Lahore-based defence analyst, told the BBC this appeared to be the only difference from previous occasions.

“The American role was a continuation of past patterns, but with one key difference – this time, they initially stayed hands-off, watching the crisis unfold instead of jumping in right away. Only when they saw how it was playing out did they step in to manage it,” Mr Haider told the BBC.

Experts in Pakistan say as the escalation cycle deepened, Pakistan sent “dual signals”, retaliating militarily while announcing a National Command Authority (NCA) meeting – a clear reminder of the nuclear overhang.

The NCA controls and takes operational decisions regarding Pakistan’s nuclear weapons.

This was around the time US Secretary of State Marco Rubio stepped in.

“The US was indispensable. This outcome would not have occurred without Secretary Rubio’s efforts,” Ashley J Tellis, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, told the BBC.

What also helped was Washington’s deepening ties with Delhi.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s personal rapport with Trump, plus the US’s broader strategic and economic stakes, gave the US administration diplomatic leverage to push both nuclear-armed rivals towards de-escalation.

Indian diplomats see three key peace tracks that happened this time, much like after Pulwama–Balakot in 2019:

• US and UK pressure
• Saudi mediation, with the Saudi junior foreign minister visiting both capitals
• The direct India-Pakistan channel between the two national security advisors (NSAs)

Despite shifting global priorities and a hands-off posture at first, the US ultimately stepped in as the indispensable mediator between South Asia’s nuclear rivals.

Whether overstated by its own officials or underacknowledged by Delhi and Islamabad, experts believe the US’s role as crisis manager remains as vital – and as complicated – as ever.

Doubts do, however, linger over the ceasefire’s durability after Saturday’s events, with some Indian media reporting it was essentially brokered by senior military officials of the two countries – not the US.

“This ceasefire is bound to be a fragile one. It came about very quickly, amid sky-high tensions. India appears to have interpreted it differently than did the US and Pakistan,” Michael Kugelman, a foreign policy analyst, told the BBC.

“Also, since it was put together so hastily, the accord may lack the proper guarantees and assurances one would need at such a tense moment.”

Donald Trump says there has been a “total reset” in US-China trade relations following the first day of talks between American and Chinese officials in Switzerland.

In a social media post, the US president described the talks as being “very good” and said change had been “negotiated in a friendly, but constructive, manner”.

An escalating trade war between Washington and Beijing has seen the US president hit Chinese imports to the US with tariffs of 145%. China retaliated with levies of 125% on some US goods.

Following months of back-and-forth, the two countries are meeting in Geneva this weekend for the first time since Trump hit China with tariffs at the start of the year.

Little information beyond the US president’s Truth Social post has so far emerged from the talks. They are due to continue on Sunday and are taking place between China’s vice-premier He Lifeng and US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent.

“We want to see, for the good of both China and the U.S., an opening up of China to American business. GREAT PROGRESS MADE!!!” Trump added.

On Friday, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Washington would not lower tariffs unilaterally, and China would need to make its own concessions.

Both sides issued various other warnings ahead of the meeting, with Beijing saying the US must ease tariffs while Bessent stressed that the focus was on “de-escalation” and this was not a “big trade deal”.

Chinese state media reported that Beijing had decided to engage with the US after fully considering global expectations, the country’s interests and appeals from American businesses.

Last month, the BBC found that Chinese exporters were struggling with the US’s tariffs – one company, Sorbo Technology, reported that half of its products were normally sold to the US and were now sat in boxes in a warehouse in China.

Meanwhile, the US economy was found to have shrank in the first three months of the year – contracting at an annual rate of 0.3% – as firms raced to get goods into the country.

The trade war between China and the US intensified last month after President Trump announced a universal baseline tariff on all imports to the United States, on what he called “Liberation Day”.

Around 60 trading partners, which the White House described as the “worst offenders”, were subjected to higher rates than others. The list included China and the European Union.

Trump said this was payback for years worth of unfair trade policies for the US.

He also separately announced a 25% import tax on all steel and aluminium coming into the US, and a further 25% tariff on all cars and car parts.

It was announced last week that the US and UK had agreed a deal, in which the 25% will be cut to 10% for a maximum of 100,000 UK cars – matching the number of cars the UK exported last year.

Cars are the UK’s biggest export to the US, worth about £9bn last year.

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.”

Care workers will no longer be recruited from overseas as part of a crackdown on visas for lower-skilled workers, the home secretary has told the BBC.

Yvette Cooper said “it is time to end that care worker recruitment from abroad” and rules will change this year – instead requiring firms to hire domestically or extend visas of overseas workers already in the UK.

The government plans to unveil a series of changes to visa and recruitment laws on Monday in a bid to cut net migration, and says measures will cut up to 50,000 lower-skilled workers coming to the UK over the next year.

Shadow home secretary Chris Philp said the plans were “too little” and called for an annual cap on migration.

Successive governments have battled largely in vain to reduce net migration, which is the number of people coming to the UK minus the number leaving.

Net migration climbed to a record 906,000 in June 2023, and last year it stood at 728,000.

The Home Office has not yet officially confirmed what will be in its immigration White Paper, due early next week.

But speaking on the BBC’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg, Cooper said changes to skilled and care worker visas “will come in in the course of this year and those changes… we expect to lead to a reduction of up to 50,000 fewer lower-skilled visas over the course of the next year”.

She added targets for net migration would not be set, saying “they undermined the credibility of anything that governments do”.

Philp told the same programme that the Conservatives would push for a Parliament vote on installing an annual cap on migration. When asked what the cap would be, he said “we’re working on the detail to specify that number”, but it would be “a further reduction of significantly more than 50,000”.

Cooper also said there would be “some changes” to rules around international students and graduates.

“We will let them continue to come and to stay and to work afterwards,” she added.

“We are making some changes, particularly around the standards and the compliance for universities, because, again, we’ve had problems where some universities haven’t had proper standards in place.

“They’ve recruited people to come as international students who then haven’t completed their courses, have either overstayed or… other problems with compliance of the system.”

The government has already tightened rules around care sector worker after coming to power last July.

Applications for Health and Care Worker visas peaked at 18,300 in August 2023, then collapsed to 1,700 by April this year following the ban on bringing dependants.

And on 9 April, an additional restriction was added requiring care firms who want to recruit a new worker from overseas to prove they attempted to recruit a worker from within England first.

But the new rules will now require care companies to recruit from domestic workers or a pool of over 10,000 care workers in the UK with cancelled sponsorships before hiring from abroad.

Alongside this Cooper promised “to bring in a new fair pay agreement for care workers” to make care jobs more attractive to UK workers and reduce overseas demand.

Sign up for our Politics Essential newsletter to read top political analysis, gain insight from across the UK and stay up to speed with the big moments. It’ll be delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

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”.

A second teenager has died after getting into difficulty in the water near Buncrana in County Donegal.

The boy was rescued after a search operation and taken to Letterkenny University Hospital, where he died in the early hours of Sunday, gardaí (Irish police) have confirmed.

On Saturday evening the body of an 18-year-old male was recovered from the water.

A third teenage boy was also rescued from the water and taken to hospital.

Police said the local coroner has been notified and a post-mortem examination will be arranged in due course.

Gardaí investigations are ongoing.

The Irish Coast Guard told BBC News NI that an alert was raised shortly before 16:00 local time by a member of the public after reports there were a number of people in difficulty in the water.

The multi-agency operation was led by Malin Head Coast Guard with assistance from police and the ambulance service.

An Irish Coast Guard helicopter was also involved in the search along with the Royal National Lifeboat Institution (RNLI).

In a statement, the Irish Coast Guard thanked all the search and rescue units and members of the public who had assisted in the search.

The mayor of Inishowen, Sinn Féin’s Jack Murray, told BBC News NI the community is “devastated.”

“On what was such a happy day, Donegal won the Ulster Championship, the Sun was shining and then that filtered through, the worst news possible that these two young men have lost their lives, it is horrendous,” he said.

Paying tribute to the two teenagers, Murray said they were “of different nationalities from Africa, who were talented young boys”.

“It is just so sad that their lives could be cut short so tragically,” he said.

“This is a community that has been visited by tragedy far too often,” he added.

“I would like to think and hope that their families know that we are all thinking of them.”

100% Redress councillor Joy Beard said people in the area are in “shock.”

“We are absolutely heartbroken,” she said.

Beard added that Buncrana is a “strong community” that will “rally around” the families.

She also paid tribute to the emergency services and coast guard.

Fianna Fáil councillor Foinán Bradley said that the three teenagers involved in the incident “came to Buncrana a number of years ago with their families” and that they had “integrated really well into the community.”

He added they were “known by many people here in Buncrana” and the community was “very, very fond of them”.

He described the community as “numb” following the incident.

“There is a very sombre air over the whole area this morning.”

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.”

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”.

Every fortnight, Samii Wood snuggles up with a group of strangers for a “cuddle puddle”.

These gatherings see attendees melt into a large nest of cushions and blankets, offering each other platonic touch and comfort.

Samii, who is 41 and based in Bedford, is a professional cuddler, who also offers one-to-one cuddle therapy.

She believes human touch is not just comforting but also has measurable health benefits.

“Your serotonin levels, which is your feel-good hormone, are boosted and so is your oxytocin level, which is your love and bonding hormone,” she says.

Touch can also lower your levels of stress hormone cortisol and “can regulate the nervous system”, she adds.

Samii’s clients are sometimes suffering with nervous system issues, post-traumatic stress disorder or loneliness.

“People think that my service will be just full of creepy guys,” she says.

“It’s not like that. I have a variety of ages and males and females that come to these events.”

Pep Valerio, 36, from Bedford, has been attending Samii’s cuddle puddles for a couple of months.

“It’s healing without words. You don’t need to know people’s problems; you just know your touch is providing aid to them,” he said.

Samii describes how in group sessions, attendees are told to imagine certain scenarios to give specific emotional context.

“Sometimes I say, ‘Imagine the person you’re hugging is the person you’d most like to hug just one more time’,” she adds.

“That always chokes me up, and and we’ve had men and women both literally just sobbing on each other.”

One-to-one sessions are catered more towards an individual’s needs.

They can range from simply sitting close together and talking with an arm around them, to lying down and spooning.

It can also involve other nurturing touch, such as back stroking or cradling.

Some might raise an eyebrow at the thought that people are paying for this, but Sammi stresses it is a “fully clothed, platonic, nurturing service”.

To safeguard all involved, she screens clients before taking them on and gets them to sign consent forms that explicitly state boundaries.

“It’s very client-led, so they tell me what they want and what they’re comfortable with. It’s an ongoing dialogue,” Samii says.

She acknowledges that intimate touch can lead to arousal, but in those cases she enforces a break or change of position to refocus clients on the nurturing aspect of the session.

There is no regulatory body in the UK for this type of therapy, but professionals like Samii can gain accreditation from Cuddle Professionals International (CPI).

This body insists its members are taught to observe “ethical touch protocols” that rely on informed consent.

While many practices may uphold professional standards, it is potentially an easy environment to misuse and exploit.

Samii says people can report any wrongdoing to the police, local authority or CPI.

The body was founded by wellness expert Claire Mendelsohn, who according to her website, “recognised the need for regulation within the profession”.

CPI is now a registered college with the Complementary Medical Association, and approved by the International Institute for Complementary Therapists to deliver training.

Samii discovered cuddle therapy after watching a documentary showing how popular it was overseas.

However, in the UK, she finds that people are more reluctant to touch and be touched.

She blames the Covid pandemic and lockdowns for simultaneously making people “crave it more” but also be “more fearful of having it”.

She explains: “It’s huge in America and in Europe, not so much over here, but we really need it and people wouldn’t come to professional cuddlers like myself if we did not need that.

“We think we’re all connected because we’re online, but that’s why we’re so much more disconnected.

“We’re all seeking that connection and there’s no shame in saying, ‘I just want to be held by someone and I want to be hugged. I want to be seen and drop my walls and and have that’.”

Touch can benefit physical and mental health, according to a paper by Danish neuroscientist Dr Julian Packheiser and his colleagues from the Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience at Ruhr University Bochum, Germany.

They found there was no difference in health benefits in adults between touch from a familiar person or a health care professional.

However, Sophie Scott, professor of cognitive neuroscience at University College London, argues that while touch has demonstrable benefits, the relationship between people involved is important.

Referring to another study, she says: “They put people in a scanner and physically hurt them; you could see the brain responding to the pain.

“However, when a partner held their hand, they had a reduced response to the pain. So there are chemical changes making you feel better, but that isn’t a random person; that is your partner.

“What worries me slightly about somebody doing that professionally is you need to develop that relationship. You wouldn’t just let anybody hold your hand.

“People like going to get their haircut or a manicure. Those are quite neutral parts of the body. Hugging might get a bit closer to their danger zones.

“What I’m saying is people would need to feel safe. If they didn’t feel safe, it would be highly adversive to do that”.

Numerous other studies have highlighted the benefit of touch and its potential to benefit mental and physical health.

Mr Valerio had been exploring alternative methods of healing, such as tapping and tai-chi, when he came across cuddle therapy.

“It relieves stress, promotes relaxation and togetherness,” he says.

He says Samii has created a safe environment by playing a soothing soundtrack and getting people to take part in warm-up hug-based exercises at the start.

“Once you’ve done a few exercises, to break down those walls, it feels like the most natural thing lie on the floor and cuddle a lot of strangers,” he says.

“There are people are crying before we have settled into the cuddle puddle, just based on the hug-based exercises we’ve done and some of the emotions that are brought up.”

He has also taken part in one-to-one exercises with Samii, which he says allow for “a deeper bond”.

“Spooning feels vulnerable, especially being the guy spooned by a woman. It allows you to experience holding and being held,” he says.

“Afterwards I feel held, I feel supported, I feel as if I’ve shed some of my load and my wall has been lowered.”

At the end of a waitressing shift, Kristina Lampert used to separate her tips in two piles: Canadian cash and American.

But it’s been weeks since she has done that.

Freighters, the restaurant where she works, is one of the first places people can grab a bite after crossing the US-Canada border between Sarnia, Ontario, and Port Huron, Michigan.

The Blue Water Bridge, which connects the US and Canada, is in full view from the restaurant’s windows.

“A lot of people used to come over and say ‘we’re here for the view’,” she says of Canadian diners. “I haven’t heard that at all recently.”

Border towns noticed almost instantly when US President Donald Trump began imposing tariffs on countries around the world and saying he wanted to make Canada the 51st US state – because the number of Canadians crossing the border plummeted.

Border crossings between the US and Canada are down some 17% since Trump started bringing in tariffs, according to CBP data.

Canadian’s car trips to the US are down almost 32% compared to March 2024, according to Statistics Canada.

Like many of the towns that dot along the 5,525 mile (8,891km) border, the economies of Port Huron and Sarnia are linked and in some ways dependent on one another. Port Huron is a manufacturing town of less than 30,000 people with a quaint downtown and lots of retail, offering visitors an enticing opportunity for a day-trip.

On a day where there is little traffic, a Sarnia resident can cross the border and be in Michigan in a matter of minutes.

Many of these towns faced their first test more than five years ago when the Covid-19 pandemic shut crossings down for 19 months and left local economies reeling.

Now, they are seeing a second economic hit due to Trump’s trade war, with many Canadians choosing to “buy Canadian” and reducing travel to the US in response to the fraying relationship between the two neighbouring countries.

One place this is being felt is at Sarnia’s Duty Free, the last place you can purchase goods before leaving Canada and entering the US. The shelves of perfume and liquor are fuller and the parking lot is emptier since tariffs tensions began.

Barbara Barett, the executive director of Frontier Duty Free Association, says some of the 32 land-border duty frees in Canada have seen as much as an 80% decrease in sales since Trump’s return to the White House. Most stores have seeing a 50-60% drop in business.

“We’re 100% reliant on the travel across the border,” she says of duty frees. “Our stores are often pillars of these communities – communities depend on them.”

And while the crossing at Port Huron-Sarnia is faring better than most, on a Friday in May the parking lot of the Sarnia Duty Free is almost empty.

Tania Lee, who runs the store with her family, says that has become the new norm.

On Easter weekend – usually one of their busiest of the year, as Canadians take advantage of the break to stop in at a favourite restaurant and go to a church service in Port Huron – cars were few and far between, and sales were not what they should have been, she says.

“We are suffering because of collateral damage at the border,” Ms Lee says of her second-generation family business.

She notes that people who live in border towns often cross the boundary multiple times a week. Ms Lee, for example, has a mailbox at a shipping facility in Port Huron that she visits regularly, as do her neighbours.

People across the Blue Water Bridge are feeling the effects too, Mayor Anita Ashford says.

She has heard from both residents of her town and Canadians frustrated about the increased tension between the nations.

Nationally, a 10% drop in Canadian tourism would cost the US up to 14,000 jobs and $2.1bn (£1.56bn) in business, according to the US Travel Association.

Michigan is one of the places likely to see the brunt of that impact. In 2023, Canadian visitors spent a collective $238m in the state, according to tourism officials.

That money is essential for border towns like Port Huron, its mayor says.

“I hope people in Washington will start to understand what they’re doing to the people,” she says. “We are not responsible for this, the [federal] government put us in this position and now we have to deal with it respectfully.”

“We need each other,” she says.

Lesego Chombo’s enthusiasm for life is as infectious as her achievements are impressive: she has won the Miss Botswana 2022 and Miss World Africa 2024 crowns, is a working lawyer, has set up her own charitable foundation – and made history in November, becoming Botswana’s youngest cabinet minister.

She was just 26 years old at the time – and had clearly impressed Botswana’s incoming President Duma Boko, whose Umbrella for Democratic Change (UDC) had just won a landslide, ousting the party that had governed for 58 years.

It was a seismic shift in the politics of the diamond-rich southern African nation – and Boko, a 55-year-old Harvard-trained lawyer, hit the ground running.

His main focus, he said, was fixing an economy too reliant on diamonds, telling the BBC ahead of his inauguration that he wanted young people to be the solution – “to become entrepreneurs, employ themselves and employ others”.

Key to this was finding a suitable ambassador – and Chombo was clearly it: a young woman already committed to various causes.

He made her minister of youth and gender.

“I’ve never been more proud to be young,” she told the BBC at the ministry’s headquarters in the capital, Gaborone.

“I’m a young person living in Botswana, passionate about youth development, gender equality, but also so passionate about the development of children.”

The beauty queen did not campaign to be an MP – she is what is called a specially elected member of parliament – and is now one of just six female MPs in the 69-member National Assembly.

Chombo said becoming an MP and then minister came as a complete surprise to her.

“I got appointed by a president who had never met me,” she said.

“Miss World and the journey that I thought I was supposed to pursue as my final destination was only the platform through which I would be seen for this very role.”

It was her crowning as Miss Botswana in 2022 that raised her profile and enabled her to campaign for social change, while trying to inspire other young women.

It also gave her the opportunity to set up the Lesego Chombo Foundation, which focuses on supporting disadvantaged youngsters and their parents in rural areas – and which she is still involved with, its projects funded by corporate companies and others.

“We strive to have a world where we feel seen and heard and represented. I’m very thrilled that I happen to be the very essence of that representation,” she said.

As she prepared for last year’s Miss World pageant, she said: “I really put myself in the zone of service. I really channelled it for this big crown.”

Now in political office, she is aware of the expectations placed on her in a country where approximately 60% of the population is below 35 years.

It also has a high level of unemployment – 28%, which is even higher for young people and women who have limited economic opportunities and battle systemic corruption.

Chombo said this was something she was determined to change: “Currently in Botswana, the rates of unemployment are so high.

“But it’s not just the rate of unemployment, it’s also just the sphere of youth development.

“It’s lacking, and so my desire is to create an ecosystem, an environment, a society, an economy in which youth can thrive.”

Chombo said her plan was to develop a comprehensive system that nurtured youth-led initiatives, strengthened entrepreneurship and ensured young people had a seat at the table when decisions were being made.

With Botswana’s anti-corruption policy undergoing a rigorous review, she said this would ensure that quotas for young entrepreneurs – when state departments and agencies put out tenders for goods and services – were actually reached.

The government has begun a 10-month forensic audit of government spending that will include 30 state-owned enterprises.

Indeed President Boko is intent on cracking down on corruption, seeing this as a way to bolter investor confidence and diversify the economy – something his deputy has been seeking to do on recent trips to the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Switzerland.

And a key deal has now been secured with UAE-based CCI Global, a provider of business process outsourcing, to open a hub in Botswana.

While youth development is a central pillar of her work, gender equity also remains close to her heart.

Her short time in office has coincided with a growing outcry over gender-based violence.

According to a United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) report, over 67% of women in Botswana have experienced abuse, more than double the global average.

“It hurts to know that it could be me next,” she admitted.

A month into her appointment, she was criticised for voting against an opposition motion in parliament to create “peace desks” at police stations and magistrate courts to quickly deal with victims.

At the time she said such provisions already existed within the law and what was needed was more public awareness.

This was followed in January by a police report noting that at least 100 women had been raped and another 10 murdered during the festive season – this caused public outrage with many lashing out at her on social media over the issue.

The minister reiterated – on several occasions, including before parliament in March – that Botswana had many laws and strategies in place and what was important was to ensure these they were actually applied.

But she told the BBC the government would be pushing for the implementation of a Gender-Based Violence Act, aimed at closing legal loopholes that have long hindered justice for survivors.

She said she was also advocating a more holistic approach, involving the ministries of health, education and local government.

“We want curriculums that promote gender equity from a young age,” Chombo said.

“We want to teach children what gender-based violence is and how to prevent it.

“It will boil down to inclusion of teaching gender equity at home, how parents behave around their children, how they model good behaviour.”

She has also been vocal about the need to address issues affecting men, particularly around mental health and positive masculinity, encouraging chiefs “to ensure that our patriarchal culture is not actively perpetuating gender violence”.

“I hear a lot of people say: ‘Why do you speak of women more than men?’

“It’s because as it stands in society, women are mostly prejudiced [against].

“But when we speak of gender equality, we’re saying that it should be applied equally for everyone. But what we strive for is gender equity.”

Chombo, who studied law at the University of Botswana, said she was thankful to her mother and other strong women for inspiring her – saying that women had to work “10 times harder” to succeed.

“[My mother] has managed to create an environment for me to thrive. And growing up, I got to realise that it’s not an easy thing.

“As women, we face so many pressures: ‘A woman cannot do this. A woman can’t do that. A woman can’t be young and in leadership.’ I’m currently facing that.”

She also credited Julia Morley, the CEO of Miss World, for helping her: “She has managed to create a legacy of what we call beauty with a purpose for so many young girls across the world.

“She has just inspired us so deeply to take up social responsibility.”

Chombo is serious about this. The beauty queen-cum-lawyer-cum-minister knows she has made history – but is also aware that her real work has only just begun.

“Impact. Tangible impact. That’s what success would look like to me,” she said.

“I want to look back and see that it is there and it is sustainable. That when I leave, someone else is able to carry it through.”

• ‘Without sport I’d probably be a criminal’ – Olympic champion Tebogo
• Botswana’s politician who did the unthinkable
• Why voters fall out of love with liberation movements

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.”

Public funding for the Royal Household has tripled in real terms since 2012, official figures show, with the rise driven largely by repairs and building work at Buckingham Palace.

The Sovereign Grant, which provides state funding for the monarchy, was introduced in 2012 at £31m per year. That has now risen to £132m, data from the House of Commons Library shows, and once inflation has been taken into account, that represents about a threefold increase.

The grant rose 53% in April, from £86.3m to £132.1m. Royal aides say this was because of a Buckingham Palace building project and the grant will come down again, adding that the monarchy represents good value.

Lord Turnbull, a crossbench peer and a former Cabinet Secretary, called the way the grant was calculated “complete and utter nonsense” but said that the budget isn’t high compared with other presidential heads of state.

The Sovereign Grant provides funding for the official duties of the monarchy. In the most recent figures, for 2023-24, the biggest items were property maintenance and staff payroll, with smaller amounts for travel and hospitality and housekeeping.

The analysis by the House of Commons Library shows how much the Sovereign Grant has risen over time – using a measure that takes into account inflation, with comparisons using 2023-24 values as a benchmark.

Using that measure, the Sovereign Grant in 2012-13 was worth £41.5m – which rose to almost £100m in 2018-19, to cover renovations in Buckingham Palace, and then rose in 2025-26 to being worth £129.3m, again for work on Buckingham Palace.

A Bank of England inflation calculation also shows the grant’s value having trebled since 2012, although Buckingham Palace uses a separate figure which is slightly below a threefold real-terms increase.

Buckingham Palace says the current figures are higher because of a 10-year, £369m project to modernise facilities in the Palace, including cabling, plumbing, wiring and lifts. It’s a project that the National Audit Office says has been well-run and delivers “good value for money”.

The Palace says it’s misleading to compare this year’s figures with earlier levels of grants. They say the big increase is due to the element of the grant that pays for Buckingham Palace building works, rather than the “core” grant for other running costs.

“The Sovereign Grant remained virtually flat for five years from 2020, during a period of high inflation. The majority of the increase in this year’s Sovereign Grant is to fund the Buckingham Palace Reservicing Programme, which is ensuring that the Palace, a national asset, is accessible and protected from fire and flood,” said a Palace spokesperson.

“A temporary increase in the grant across two years was approved to provide the remainder of the funding agreed in 2016 for this reservicing work. It has always been anticipated that the level of the Sovereign Grant will drop once the project is completed,” said the spokesperson.

This could mean funding from the public purse reducing after 2027.

The sharp increase over the past decade has been during difficult years for public finances, including periods of austerity and tight controls over budgets.

For example, a report from the Institute for Fiscal Studies showed that public spending on education in England went down by 11% in real terms between 2010-11 and 2023-24, although the IFS says that it is difficult to compare such big multi-billion budgets with changes in relatively smaller amounts such as the Sovereign Grant.

Before the Sovereign Grant was introduced, state funding for the monarchy came through a mix of grants, government department spending and a “civil list” payment.

Figures from the House of Commons Library, going back to 1995, show the pre-Sovereign Grant totals as lower than than they are today – for instance, using 2023-24 values, it was worth £67m in 2000 and £56m in 2005.

The Sovereign Grant was introduced as a more “modern, transparent” way of bringing together royal funding, presented to MPs in 2011 as being likely to reduce the royal income.

The grant is based on a percentage of the profits of the independent property and landowning business, the Crown Estate. The grant is not from the Crown Estate, it comes from the Treasury, but the Crown Estate is used as a benchmark.

Sovereign Grant was initially set at 15% of Crown Estate profits, which rose to 25% to cover the cost of renovating Buckingham Palace.

It’s now being reduced to 12%. But because of increased profits for the Crown Estate from selling leases for offshore wind farms, the actual cash amount has risen sharply, because it’s a percentage based on a much bigger total.

The increase in the Sovereign Grant’s value is blamed by former Lib Dem Home Office minister Norman Baker, a prominent critic of royal finances, on what he calls the “completely absurd” way it’s calculated and “weak-kneed” governments that don’t want to challenge it.

“The Royal Family has been very efficient in persuading the public purse to keep coughing up more money,” he says.

“Buckingham Palace has been used again and again to justify the increases.

“We’re told public finances are tight, we can’t afford a winter fuel allowance, but we can pay for an increase for the Royal Family. It’s completely wrong.”

Lord Turnbull, a former Cabinet Secretary and Permanent Secretary at the Treasury in the 1990s and 2000s, is also critical of the way the grant is calculated. He says successive governments have used the Crown Estate calculation as a convenient way of avoiding debate and stopping a “lot of bolshy backbenchers moaning about the cost of the monarchy”.

He says it would be much better to have a straightforward grant to pay for the monarchy, which could be debated on its own merits.

But he also says it’s a “red herring” to focus on the headline increase in the Sovereign Grant, when that figure has been driven by work to preserve Buckingham Palace, rather than underlying running costs. He says that if you have a monarchy it has to be properly funded. “You either have one or you don’t,” says Lord Turnbull.

Pauline Maclaran, a royal commentator from Royal Holloway, University of London, says the monarchy “generates a great deal of money and goodwill.”

This is often seen in terms of boosting tourism and promoting business links, but Prof Maclaran says increasingly it needs to recognise the impact of royal “soft power”.

US President Trump is a self-professed fan of King Charles and if those warm feelings helped with UK and US trade and tariff negotiations the benefits would hugely outweigh any annual costs of the monarchy, says Prof Maclaran.

But the royals can’t be immune to questions about finances, she says: “The public wants to know if they’re of value.”

Royal expert Richard Palmer says this year’s increase has “raised eyebrows”.

“Of course the head of state and those who support him need to be funded properly, but so do other parts of the state – the health service, schools, the military, for example,” says Mr Palmer.

Royal sources say there is transparency and funding is subject to the approval of Parliament. The Royal Trustees overseeing the grant are the prime minister, chancellor and the keeper of the privy purse, who looks after the monarch’s finances.

You can dig into the accounts and see from 2023-24 that the royals spent over £1m on helicopter flights, there was an electricity bill of £2.2m and that travel for the Duke of Kent over three days to attend regimental events in Scotland cost more than £23,000.

There are also details of what the monarchy provides in a year – including hosting 400 events, inviting 105,000 guests to receptions, garden parties and official lunches. There were also 2,300 public engagements, supporting charities and good causes.

There are national and international events, including state visits which help to promote UK trade. There’s a constitutional role, such as the state opening of Parliament and regular meetings with the prime minister.

Republic, a group campaigning for an elected head of state, have argued that other costs need to be included, such as security, which is not covered by the Sovereign Grant.

They also want the Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall to count as public funding, rather than private incomes for the King and Prince of Wales. A report from the group claims that the total cost of the monarchy is about £510m per year.

Opinion polls suggest the monarchy remains popular, with a YouGov survey in February 2025 suggesting 55% viewed the monarchy positively compared with 36% who saw it negatively.

But there is less certainty about funding. Another YouGov survey in December 2024 suggested strong public opposition to government money being spent on Buckingham Palace – by 56% to 29%.

And there are divisions by age groups – with 74% of the over-65s thinking the royals are good value for money, compared with 44% of 25 to 49 year olds.

Sign up here to get the latest royal stories and analysis every week with our Royal Watch newsletter. Those outside the UK can sign up here.

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.”

Baby Reindeer and Mr Bates vs the Post Office will go head to head at the Bafta TV Awards, which take place later at London’s Royal Festival Hall.

The event is one of the most prestigious in the TV calendar, and will see shows broadcast in 2024 compete for awards voted for by the British Academy.

First screened by ITV in January 2024, Mr Bates vs the Post Office was one of the most impactful shows of the year and led to widespread public outcry about the wrongful convictions of hundreds of sub-postmasters.

Baby Reindeer, meanwhile, was a breakout viral hit for Netflix about an aspiring comedian and his stalker, but it also prompted a defamation claim from the woman said to have inspired it.

The TV Baftas mark the final stop on the awards circuit for both shows, after wins at other events such as the Emmys, Golden Globes, SAG and National Television Awards.

• 4 nominations – Baby Reindeer, Mr Bates vs The Post Office
• 3 – Rivals, Slow Horses, Mr Loverman, Say Nothing, The Traitors
• 2 – Sherwood, Wolf Hall: The Mirror and the Light, Gavin & Stacey: The Finale

The above tallies include nominations for the memorable moment prize, the only award voted by the public.

The numbers do not include the shows’ earlier nominations and wins at the Bafta Craft Awards, which took place last month and saw Baby Reindeer’s Richard Gadd take home best comedy writing, with Slow Horses and Inside No. 9 among the other winners.

The Post Office scandal is widely considered the biggest miscarriage of justice in modern British history, and saw hundreds of sub-postmasters wrongly prosecuted and convicted of crimes they didn’t commit, based on inaccurate data from the Horizon software system.

The story was reported in the media over several years, but ITV dramatisation Mr Bates vs the Post Office brought it a new league of public attention and prompted the government to announce new legislation to exonerate and compensate victims.

Meanwhile, Baby Reindeer told the story of a struggling stand-up comedian, the woman who stalks him, and the powerful man in the TV industry who mentors and then sexually assaults him. Richard Gadd’s partly autobiographical drama became one of the most dissected series of the year.

Other nominees include Rivals, a Disney+ adaptation of a Jilly Cooper novel about two powerful men battling for control of a local TV network, and Slow Horses, about a dysfunctional unit within MI5 made up of disgraced agents.

Say Nothing, which followed the lives of those growing up during the troubles in Belfast, is also nominated, alongside Mr Loverman, a screen adaptation of Bernadine Evaristo’s novel about an elderly man whose marriage falls apart after his long-term affair with his male friend is revealed.

Sherwood focused on a Nottinghamshire community still reeling from the 1980s miners’ strike, while Wolf Hall: The Mirror and the Light continued Hilary Mantel’s trilogy about Thomas Cromwell’s continued rise to power and eventual fall from grace.

Other nominees include reality series The Traitors, a game of deception played in a Scottish castle, and Gavin & Stacey: The Finale, which saw the long-running series about two families from from Billericay in Essex and Barry in Wales reach an emotional conclusion.

Actor and TV presenter Alan Cumming will take over hosting duties this year, and we hope he brings just as much drama as he did to the latest cracking series of The Traitors US.

The Scottish star’s film credits include Eyes Wide Shut, GoldenEye and Emma, as well as two absolute masterpieces of 1990s cinema – Spice World: The Movie and Romy and Michele’s High School Reunion.

Bafta’s executive director of awards and content, Emma Baehr, said Cumming would “definitely bring a playful sense of mischief and fun to the ceremony”.

Elsewhere in the ceremony, Jessie J will deliver her first TV performance in six years, singing the appropriately titled The Award Goes To, while Tom Grennan will perform his new single Full Attention.

Awards will be presented by stars including Dame Mary Berry, Billy Porter, Suranne Jones, Ashley Walters, Katie Piper, Sir David Suchet, Big Zuu, Ellie Simmonds, Owen Cooper, Rose Ayling Ellis, Stacey Dooley and Baroness Benjamin.

The ceremony will be broadcast on BBC One at 19:00 BST.

But it actually takes place a couple of hours earlier, so that some sections of the ceremony can be edited down before the show airs.

BBC News will be running spoiler-free coverage, with winners revealed on our live page in line with when they are announced on BBC One.

Drama series

• Blue Lights – BBC One
• Sherwood – BBC One
• Supacell – Netflix
• Wolf Hall: The Mirror And The Light – BBC One

Limited drama

• Baby Reindeer – Netflix
• Lost Boys And Fairies – BBC One
• Mr Bates Vs The Post Office – ITV1
• One Day – Netflix

Scripted comedy

• Alma’s Not Normal (BBC Two)
• Brassic (Sky Max)
• G’Wed (ITV1)
• Ludwig (BBC One)

Leading actress

• Anna Maxwell Martin – Until I Kill You (ITV1)
• Billie Piper – Scoop (Netflix)
• Lola Petticrew – Say Nothing (Disney+)
• Marisa Abela – Industry (BBC One)
• Monica Dolan – Mr Bates vs The Post Office (ITV1)
• Sharon D Clarke – Mr Loverman (BBC One)

Leading actor

• David Tennant – Rivals (Disney+)
• Gary Oldman – Slow Horses (Apple TV+)
• Lennie James – Mr Loverman (BBC One)
• Martin Freeman – The Responder (BBC One)
• Richard Gadd – Baby Reindeer (Netflix)
• Toby Jones – Mr Bates vs The Post Office (ITV1)

Supporting actress

• Jessica Gunning – Baby Reindeer (Netflix)
• Katherine Parkinson – Rivals (Disney+)
• Maxine Peake – Say Nothing – (Disney+)
• Monica Dolan – Sherwood (BBC One)
• Nava Mau – Baby Reindeer (Netflix)
• Sue Johnston – Truelove (Channel 4)

Supporting actor

• Ariyon Bakare, Mr Loverman (BBC One)
• Christopher Chung, Slow Horses (Apple TV+)
• Damian Lewis, Wolf Hall: The Mirror and the Light (BBC One
• Jonathan Pryce, Slow Horses (Apple TV+)
• McKinley Belcher III, Eric (Netflix)
• Sonny Walker, The Gathering (Channel 4)

Female performance in a comedy

• Anjana Vasan – We Are Lady Parts (Channel 4)
• Kate O’Flynn – Everyone Else Burns (Channel 4)
• Lolly Adefope – The Franchise (Sky Comedy)
• Nicola Coughlan – Big Mood (Channel 4)
• Ruth Jones – Gavin & Stacey: The Finale (BBC One)
• Sophie Willan – Alma’s Not Normal (BBC Two)

Male performance in a comedy

• Bilal Hasna – Extraordinary (Disney+)
• Danny Dyer – Mr Bigstuff (Sky Comedy)
• Dylan Thomas-Smith – G’Wed (ITV2)
• Nabhaan Rizwan – Kaos – Sister (Netflix)
• Oliver Savell- Changing Ends (ITV1)
• Phil Dunning – Smoggie Queens (BBC Three)

Soap

• Casualty (BBC One)
• Coronation Street (ITV1)
• EastEnders (BBC One)

Entertainment programme

• The 1% Club (ITV1)
• Michael McIntyre’s Big Show (BBC One)
• Taskmaster (Channel 4)
• Would I Lie To You? (BBC One)

Entertainment performance

• Anthony McPartlin, Declan Donnelly – Ant & Dec’s Saturday Night Takeaway – (ITV1)
• Claudia Winkleman – The Traitors (BBC One)
• Graham Norton – The Graham Norton Show (BBC One)
• Joe Lycett Late Night Lycett – (Channel 4)
• Romesh Ranganathan, Rob Beckett Rob & Romesh Vs (Sky Max)
• Stacey Solomon Sort Your Life Out – (BBC One)

Factual entertainment

• In Vogue: The 90s (Disney+)
• Race Across The World (BBC One)
• Rob And Rylan’s Grand Tour (BBC Two)
• Sort Your Life Out (BBC One)

Reality

• Dragons’ Den (BBC One)
• The Jury: Murder Trial (Channel 4)
• Love Is Blind (Netflix)
• The Traitors (BBC One)

Daytime

• Clive Myrie’s Caribbean Adventure (BBC Two)
• Loose Women (ITV1)
• Morning Live (BBC One)
• Richard Osman’s House Of Games (BBC Two)

International

• After The Party (Channel 4)
• Colin From Accounts (BBC Two)
• Say Nothing (Disney+)
• Shōgun (Disney+)
• True Detective: Night Country (Sky Atlantic)
• You Are Not Alone: Fighting The Wolfpack (Netflix)

Live event coverage

• D-Day 80: Tribute To The Fallen (BBC One)
• Glastonbury 2024 (BBC Two)
• Last Night Of The Proms (BBC Two)

Current affairs

• Life and Death in Gaza – Storyville (BBC Two)
• Maternity: Broken Trust – Exposure (ITV1)
• State of Rage (Channel 4)
• Ukraine’s War: The Other Side (ITV1)

Single documentary

• Hell Jumper (BBC Two)
• Tell Them You Love Me (Sky Documentaries)
• Ukraine: Enemy In The Woods (BBC Two)
• Undercover: Exposing The Far Right (Channel 4)

Factual series

• American Nightmare (Netflix)
• Freddie Flintoff’s Field Of Dreams On Tour (BBC One)
• The Push: Murder On The Cliff (Channel 4)
• To Catch A Copper (Channel 4)

Specialist factual

• Atomic People (BBC Two)
• Billy & Molly: An Otter Love (National Geographic)
• Children of the Cult (ITV1)
• Miners’ Strike 1984: The Battle For Britain (Channel 4)

News coverage

• BBC Breakfast: Post Office Special (BBC News/BBC One)
• Channel 4 News: Inside Sednaya – The Fall Of Assad (Channel 4 News/Channel 4)
• Channel 4 News: Undercover Inside Reform’s Campaign (Channel 4 News/Channel 4)

Sports coverage

• Euro 2024 (BBC Sport/BBC One)
• Paris 2024 Olympics (BBC Sport/BBC One)
• Wimbledon 2024 (BBC Sport/Wimbledon Broadcast Services/BBC One)

Memorable moment

• Bridgerton – “THE” carriage scene where Colin admits his true feelings for Penelope (Netflix)
• Gavin & Stacey: The Finale – Smithy’s Wedding: Mick Stands Up (BBC One)
• Mr Bates Vs The Post Office – Jo Hamilton phones the Horizon helpline (ITV1)
• Rivals – Rupert Campbell-Black and Sarah Stratton are caught in a game of naked tennis (Disney+)
• Strictly Come Dancing – Chris McCausland and Dianne Buswell Waltz to You’ll Never Walk Alone (BBC One)
• The Traitors – “Paul isn’t my son… but Ross is!” (BBC One)

Short form

• Brown Brit (Channel 4)
• Peaked (Channel 4)
• Quiet Life (BBC Three)

Read more about the Bafta nominees:

• Baby Reindeer stars win big at Emmy Awards
• Netflix fails to get Baby Reindeer lawsuit dropped
• The power of Mr Bates vs The Post Office in bringing about justice
• Mr Bates vs Post Office drama lost £1m, ITV boss says
• Rivals: Dame Jilly Cooper on why jogging is ruinous for our sex lives
• Gary Oldman wants to play shabby secret agent ‘for the long run’
• Marian Price to sue Disney over Say Nothing murder scene
• Life and Death in Gaza: ‘I say bye to my kids, in case we don’t wake up’
• Scoop: Why Gillian Anderson found it ‘scary’ to play Emily Maitlis
• Bankers ‘neither villains nor rock stars’, says Industry creator
• ‘I was told Mr Loverman was too niche for TV’
• Martin Freeman: The Responder star on why TV viewers can ‘smell lies’
• UK TV industry in crisis, says Wolf Hall director
• Eric: Benedict Cumberbatch says dressing as monster is ‘one of the most ludicrous things I’ve done’
• Sherwood actress aims to break Down’s syndrome barriers
• TV drama Truelove puts seaside town ‘on the map’
• We Are Lady Parts: Why Anjana Vasan is done people pleasing
• Nicola Coughlan: Why I hate on-screen vanity, in new show Big Mood
• Gavin and Stacey tops Christmas Day TV ratings
• Gavin & Stacey: An exclusive behind-the-scenes look at the Christmas finale
• Alma’s Not Normal: How anger and spa breaks fuelled new series
• Extraordinary: Peat & Diesel music to feature on new Disney show
• Blue Lights series two promises ‘absolute chaos’
• Supacell: Superhero series tackling knife crime and sickle cell
• Lost Boys and Fairies writer proud of adoption drama
• One Day: I rarely saw people like me in lead roles, says Ambika Mod
• Derek Thompson: Casualty’s Charlie Fairhead exits after 38 years
• Coronation Street’s Gail bids farewell after 50 years
• EastEnders gets ratings bump for ‘flawless’ live episode
• Why is Race Across the World so popular?
• Rylan Clark and Rob Rinder: ‘The tour that helped mend our broken hearts’
• Sort Your Life Out: How to plump up your saggy sofa
• Ant & Dec’s Saturday Night Takeaway: More than 4m tune in for final show
• The Traitors finale was most-watched live episode in show’s history
• Late Night Lycett: Joe Lycett behind Banksy mural hoax
• Michael McIntyre’s Big Show: LeAnn Rimes in duet with Harrogate mum
• Romesh and Roisin remember the original Taskmaster
• Sara Davies to ‘step away’ from Dragons’ Den
• Matt and Emma Willis on a ‘very British’ Love is Blind
• Shogun: A guide to the hit Japanese samurai epic as its finale cuts deep
• King and Queen hear first-hand D-Day veteran stories
• Glastonbury 2024: 15 magical and memorable moments
• Thousands wave flags to classics at Last Night of the Proms
• Maternity: Broken Trust: Parents hope documentary will help maternity inquiry bid
• Hell Jumper: Story of Ukraine war victims’ rescuer told in film
• Freddie Flintoff: Star returns to BBC with second Field of Dreams series
• To Catch a Copper: Avon and Somerset Police staff ‘betrayed’ by Channel 4 documentary
• Atomic People: ‘Atomic bomb hell must never be repeated’ say Japan’s last survivors
• BBC Breakfast: Post Office Special: ‘I carried the shame – I refuse to carry it any longer’
• Euro 2024 final in numbers
• Paris 2024: How is France preparing for the Olympics and Paralympics?
• Five Wimbledon storylines to look out for
• Bridgerton or Strictly? Bafta opens vote on best TV moments of 2024
• Peaked: Actress returns home for Derbyshire-set comedy

A ceasefire between India and Pakistan appears to have held overnight into Sunday, after the two nations accused each other of “violations” just hours after a deal was reached.

Days of cross-border military strikes had preceded the US-brokered deal, marking the worst military confrontation between the two rivals in decades.

US President Donald Trump praised India and Pakistan’s leaders for agreeing the ceasefire in fresh comments on Sunday morning, saying millions of people could have died without it.

This comes after explosions were heard in Indian-administered Kashmir hours after the deal was announced, with both sides accusing each other of violations.

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 denies any involvement.

US President Donald Trump announced the “full and immediate” ceasefire on his Truth Social Platform on Saturday. 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 explosions and seeing flashes in the sky.

Indian Foreign Secretary Misri accused Pakistan of “repeated violations” of the deal, and said his country’s armed forces would give “an appropriate response”.

Meanwhile, a spokesman for Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said Pakistan remained committed to implementing the deal, “notwithstanding the violations being committed by India in some areas”, and said troops on the ground should “exercise restraint”.

Kashmir is claimed in full by both India and Pakistan, but administered only in part by each since they were partitioned following independence from the UK 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”.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said following the announcement that 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.

In a further Truth Social post on Sunday, Trump repeated praise for India and Pakistan’s leaders for understanding it was “time to stop the current aggression”.

“I am proud that the USA was able to help you arrive at this historic and heroic decision,” he added.

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

UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said the UK 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 had singled 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.

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

The US president’s directive was issued on Friday and forms part of his 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 president’s call to increase staff comes as his administration pursues multiple pathways to force undocumented immigrants to leave the US.

His order on Friday did not specify how the increase in staffing at the 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, it has 6,100 deportation officers and more than 750 enforcement removal assistants, according to the agency’s 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 its current efforts “by deputising and contracting with state and local law enforcement officers, former federal officers, officers and personnel within other federal agencies”.

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 his administration accuses of gang activity.

Earlier this month, US District Judge Fernando Rodriguez, a Trump appointee 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”.

He said: “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.”

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 defence 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.”

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

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.”

A ceasefire between India and Pakistan appears to have held overnight into Sunday, after the two nations accused each other of “violations” just hours after a deal was reached.

Days of cross-border military strikes had preceded the US-brokered deal, marking the worst military confrontation between the two rivals in decades.

US President Donald Trump praised India and Pakistan’s leaders for agreeing the ceasefire in fresh comments on Sunday morning, saying millions of people could have died without it.

This comes after explosions were heard in Indian-administered Kashmir hours after the deal was announced, with both sides accusing each other of violations.

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 denies any involvement.

US President Donald Trump announced the “full and immediate” ceasefire on his Truth Social Platform on Saturday. 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 explosions and seeing flashes in the sky.

Indian Foreign Secretary Misri accused Pakistan of “repeated violations” of the deal, and said his country’s armed forces would give “an appropriate response”.

Meanwhile, a spokesman for Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said Pakistan remained committed to implementing the deal, “notwithstanding the violations being committed by India in some areas”, and said troops on the ground should “exercise restraint”.

Kashmir is claimed in full by both India and Pakistan, but administered only in part by each since they were partitioned following independence from the UK 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”.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said following the announcement that 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.

In a further Truth Social post on Sunday, Trump repeated praise for India and Pakistan’s leaders for understanding it was “time to stop the current aggression”.

“I am proud that the USA was able to help you arrive at this historic and heroic decision,” he added.

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

UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said the UK 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 had singled 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.

Pope Leo XIV appealed for “no more war” in a message to world powers during his first Sunday address at the Vatican.

Reflecting on current conflicts, the newly selected pontiff called for a “lasting peace” in the war in Ukraine, a ceasefire in Gaza, and welcomed Saturday’s agreement to end recent hostilities between India and Pakistan.

He said he was “deeply hurt” by events in Gaza, expressed hope for a “lasting accord” between India and Pakistan, and wished for a “authentic, true and lasting peace” in Ukraine.

The Pope also recited the Regina Caeli prayer, in honour of the Virgin Mary, to the crowd in St Peter’s Square.

Pope Leo was chosen as the new leader of the Catholic Church on Thursday, following a two-day conclave in Vatican City and the death of his predecessor, Pope Francis.

On Saturday, he visited a shrine outside Rome and then prayed before Francis’ tomb inside the basilica of Santa Maria Maggiore.

Pope Leo will be formally inaugurated at a mass in St Peter’s Square next week on 18 May.

Speaking from the central balcony of St Peter’s Basilica, he said: “The immense tragedy of the Second World War ended 80 years ago… now we’re facing the tragedy of a third world war in pieces.

“I would also like to address the powerful people of the world, repeating the always-current call: ‘no more war’.”

The pontiff continued: “I carry in my heart the suffering of the beloved Ukrainian people.

“May whatever is possible be done to reach an authentic, true and lasting peace as quickly as possible. May all the prisoners be freed. May children return to their families.

“And I am deeply hurt by what is happening in the Gaza strip.

“May a ceasefire immediately come into effect. May humanitarian aid be allowed into the civilian population and may all hostages be freed.

He went on: “I was happy to hear on the other hand that there was a ceasefire between India and Pakistan, and I hope that through the coming negotiations we might soon come to a lasting accord.”

His remarks comes as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin set out competing plans for a peace process to bring the three-year invasion of Ukraine to an end.

In the Middle East, Israel has cut off all humanitarian aid entering Gaza and resumed its military offensive in the Palestinian territory following the collapse of a two-month ceasefire and hostage exchange agreement.

Meanwhile, India and Pakistan agreed to a tentative ceasefire on Saturday after days cross-border military strikes that followed an attack on tourists in Indian-administered Kashmir on 22 April.

It has been a busy week for the pontiff, who held his first Mass as Pope in the Sistine chapel on Friday before speaking to cardinals on Saturday.

During this meeting, he described himself as an unworthy choice for Pope, and vowed to continue the “precious legacy” of his predecessor.

He highlighted the importance of missionary work and discussion – as well as care for those he called the “least and the rejected”.

He explained he had chosen the name Leo after a 19th-century Pope known for his teaching on social justice.

The new Pope also suggested the development of artificial intelligence and other advances meant the church was necessary today for the defence of human dignity and justice.

He is due to hold an audience with the media on Monday ahead of his inauguration next Sunday.

As part of that mass he will deliver a homily in the presence of numerous heads of state and dignitaries.

The 69-year-old is the 267th occupant of the throne of St Peter, and the first American to become a pontiff. He will lead members of the Catholic Church’s global community of 1.4bn people.

Born Robert Francis Prevost in Chicago, he worked for many years as a missionary in Peru before being made an archbishop there. He also has Peruvian nationality.

Although Leo was born in the US, the Vatican described him as the second pope from the Americas. Pope Francis, from Argentina, was the first.

Pope Leo is widely seen as a moderate who can offer “continuity” and “unity” following the death of his predecessor last month.

The new pontiff is believed to have shared Francis’ views on migrants, the poor and the environment.

In his first speech he told the crowds he wanted “to walk together with you as a united Church searching all together for peace and justice”.

When Charlie Hopkins thinks back to the three years he spent in one of America’s most famous prisons, he remembers the “deathly quiet” the most.

In 1955, Hopkins was sent to Alcatraz – a famed prison on an isolated island off the coast of San Francisco – after causing trouble at other prisons to serve a 17-year sentence for kidnapping and robbery.

Falling asleep at night in his cell on the remote island, he said, the only sound was the whistle of ships passing.

“That’s a lonely sound,” Hopkins said. “It reminds you of Hank Williams singing that song, ‘I’m so lonesome I could cry.'”

Now 93 and living in Florida, Hopkins said the San Francisco National Archives informed him that he is likely the last surviving former Alcatraz inmate. The BBC could not independently verify this.

In an interview with the BBC this week, Hopkins described life at Alcatraz – which formed the setting for the 1996 film The Rock – where he made friends with gangsters and once helped plan an unsuccessful escape.

Although it closed decades ago, US President Donald Trump recently claimed that he wants to re-open it as a federal prison.

When Hopkins was transferred to the high-security prison in 1955, from an Atlanta facility, he remembers it being clean, but barren. And there were few distractions – no radio at the time, and few books, he said.

“There was nothing to do,” he said. “You could walk back and forth in your cell or do push-ups.”

Hopkins kept busy part of the time with his job cleaning Alcatraz, sweeping the floors and buffing them “until they shined”, he said.

He was sent to prison in 1952 in Jacksonville, Florida, for his role in a series of robberies and kidnappings. He was part of a group that took hostages to get through roadblocks and steal cars, he said.

• The men who broke out of Alcatraz with a spoon

At Alcatraz, Hopkins had some infamous neighbours. The facility housed many violent criminals over its 30 years – Al Capone; Robert Stroud, a murderer known as the “Birdman of Alcatraz”; and crime boss James “Whitey” Bulger – making it the subject of a host of films and television shows.

A 22-acre island, 1.25 miles (2km) off San Francisco and surrounded by freezing waters with strong currents, Alcatraz was originally a naval defence fort. It was rebuilt in the early 20th century as a military prison. The US Justice Department took it over in the 1930s, transforming the facility into a federal prison to address rampant organised crime at the time.

Even in the high-security prison, Hopkins said he still managed to get into trouble and spent many days in the facility’s “D Block” – solitary confinement where inmates who misbehaved were held and rarely let out of their cells.

His longest stint there – six months – came after he tried to help several other prisoners, including notorious bank robber Forrest Tucker, escape Alcatraz, Hopkins said. He helped steal hacksaw blades from the prison’s electric shop to cut the prison bars in the basement kitchen.

The plan didn’t work – prison guards discovered the blades in other inmates’ cells, Hopkins said. “A few days after they locked them up, they locked me up,” he said.

But that did not stop one of the inmates.

In 1956, when Tucker was taken to a hospital for a kidney operation, he stabbed his ankle with a pencil so prison guards would have to remove his leg irons, Tucker told the New Yorker. Then, as he was taken to get an X-ray, he overpowered hospital orderlies and ran away, he said.

He was captured in a hospital gown in a cornfield hours later.

As more prisoners attempted to escape Alcatraz over the years, officials ramped up security, Hopkins said.

“When I left there in 1958, the security was so tight you couldn’t breathe,” he said.

All told, there were 14 separate attempts over the years involving 36 inmates, according to the National Park Service.

One of the most famous involved Frank Morris, and brothers Clarence and John Anglin, who escaped in June 1962 by placing papier-mâché heads in their beds and breaking out through ventilation ducts. They were never found, but the FBI concluded that they drowned in the cold waters surrounding the island.

A year later, the prison shut down after the government determined it would be more cost-effective to build new prisons than to keep the remote island facility in operation.

Now it’s a publicly run museum visited by millions each year that generates about $60m (£45m) a year in revenue for park partners.

The building is decrepit, with peeling paint, rusted pipes, and crumbling toilets in each cramped cell. Construction on the main prison facility began in 1907, and more than a century of exposure to the elements has rendered the place all but uninhabitable.

Trump said this week, however, that he wants his government to re-open and expand the island prison for the country’s “most ruthless and violent offenders”.

Alcatraz “represents something very strong, very powerful” – law and order, Trump said.

But experts and historians said Trump’s proposal to re-establish the prison is far-fetched, as it would cost billions to repair and bring up to date with other federal facilities.

Hopkins agrees. “It would be so expensive,” he said.

“Back then, the sewage system went into the ocean,” he added. “They’d have to come up with another way of handling that.”

Hopkins left Alcatraz five years before it closed down for good. He had been transferred to a prison in Springfield, Missouri and given psychiatric medication that improved his behaviour and helped him heal psychological issues, he said.

But the avid Trump supporter said he does not believe the president’s proposal is serious.

“He don’t really want to open that place,” Hopkins said, adding that Trump was trying to “get a point across to the public” about punishing criminals and those who enter the US illegally.

Hopkins was released in 1963, working first at a truck stop before taking on other jobs. He went back to his home state of Florida, where now he has a daughter and grandson.

After several decades reflecting on his crimes and life in Alcatraz, he wrote a 1,000-page memoir, with nearly half of the book detailing his troubled behaviour, he said.

“You wouldn’t believe the trouble I caused them when I was there,” he said. “I can see now, looking back, that I had problems.”

In a dramatic turn of events, US President Donald Trump took to social media on Saturday to announce that India and Pakistan – after four tense days of cross-border clashes – had agreed to a “full and immediate ceasefire”.

Behind the scenes, US mediators, alongside diplomatic backchannels and regional players, proved critical in pulling the nuclear-armed rivals back from the brink, experts say.

However, hours after a ceasefire deal, India and Pakistan were trading accusations of fresh violations – underscoring its fragility.

India accused Pakistan of “repeated violations” while Pakistan insisted it remained committed to the ceasefire, with its forces showing “responsibility and restraint.”

Before Trump’s ceasefire announcement, India and Pakistan were spiralling towards what many feared could become a full-blown conflict.

After a deadly militant attack killed 26 tourists in Indian-administered Kashmir last month, India launched air strikes inside Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir – triggering days of aerial clashes, artillery duels and, by Saturday morning, accusations from both sides of missile strikes on each other’s airbases.

The rhetoric escalated sharply, with each country claiming to have inflicted heavy damage while foiling the other’s attacks.

• Why India and Pakistan fight over Kashmir
• Drone war opens a new chapter in India-Pakistan conflict

Tanvi Madan, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington DC, says US Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s call to Pakistani Army Chief Asim Munir on 9 May “might have been the crucial point”.

“There’s still much we don’t know about the roles of various international actors, but it’s clear over the past three days that at least three countries were working to de-escalate – the US, of course, but also the UK and Saudi Arabia,” she says.

Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar told Pakistani media that “three dozen countries” were involved in the diplomacy – including Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the US.

“One question is whether, if this call had come earlier – right after the initial Indian strikes, when Pakistan was already claiming some Indian losses and an off-ramp was available – it might have prevented further escalation,” Ms Madan says.

This isn’t the first time US mediation has helped defuse an India–Pakistan crisis.

In his memoir, former US secretary of state Mike Pompeo claimed he was woken up to speak with an unnamed “Indian counterpart”, who feared Pakistan was preparing nuclear weapons during the 2019 standoff.

Former Indian High Commissioner to Pakistan Ajay Bisaria later wrote that Pompeo overstated both the risk of nuclear escalation and the US role in calming the conflict.

But diplomats say there is little doubt the US played an important role in defusing the crisis this time.

“The US was the most prominent external player. Last time, Pompeo claimed they averted nuclear war. While they’ll likely exaggerate, they may have played the primary diplomatic role, perhaps amplifying Delhi’s positions in Islamabad,” Mr Bisaria told the BBC on Saturday.

Yet at the outset, the US appeared strikingly standoffish.

As tensions flared, US Vice President JD Vance said on Thursday that the US was not going to get involved in a war that’s “fundamentally none of our business”.

“We can’t control these countries though. Fundamentally, India has its gripes with Pakistan… America can’t tell the Indians to lay down their arms. We can’t tell the Pakistanis to lay down their arms. And so we’re going to continue to pursue this thing through diplomatic channels, ” he said in a television interview.

Meanwhile, President Trump said earlier this week: “I know both [leaders of India and Pakistan] very well, and I want to see them work it out… I want to see them stop, and hopefully they can stop now”.

Ejaz Haider, a Lahore-based defence analyst, told the BBC this appeared to be the only difference from previous occasions.

“The American role was a continuation of past patterns, but with one key difference – this time, they initially stayed hands-off, watching the crisis unfold instead of jumping in right away. Only when they saw how it was playing out did they step in to manage it,” Mr Haider told the BBC.

Experts in Pakistan say as the escalation cycle deepened, Pakistan sent “dual signals”, retaliating militarily while announcing a National Command Authority (NCA) meeting – a clear reminder of the nuclear overhang.

The NCA controls and takes operational decisions regarding Pakistan’s nuclear weapons.

This was around the time US Secretary of State Marco Rubio stepped in.

“The US was indispensable. This outcome would not have occurred without Secretary Rubio’s efforts,” Ashley J Tellis, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, told the BBC.

What also helped was Washington’s deepening ties with Delhi.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s personal rapport with Trump, plus the US’s broader strategic and economic stakes, gave the US administration diplomatic leverage to push both nuclear-armed rivals towards de-escalation.

Indian diplomats see three key peace tracks that happened this time, much like after Pulwama–Balakot in 2019:

• US and UK pressure
• Saudi mediation, with the Saudi junior foreign minister visiting both capitals
• The direct India-Pakistan channel between the two national security advisors (NSAs)

Despite shifting global priorities and a hands-off posture at first, the US ultimately stepped in as the indispensable mediator between South Asia’s nuclear rivals.

Whether overstated by its own officials or underacknowledged by Delhi and Islamabad, experts believe the US’s role as crisis manager remains as vital – and as complicated – as ever.

Doubts do, however, linger over the ceasefire’s durability after Saturday’s events, with some Indian media reporting it was essentially brokered by senior military officials of the two countries – not the US.

“This ceasefire is bound to be a fragile one. It came about very quickly, amid sky-high tensions. India appears to have interpreted it differently than did the US and Pakistan,” Michael Kugelman, a foreign policy analyst, told the BBC.

“Also, since it was put together so hastily, the accord may lack the proper guarantees and assurances one would need at such a tense moment.”

Volodymyr Zelensky has given a cautious and diplomatic response to Vladimir Putin’s late-night offer of direct talks in Istanbul next Thursday.

The Ukrainian leader might have been expected to slam his opposite number in Moscow for not committing to a 30-day ceasefire, as demanded by Kyiv and its Western allies on Saturday.

Instead, writing on X, Zelensky called it “a positive sign that the Russians have finally begun to consider ending the war”.

Zelensky added that Ukraine expected Russia to confirm it would abide by the proposed 30-day ceasefire, starting on Monday.

It’s hard to tell if Zelensky really sees Putin’s offer of direct talks as a “positive sign”. This is as much about optics as anything else.

Neither Putin nor Zelensky want to be seen by US President Donald Trump as the obstacle to peace.

Follow live updates

Trump’s reaction was markedly upbeat. Writing on his Truth Social platform earlier, he hinted once again that this war was close to ending. He wrote: “A potentially great day for Russia and Ukraine!”

Putin said he wants to address what he calls “the root causes of the conflict”.

From his perspective, that means Ukraine’s unacceptable ambition to be part of a prosperous, democratic Europe rather than returning to Moscow’s orbit and become a pliant, satellite nation like Belarus.

He will also want a firm undertaking that Ukraine will never join Nato.

Moscow demanded on Saturday that, before any ceasefire can start, the West must stop arming Ukraine.

That of course would leave this country that much less able to fend off Russia’s gradual advances on the frontline – or, worse, a new full-scale offensive to take more land.

What Ukraine badly needs from its allies is an uninterrupted flow of air defences to fend off the ever-growing numbers of drones and missiles being fired across the common border at Kyiv and other major cities.

Shortly after dawn on Sunday, we were woken by an air raid alert and sirens went off as more Russian drones were launched.

On 9 May, the US Embassy in Kyiv issued a warning to its citizens that there was “a significant risk of air raids in the coming days”.

One of the biggest concerns is that the Kremlin may launch another Oreshnik hypersonic ballistic missile like the one its forces fired at a factory in Dnipro last November.

With its velocity approaching 10 times the speed of sound, Russia boasts that this missile is “unstoppable”.

So now the key question is what Trump does next – and this could go either way.

He could decide that his opposite number in Moscow is simply stringing him along, finding one excuse after another not to agree to a ceasefire.

Or, given his historic warm relations with Putin, will he throw the Russian leader a diplomatic lifeline and put pressure on Ukraine instead to sit down in Istanbul and listen to Moscow’s demands, irrespective of whether there is a ceasefire come Monday?

At the end of a waitressing shift, Kristina Lampert used to separate her tips in two piles: Canadian cash and American.

But it’s been weeks since she has done that.

Freighters, the restaurant where she works, is one of the first places people can grab a bite after crossing the US-Canada border between Sarnia, Ontario, and Port Huron, Michigan.

The Blue Water Bridge, which connects the US and Canada, is in full view from the restaurant’s windows.

“A lot of people used to come over and say ‘we’re here for the view’,” she says of Canadian diners. “I haven’t heard that at all recently.”

Border towns noticed almost instantly when US President Donald Trump began imposing tariffs on countries around the world and saying he wanted to make Canada the 51st US state – because the number of Canadians crossing the border plummeted.

Border crossings between the US and Canada are down some 17% since Trump started bringing in tariffs, according to CBP data.

Canadian’s car trips to the US are down almost 32% compared to March 2024, according to Statistics Canada.

Like many of the towns that dot along the 5,525 mile (8,891km) border, the economies of Port Huron and Sarnia are linked and in some ways dependent on one another. Port Huron is a manufacturing town of less than 30,000 people with a quaint downtown and lots of retail, offering visitors an enticing opportunity for a day-trip.

On a day where there is little traffic, a Sarnia resident can cross the border and be in Michigan in a matter of minutes.

Many of these towns faced their first test more than five years ago when the Covid-19 pandemic shut crossings down for 19 months and left local economies reeling.

Now, they are seeing a second economic hit due to Trump’s trade war, with many Canadians choosing to “buy Canadian” and reducing travel to the US in response to the fraying relationship between the two neighbouring countries.

One place this is being felt is at Sarnia’s Duty Free, the last place you can purchase goods before leaving Canada and entering the US. The shelves of perfume and liquor are fuller and the parking lot is emptier since tariffs tensions began.

Barbara Barett, the executive director of Frontier Duty Free Association, says some of the 32 land-border duty frees in Canada have seen as much as an 80% decrease in sales since Trump’s return to the White House. Most stores have seeing a 50-60% drop in business.

“We’re 100% reliant on the travel across the border,” she says of duty frees. “Our stores are often pillars of these communities – communities depend on them.”

And while the crossing at Port Huron-Sarnia is faring better than most, on a Friday in May the parking lot of the Sarnia Duty Free is almost empty.

Tania Lee, who runs the store with her family, says that has become the new norm.

On Easter weekend – usually one of their busiest of the year, as Canadians take advantage of the break to stop in at a favourite restaurant and go to a church service in Port Huron – cars were few and far between, and sales were not what they should have been, she says.

“We are suffering because of collateral damage at the border,” Ms Lee says of her second-generation family business.

She notes that people who live in border towns often cross the boundary multiple times a week. Ms Lee, for example, has a mailbox at a shipping facility in Port Huron that she visits regularly, as do her neighbours.

People across the Blue Water Bridge are feeling the effects too, Mayor Anita Ashford says.

She has heard from both residents of her town and Canadians frustrated about the increased tension between the nations.

Nationally, a 10% drop in Canadian tourism would cost the US up to 14,000 jobs and $2.1bn (£1.56bn) in business, according to the US Travel Association.

Michigan is one of the places likely to see the brunt of that impact. In 2023, Canadian visitors spent a collective $238m in the state, according to tourism officials.

That money is essential for border towns like Port Huron, its mayor says.

“I hope people in Washington will start to understand what they’re doing to the people,” she says. “We are not responsible for this, the [federal] government put us in this position and now we have to deal with it respectfully.”

“We need each other,” she says.

Donald Trump says there has been a “total reset” in US-China trade relations following the first day of talks between American and Chinese officials in Switzerland.

In a social media post, the US president described the talks as being “very good” and said change had been “negotiated in a friendly, but constructive, manner”.

An escalating trade war between Washington and Beijing has seen the US president hit Chinese imports to the US with tariffs of 145%. China retaliated with levies of 125% on some US goods.

Following months of back-and-forth, the two countries are meeting in Geneva this weekend for the first time since Trump hit China with tariffs at the start of the year.

Little information beyond the US president’s Truth Social post has so far emerged from the talks. They are due to continue on Sunday and are taking place between China’s vice-premier He Lifeng and US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent.

“We want to see, for the good of both China and the U.S., an opening up of China to American business. GREAT PROGRESS MADE!!!” Trump added.

On Friday, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Washington would not lower tariffs unilaterally, and China would need to make its own concessions.

Both sides issued various other warnings ahead of the meeting, with Beijing saying the US must ease tariffs while Bessent stressed that the focus was on “de-escalation” and this was not a “big trade deal”.

Chinese state media reported that Beijing had decided to engage with the US after fully considering global expectations, the country’s interests and appeals from American businesses.

Last month, the BBC found that Chinese exporters were struggling with the US’s tariffs – one company, Sorbo Technology, reported that half of its products were normally sold to the US and were now sat in boxes in a warehouse in China.

Meanwhile, the US economy was found to have shrank in the first three months of the year – contracting at an annual rate of 0.3% – as firms raced to get goods into the country.

The trade war between China and the US intensified last month after President Trump announced a universal baseline tariff on all imports to the United States, on what he called “Liberation Day”.

Around 60 trading partners, which the White House described as the “worst offenders”, were subjected to higher rates than others. The list included China and the European Union.

Trump said this was payback for years worth of unfair trade policies for the US.

He also separately announced a 25% import tax on all steel and aluminium coming into the US, and a further 25% tariff on all cars and car parts.

It was announced last week that the US and UK had agreed a deal, in which the 25% will be cut to 10% for a maximum of 100,000 UK cars – matching the number of cars the UK exported last year.

Cars are the UK’s biggest export to the US, worth about £9bn last year.

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.

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”.

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.”