US President Donald Trump says Russia and Ukraine will “immediately” start negotiating towards a ceasefire and an end to the war, after a two-hour phone call with Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin.

Trump, who described the conversation as having gone “very well”, also said conditions for peace would need to be negotiated between the two parties.

Despite the note of optimism from Trump, who also spoke with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, any ceasefire or peace deal does not appear close.

Putin said he was ready to work with Ukraine on a “memorandum on a possible future peace agreement”, while Zelensky said “this is a defining moment”, and urged the US not to distance itself from talks.

While Trump has expressed positivity towards his conversation with Putin, there was no indication about when peace negotiations would take place. Nor did the Russian president address demands from the US and European countries for an unconditional 30-day ceasefire.

After his one-on-one call with Trump, Zelensky reaffirmed Ukraine’s desire for a “full and unconditional ceasefire”, and warned if Moscow is not ready, “there must be stronger sanctions”.

Speaking earlier before Trump’s conversation with Putin, Zelensky said he had asked that any decisions about Ukraine were not made without his country, calling them “matters of principles” for Ukraine.

He added he did not have any details on a “memorandum” but said once they have received anything from the Russians, they will “be able to formulate their vision accordingly”.

Writing on his Truth Social page after the call, Trump said: “Russia and Ukraine will immediately start negotiations toward a Ceasefire and, more importantly, an END to the War,” adding he had informed Zelensky of this in a second call, which also included other world leaders.

He added: “The conditions for that will be negotiated between the two parties, as it can only be, because they know details of a negotiation that nobody else would be aware of.”

Zelensky said the negotiation process “must involve both American and European representatives at the appropriate level”.

“It is crucial for all of us that the United States does not distance itself from the talks and the pursuit of peace, because the only one who benefits from that is Putin,” he explained.

Talking at a White House event later in the day, Trump said the US would not be stepping away from brokering talks between Russia and Ukraine, but that he has a “red line in his head” on when he will stop pushing on them both.

He also denied that the US was stepping back from its negotiating role.

In recent weeks, Trump has repeatedly warned that the US would step away from negotiations as he became increasingly frustrated at the lack of developments from both Moscow and Kyiv in the way of peace.

When asked on what he believes on Russia, he said he thinks Putin has had enough of the war and wants it to end.

Meanwhile, Putin – who described the call with Trump, which he took from a music school on a visit to the city of Sochi, as “frank, informative and constructive” – also spoke of the potential for a ceasefire.

“We have agreed with the US president that Russia will offer and is ready to work with Ukraine on a memorandum on a possible future peace agreement,” he said.

This, he added would define “a number of positions” including “principles of the settlement and a timeline for concluding a possible peace agreement…including a possible ceasefire for a certain period of time, should relevant agreements be reached”.

Yury Ushakov, an aide to the Russian president, said a ceasefire timeframe was not “discussed… although Trump, of course, emphasises his interest in reaching one or another agreement as soon as possible”.

Zelensky held a second call with Trump after the US president spoke to Putin, which also included President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen, and the leaders of France, Italy, Germany and Finland.

“I want to thank President Trump for his tireless efforts to bring a ceasefire to Ukraine,” von der Leyen said, adding: “It’s important that the US stays engaged.”

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni said Pope Leo’s offer to host potential peace talks was a gesture welcomed by the US and the other leaders in the call, and “judged positively”.

Earlier this month, the new Pope offered the Vatican as a venue for possible peace talks after Putin turned down Zelensky’s offer to meet face-to-face in Turkey for negotiations.

Kyiv has previously said Putin’s comments saying he desires peace are hollow.

“Putin wants war,” Andriy Yermak, a top aide to the Ukrainian president, said after Russia on Sunday launched what Ukraine said was its biggest drone attack since the full-scale invasion began.

Ukraine says at least 10 people have been killed in Russian strikes in recent days – including nine people in an attack on a civilian minibus in north-eastern Ukraine. Russia says it has also intercepted Ukrainian drones.

The strike on the bus happened just hours after Russia and Ukraine held their first face-to-face talks in more than three years. A prisoner swap was agreed but there was no commitment to a ceasefire.

Trump had offered to attend the talks in Turkey if Putin would also be there, but the Russian president declined to go.

Russia has declared ceasefires before – but only temporary ones. It declared one for 8-11 May – which coincided with victory celebrations to mark the end of World War Two – but Kyiv would not sign up to it, saying Putin could not be trusted and that an immediate 30-day ceasefire was needed.

The Kremlin announced a similar, 30-hour truce over Easter, but while both sides reported a dip in fighting, they accused each other of hundreds of violations.

Russia and Ukraine have been at war since Moscow launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

Last year, Donald Trump promised he would end the Ukraine War in “24 hours”.

Last week, he said that it would not be resolved until he and Russian President Vladimir Putin could “get together” and hash it out in person.

On Monday, the ground shifted again.

After a two-hour phone call with Putin, he said that the conditions of a peace deal could only be negotiated between Russia and Ukraine – and maybe with the help of the Pope.

Still, the US president has not lost his sense of optimism about the prospect for peace, posting on social media that the combatants would “immediately start” negotiations for a ceasefire and an end to the war.

That sentiment was somewhat at odds with the Russian view. Putin only said that his country is ready to work with Ukraine to craft a “memorandum on a possible future peace agreement”.

Talks about memorandums and a “possible future” of peace hardly seems the kind of solid ground on which lasting deals can be quickly built.

• Russia and Ukraine to ‘immediately’ start ceasefire talks, says Trump
• Trump says he will call Putin to discuss stopping Ukraine ‘bloodbath’
• Rosenberg: Trump-Putin call seen as victory in Russia

Putin again emphasised that any resolution would have to address the “root causes” of the war – which Russia has claimed in the past to be Ukraine’s desire for closer ties to Europe.

There is a possibility that Trump’s latest take on the war in Ukraine could be a sign that the US will ultimately abandon the negotiating table.

“Big egos involved, but I think something’s going to happen,” Trump said on Monday afternoon. “And if it doesn’t, I’ll just back away and they’ll have to keep going.”

Such a move, however, comes with its own set of questions – and risks.

If the US washes its hands of the war, as Vice-President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio have also threatened, does it mean the US would also end any military and intelligence support for Ukraine?

And if that is the case, then it may be a development that Russia, with its greater resources compared to a Ukraine cut off from American backing, would welcome.

That prospect is enough to have Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky concerned.

“It’s crucial for all of us that the United States does not distance itself from the talks and the pursuit of peace,” he said on Monday after the Trump-Putin call.

• Trump’s frantic peace brokering hints at what he really wants

Putting aside Monday’s rhetoric, it appears that Ukraine and Russia are set to continue some kind of talks – and talking in any form is progress after nearly three years of war. Still to be determined is whether the Russian team will be more than the low-level delegation that travelled to Istanbul to meet with the Ukrainians last Friday.

Trump is holding out the promise of reduced sanctions on Russia – and new trade deals and economic investment – as the enticement that will move Putin toward a peace agreement. He mentioned that again in his post-call comments. Not discussed, on the other hand, were any negative consequences, such as new sanctions on Russian banking and energy exports.

The US president last month warned that he would not tolerate Putin “tapping me along” and said that Russia should not target civilian areas. But yesterday, Russia launched its largest drone strike of the war on Ukrainian cities, and Monday’s call between the two world leaders makes clear that any ceasefire or peace deal still seems well over the horizon.

Sean “Diddy” Combs allegedly used a hammer to try to break into his ex-girlfriend’s apartment after the now-infamous assault at an Intercontinental Hotel in 2016, a New York court has heard.

Security video of Mr Combs’ assault on his then-girlfriend Casandra “Cassie” Ventura has been shown to the jury several times in his sex-trafficking trial.

Ms Ventura’s former best friend Kerry Morgan on Monday recounted how Mr Combs allegedly tried to smash his way into Ventura’s apartment in the aftermath, and described the incident as terrifying.

Mr Combs, 55, has pleaded not guilty to racketeering, sex trafficking and transportation to engage in prostitution. He could face life in prison if convicted.

Ms Morgan told the court she was at Ms Ventura’s Los Angeles apartment after the hotel incident and watched through the peephole as Mr Combs was “banging on the door with a hammer”.

Ms Morgan told the court that as it unfolded, she didn’t think Ms Ventura cared if Mr Combs “came in and killed her”.

Mr Combs did not enter the apartment and police officers arrived about three hours later, Ms Morgan said. No complaint was filed.

The court heard more allegations of violent outbursts by the hip-hop mogul. Ms Morgan said that during a vacation in Jamaica, she saw him drag Ms Ventura down a 50-yard hallway by her hair because she was “taking too long in the bathroom”.

The witness told the court she too had experienced violence at the hands of Mr Combs, alleging he choked her and threw a wooden hanger at her head in 2018 while demanding to know who Ms Ventura was cheating on him with.

The court heard Ms Morgan had a concussion and had to go to urgent care.

The two women were best friends for 17 years, but after that, their friendship was over, Ms Morgan said.

She told the court that Ms Ventura met her at a West Hollywood pizza place about a month later and offered her $30,000 (£22,450) to sign a non-disclosure agreement. They agreed, and have not spoken in the seven years since.

“I draw my line at physical abuse,” Ms Morgan said.

After Ms Morgan stepped down from the witness stand, David James, the former personal assistant of Mr Combs, testified.

Mr James, who told the court he often worked 20 hours a day for six to seven days a week, was once shown a photograph of Mr Combs at his Bad Boy Entertainment office and a high-ranking staff member told him “this is Mr Combs’ kingdom. We’re all here to serve it”.

The former assistant also recounted a conversation he overheard in Manhattan, when he was in an Escalade SUV with Combs and some of his entourage.

When a friend asked how Ms Ventura was, Mr Combs allegedly said: “Cassie’s good. I got her right where I want her, she’s young”.

“He said she was very mouldable,” Mr James recalls his boss saying.

The trial will continue on Tuesday with Mr James on the witness stand.

Israel says it has allowed five UN lorries carrying humanitarian aid, including baby food, into the Gaza Strip after 11 weeks of blockade.

The UN’s humanitarian chief welcomed the move but stressed it was only “a drop in the ocean of what is urgently needed” by the 2.1 million Palestinians in the war-torn territory, where global experts are warning of a looming famine.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said his decision to temporarily let in a “minimal” amount of food followed pressure from allies in the US Senate.

“We must not reach a situation of famine, both from a practical and a diplomatic standpoint,” he stressed in a video in response to criticism of the move in Israel.

Netanyahu said food deliveries would continue only until the Israeli military and private companies had set up hubs to distribute aid under a US-backed plan rejected by the UN.

He also declared that Israeli forces would “take control of all areas” of Gaza as part of the expanded ground offensive against Hamas that the Israeli military began on Sunday.

Meanwhile, Israeli air strikes killed at least 40 people across the territory on Monday, according to first responders and hospitals.

One strike reportedly killed five people at a school being used as a shelter for displaced families in Nuseirat refugee camp, in central Gaza.

The Israeli military said it struck “Hamas terrorists” who were operating inside a command-and-control centre in the area.

It also ordered the evacuation of the southern city of Khan Younis and its eastern suburbs, warning residents that it was about to launch an “unprecedented attack” there.

Israel stopped all deliveries of humanitarian aid and commercial supplies to Gaza on 2 March and resumed its military offensive two weeks later, ending a two-month ceasefire with Hamas.

It said the steps were meant to put pressure on the armed group to release the hostages still held in Gaza.

The resumed Israeli bombardment and ground operation have reportedly killed more than 3,000 people and displaced 400,000 others, while the UN says the blockade has caused severe shortages of food, medicine and fuel.

Last week, the Hamas-run health ministry reported 57 children had died from the effects of malnutrition over the past 11 weeks, and an assessment by the UN-backed Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) warned half a million people faced starvation.

The UN said Israel was obliged under international humanitarian law to ensure food and medical supplies for Gaza’s population. Israeli officials said there was no shortage of aid because thousands of lorry loads had gone into Gaza during the ceasefire. They accused Hamas of stealing supplies, which the group denied.

But after pressure from Israel’s allies increased, the Israeli prime minister’s office announced on Sunday night it would “allow a basic quantity of food to be brought in for the population in order to make certain that no starvation crisis develops in the Gaza Strip”.

Israeli right-wing politicians and activists were quick to assail the abrupt policy change. Far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir called it “a grave mistake” that would “fuel Hamas and give it oxygen while our hostages languish in tunnels”.

In a video posted on social media on Monday in response to the criticism, Netanyahu did not make humanitarian arguments when he explained the decision to let in some food.

“Since the beginning of the war, we said that in order to achieve victory – to defeat Hamas and to free all our hostages, two missions that are intertwined – there is one necessary condition: We must not reach a situation of famine, both from a practical and a diplomatic standpoint,” he said.

He said he had blocked aid deliveries via the UN and other humanitarian organisations because of looting by Hamas, and he was now pursuing a “different method” involving a US-backed non-governmental organisation, the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, distributing aid from hubs protected by security contractors and the Israel Defense Forces (IDF).

However, he warned a “red line” was now approaching and “our best friends in the world, [US] senators whom I know as passionate supporters of Israel”, had voiced concerns.

“They come to me and say this: ‘We’re giving you all the support to achieve victory… But there’s one thing we cannot accept. We cannot handle images of starvation’.”

“And so, in order to achieve victory, we must somehow solve this problem. Until we establish those distribution points, and until we build a sterile area under IDF control for distributing food and medicine, we need to provide a minimal, basic bridge – just enough to prevent hunger,” he added.

Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, another far-right leader, sought to smooth over the decision by urging the Israeli public to focus on the big picture.

Smotrich – who advocates building new Israeli settlements in Gaza – said the military offensive was meant to force Palestinians to the south of the territory “and from there, with God’s help, to third countries”, permanently displacing them.

On Monday, Sir Keir Starmer, Emmanuel Macron and Mark Carney, the leaders of the UK, France and Canada, said the decision to allow a basic quantity of food into Gaza was “wholly inadequate”.

In a joint statement, they said: “If Israel does not cease the renewed military offensive and lift its restrictions on humanitarian aid, we will take further concrete actions in response.”

Netanyahu responded with a statement accusing the three leaders of asking Israel to “end a defensive war for our survival”, saying that, by doing so, they were “offering a huge prize” for the 7 October attacks while “inviting more such atrocities”.

“Israel accepts President Trump’s vision and urges all European leaders to do the same,” he added.

On Monday evening, Israeli military body Cogat announced five UN lorries carrying humanitarian aid, including food for babies, had entered Gaza via the Kerem Shalom crossing “following the recommendation of professional IDF officials and in accordance with the directive of the political echelon”.

The UN’s humanitarian chief, Tom Fletcher, said it was a “welcome development” that Israeli authorities had allowed it to resume delivery of limited aid, and said nine of its trucks had been cleared to enter via the Kerem Shalom crossing.

“But it is a drop in the ocean of what is urgently needed, and significantly more aid must be allowed into Gaza, starting tomorrow morning,” he warned.

He also said Israel had reassured the UN its work would be facilitated through existing mechanisms and that he was “determined that our aid reach those in greatest need, and that the risk of theft by Hamas or other armed groups is minimised”.

UN spokesperson Stephane Dujarric said none of the aid had been picked up at the designated zone inside Gaza because it was “already dark” and due to “security concerns, we cannot operate in those conditions”, according to the AFP news agency.

The director general of the Israeli foreign ministry, Eden Bar Tal, earlier told reporters that “in the coming days, Israel will facilitate the entry of dozens of aid trucks”.

A senior Israeli official meanwhile said preparations for the aid plan mentioned by Netanyahu would be completed in about a week – a claim that was questioned by the head of the US-based charity World Central Kitchen.

“This is not true. Will take weeks,” chef José Andrés wrote on X. “This plan will leave Palestinians hungry. The new humanitarian foundation members should be ashamed of themselves… We already have a system in place to feed all Palestinians with the help of Palestinians.”

UN and other aid agencies have said they have about 8,900 lorry loads of humanitarian aid already in position and ready to enter Gaza, as well as what Fletcher described as “clear, principled and practical plan to save lives at scale” and reduce looting.

They have also insisted they will not co-operate with the Israeli-US plan to distribute aid from hubs located mostly in the south of Gaza, saying it contradicts their fundamental humanitarian principles of impartiality, independence and neutrality.

They have warned it will practically exclude those with mobility issues, including those with disabilities and the elderly, force further displacement, expose thousands of people to harm, make aid conditional on political and military aims, and set an unacceptable precedent for aid delivery around the world.

A displaced Palestinian man living in the coastal al-Mawasi area west of Khan Younis with his wife and two children, aged nine and two, said they were currently able to eat one meal a day thanks to “significant rationing”.

“Getting access to food, medicine and hygiene products has become extremely difficult – almost impossible – due to the shortage of these items and their high prices if they are available,” Abd al-Fatah Hussein told the BBC in a message.

Mohammed Abu Rijleh meanwhile said his charity, Shabab Gaza (Gaza Youth), had been able to distribute only around 2,500 meals on Monday – far fewer than usual.

He told the BBC by telephone it had been a struggle to find ingredients to cook, forcing him to buy them at high prices from local markets.

Netanyahu also said Israeli forces were engaged in “massive fighting” in Gaza and were making progress.

“We are going to take control of all areas of the Strip, that’s what we’re going to do,” he said.

He said the “main objective” of the expanded offensive was to defeat Hamas and that it would lead to the release of the 58 remaining hostages, up to 23 of whom are believed to be alive.

On Sunday, IDF spokesman Brig Gen Effie Defrin said five divisions were involved in an operation that would include “dividing the territory and distancing the population for its safety”. “The only thing that can stop us is the return of our hostages,” he added.

While negotiators for Israel and Hamas remain in Qatar, both sides say there has been no breakthrough in a new round of indirect talks on a ceasefire and hostage release deal.

Israel launched a military campaign in Gaza in response Hamas’s cross-border attack on 7 October 2023, in which about 1,200 people were killed and 251 others were taken hostage.

At least 53,475 people have been killed in Gaza since then, including 3,340 since the Israeli offensive resumed, according to the territory’s health ministry.

The four-day conflict between arch-rivals India and Pakistan this month ended with a ceasefire and both claiming victory – but it now appears that China’s defence industry might also be an unlikely winner.

The latest flare-up began on 7 May when India launched attacks on what it called “terrorist infrastructure” inside Pakistan in response to the brutal killing of 26 people, mostly tourists by militants in Pahalgam on 22 April.

Many of them were killed in the scenic valley in Indian-administered Kashmir in front of their wives and family members. Delhi accused Islamabad of supporting militant groups involved in the carnage, a charge Pakistan denied.

After India’s response – which it called Operation Sindoor – to the militant attack, tit-for-tat military manoeuvres from both sides followed, involving drones, missiles and fighter jets.

India reportedly used its French and Russian-made jets, while Pakistan deployed its J-10 and J-17 aircraft, which Islamabad co-produces with Beijing. Both sides say their jets did not cross the border and they were firing missiles at each other from a distance.

Islamabad claims that its fighter aircraft shot down at least six Indian planes, including the newly-acquired French-made Rafale fighter jets. Delhi hasn’t responded to these claims.

“Losses are a part of combat,” Air Marshal AK Bharti of the Indian Air Force (IAF) said last week when a reporter asked him about these claims. Air Marshal Bharti declined to comment on the specific claim of Pakistan downing Indian jets.

“We have achieved the objectives that we selected, and all our pilots are back home,” he added.

India said it had killed at least “100 terrorists” while targeting the headquarters of the banned Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed militant outfits based in Pakistan.

A definitive account of what really happened in the aerial battle is yet to emerge. Some media outlets reported plane crashes in the state of Punjab and Indian-administered Kashmir around the same time but the Indian government has not responded to the reports.

A Reuters report quoting American officials said Pakistan possibly had used the Chinese-made J-10 aircraft to launch air-to-air missiles against Indian fighter jets. Pakistan claiming victory after hugely relying on Chinese weapons systems in an active combat situation is being seen by some experts as a boost for Beijing’s defence industry but some also disagree with the claim.

Some of the experts have called this a “DeepSeek moment” for the Chinese weapons industry, referring to January this year when the Chinese AI start-up shook US giants with its cost-effective technology.

“The aerial fight was a big advertisement for the Chinese weapons industry. Until now, China had no opportunity to test its platforms in a combat situation,” Zhou Bo, a retired senior colonel in the Chinese People’s Liberation Army, told the BBC.

The Beijing-based analyst said the outcome of the air duel showed “China has some systems that are next to none”. Shares in the Chinese Avic Chengdu Aircraft company, that manufactures fighter jets like the J-10, surged by up to 40% last week after the reported performance of the fighter jet in the India-Pakistan conflict.

Other experts, however, feel it’s too early to declare the superiority of Chinese weapons systems.

Professor Walter Ladwig from the King’s College in London said it was yet to be determined whether the Chinese jets had actually outmanoeuvred the Indian Air Force (IAF) planes, particularly the Rafale.

“In a standard military doctrine, you would suppress the enemy’s air defences and get air superiority before you struck ground targets. Instead, it appears the IAF’s mission was clearly not to provoke any Pakistani military retaliation,” he said.

Mr Ladwig thought that the Indian pilots were given instructions to fly despite the fact that the entire Pakistani air defence was on high alert and their jets were already in the sky. The IAF hasn’t given details of the mission or about its air operations strategy.

Beijing also hasn’t made any comment on reports of the J-10 taking down Indian fighter jets, including the Rafale. But unconfirmed reports of the J-10 bringing down a Western weapon system has triggered jubilation and triumphalism on Chinese social media.

Carlotta Rinaudo, a China researcher at the International Team for the Study of Security in Verona, said Chinese social media was flooded with nationalistic messages even though it’s difficult to reach a conclusion with the available information.

“At the moment perception matters way more than reality. If we see it in that way, the main winner is really China,” she said.

For China, Pakistan is a strategic and economic ally. It is investing more than $50bn (£37bn) to build infrastructure in Pakistan as part of its China-Pakistan Economic corridor.

So, a weak Pakistan is not in China’s interest.

China made a critical difference in the latest India-Pakistan conflict, says Imtiaz Gul, a Pakistani security analyst. “It took the Indian planners by sheer surprise. They didn’t probably envision the depth of co-operation in the modern warfare between Pakistan and China,” he said.

Experts say the performance of the Chinese jets in a real combat situation was keenly analysed in Western capitals as this will have cascading impact on global arms trade. The US is the world’s largest arms exporter, while China is the fourth.

China sells weapons mostly to developing countries like Myanmar and Pakistan. Previously the Chinese weapon systems were criticised for their poor quality and technical problems.

Reports said the Burmese military grounded several of its JF-17 fighter jets – jointly manufactured by China and Pakistan in 2022 – due to technical malfunctions.

The Nigerian military reported several technical problems with the Chinese made F-7 fighter jets.

Another point to be noted is that this was not the first time that India lost an aircraft to Pakistan.

In 2019, during a brief air battle between the two sides following similar Indian air strikes on suspected terrorist targets in Pakistan, a Russian-made MiG-21 jet was shot down inside Pakistani territory and the pilot was captured. He was released a few days later.

India, however, said that the pilot had ejected after successfully shooting down Pakistani fighter jets, including a US-made F-16. Pakistan has denied the claim.

Despite reports of the downing of Indian jets last week, experts like Mr Ladwig argue that India was able to hit an “impressive breadth of targets” inside Pakistan early in the morning of 10 May and this fact has gone largely unnoticed by the international media.

The Indian military said in a co-ordinated attack, it launched missiles on 11 Pakistani air bases across the country, including the strategic Nur Khan air base outside Rawalpindi, not far from the Pakistani military headquarters. It’s a sensitive target that took Islamabad by surprise.

One of the furthest targets was in Bholari, 140km (86 miles) from the southern city of Karachi.

Mr Ladwig says this time the IAF operated with standard procedures – first attacking Pakistani air defence and radar systems and then focusing on ground targets.

The Indian jets used an array of missiles, loitering munitions and drones despite the Pakistanis operating the Chinese-provided HQ 9 air defence system.

“It seems the attacks were relatively precise and targeted. The craters were in the middle of runways, exactly the ideal spot. If it were a longer conflict, how long would it take the Pakistani Air Force to get these facilities up and running again, I can’t say,” Mr Ladwig pointed out.

Nevertheless, he said, by refusing to get into the details of the mission briefing, India’s military “lost control of the narrative thread”.

In response to the Indian strikes, Pakistan said it launched missile and air strikes on several Indian forward air bases, but Delhi said the attacks caused no damage to equipment and personnel.

Realising that the situation was getting out of control, the US and its allies intervened and put pressure on both countries to stop the fighting.

But for India, experts say, the whole episode is a wake-up call.

Beijing may not comment on the details of the recent India-Pakistan conflict, but it’s keen to show that its weapon systems are fast catching up with the West.

Delhi is aware that the jets China has supplied to Pakistan are some of the earlier models. Beijing has already inducted the more advanced J-20 stealth fighter jets, that can evade radars.

India and China have a long-standing border dispute along the Himalayas and fought a brief border war in 1962 that resulted in a defeat for India. A brief border clash took place in Ladakh in June 2020.

Experts say India is acutely aware that it needs to accelerate investments in its homegrown defence manufacturing industry and speed up international buying.

For now, China’s defence industry seems to be enjoying the limelight following the claims of success of one of its aircraft in the India-Pakistan conflict.

Joe Biden expressed his gratitude for the words of support that have poured in from across the world, including a private letter from Britain’s King Charles, after the former US president announced his cancer diagnosis on Sunday.

“Cancer touches us all,” Biden wrote on social media on Monday morning. “Like so many of you, Jill and I have learned that we are strongest in the broken places. Thank you for lifting us up with love and support.”

On Sunday, Biden’s office disclosed that he was diagnosed with an aggressive form of prostate cancer that has spread to his bones.

The news comes as fresh questions are being raised about the former president’s health while he was in office.

President Donald Trump posted that he was “saddened” by Biden’s diagnosis but later questioned – without providing any evidence – whether Biden’s team had known earlier about his illness and concealed the news from the public.

“I am surprised that the public wasn’t notified a long time ago because to get to stage nine that takes a long time,” he said at the White House on Monday afternoon.

“It could take years to get to this level of danger,” he said, adding: “I feel very badly about it, and I think people should try and find out what happened.”

Late-stage diagnoses for cancer are not unheard of, however. One UK study in 2014 found 46% of cancer diagnoses in that country were only made at an advanced stage.

Biden’s office said that he was diagnosed on Friday with prostate cancer “characterised by a Gleason score of 9 (Grade Group 5) with metastasis to the bone”.

“While this represents a more aggressive form of the disease, the cancer appears to be hormone-sensitive which allows for effective management.”

A Gleason score of nine means his illness is classified as “high-grade” and the cancer cells could spread quickly, according to Cancer Research UK.

• What we know about Biden’s prostate cancer diagnosis
• Analysis: Cancer diagnosis is another formidable challenge

Biden said his diagnosis was made after he reported urinary symptoms which led doctors to find a small nodule on his prostate.

In the wake of the cancer diagnosis, many have offered Biden their support including former President Barack Obama and former Vice-President Kamala Harris.

King Charles has written privately to Biden offering his support and best wishes, Buckingham Palace said.

The king, 76, who has met Biden a number of times, is also receiving treatment for an unspecified type of cancer after his diagnosis in 2024.

Biden had then sent his best wishes, saying: “I’m concerned about him. Just heard about his diagnosis. I’ll be talking to him, God willing.”

Vice-President JD Vance offered well wishes, but questioned whether the American people had a clear picture of Biden’s health while the former president was in office.

“We really do need to be honest about whether the former president was capable of doing the job,” Vance said on Monday. “And that’s that’s … you can separate the desire for him to have the right health outcome with a recognition that whether it was doctors or whether there were staffers around the former president, I don’t think he was able to do a good job for the American people.”

Vance also said he blamed the people around him more than Biden himself.

“This is not child’s play, and we can pray for good health, but also recognise that if you’re not in good enough health to do the job, you shouldn’t be doing the job,” he added.

The announcement comes as Biden staves off criticism from a forthcoming book that claims he and his advisers hid his deteriorating health while he was in the White House.

Details revealed last week from the book entitled, Original Sin: President Biden’s Decline, Its Cover-Up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again, include Biden not recognising actor and frequent Democratic donor George Clooney at a fundraiser last year and aides discussing putting the former president in a wheelchair.

The book will be released on Tuesday.

Nearly a year ago, the former president was forced to drop out of the 2024 US presidential election because of concerns about his health and age.

Sesame Street and Netflix have struck a deal that will see the popular US television show appear on the streaming platform, while still being available on the free-to-air channel PBS.

Netflix said the iconic programme is a “beloved cornerstone of children’s media, enchanting young minds and nurturing a love of learning”.

From later this year Netflix will offer its 300 million subscribers around the world a new 56th season of the show and 90 hours of previous episodes.

Sesame Street was facing an uncertain future after entertainment giant Warner Bros Discovery, which owns the HBO platform, did not renew its deal with the half a century old programme.

Under the deal, PBS will get access to episodes on the same day they are released on Netflix.

In the late 1960s, Sesame Street co-founders Lloyd Morrisett and Joan Ganz Cooney approached Harvard University’s Graduate School of Education with a novel way of teaching American children.

A team led by a developmental psychologist worked with the Sesame founders to analyse childhood psychology and produce entertaining lessons.

They worked with Muppets creator Jim Henson to create characters like Big Bird, with a set made to look like an urban street.

Since its first airing on 10 November 1969, millions of children have grown up with the show’s theme tune “Can you tell me how to get, how get to Sesame Street?”

Over the decades, the programme and its characters have gained a life beyond the small screen.

Popular character Elmo stepped into the public policy spotlight in 2002, when he was invited to discuss music education at Congress.

During a child obesity epidemic in the US in 2006, Sesame Street aired Health Habits segments designed to teach kids about diet and exercise.

The Cookie Monster declared cookies a “sometimes food” and taught children about a balanced diet.

Former First Lady Michelle Obama also visited Sesame’s studios to film a segment on healthy eating.

Netflix has been increasing its focus on children’s content, that accounts for 15% of viewing on its service.

It also announced on Tuesday that new episodes of Peppa Pig and a mobile game with puzzles and colouring activities would be coming to the platform.

A British ultra-endurance athlete has broken the world record for running across the length of Australia, after a gruelling 35-day journey.

William Goodge, 31, started the 3,800km (2,361 miles) run from Cottesloe Beach in Perth on 15 April, and finished on Monday afternoon at Australia’s iconic Bondi Beach, his father by his side.

Originally from Bedfordshire in England, Goodge ran the equivalent of two-and-a-half marathons – about 100km – every day.

He started running marathons after his mother, Amanda, died from cancer in 2018, with this journey raising money for cancer charities in the UK, US and Australia.

The previous world record for running across Australia was held by Chris Turnbull, who managed the feat in 39 days in 2023. The year before, Australian electrician Nedd Brockmann ran the same route in 47 days, raising millions for charity.

Speaking to local media after he crossed the finish line, Goodge said the run was “like a revolving nightmare that wouldn’t end”.

“The first nine days were extremely challenging…but you have to tell your body and mind that even though you’re struggling, you’re going to persevere, and you’re going to get through it,” he told the Sydney Morning Herald (SMH).

Moments after crossing the finish line, Goodge placed a bunch of flowers on Bondi’s famous shoreline in memory of his late mother.

“She was the most special person in my life,” he told the Guardian Australia, adding, “she would be proud of everything I’ve done – she’d also be concerned”.

Along the way toenails have fallen off, his feet began rotting and he sometimes hallucinated due to broken sleep caused by pain in his bones.

Goodge said thinking about how his mother battled cancer was crucial during his journey, and helped him overlook his own suffering.

“So in the moments where it’s tough, I’ll think back to those times, I think about the woman she was, and how she handled herself, and how she supported me,” he told the SMH.

“I feel like she’s there with me a lot of the time.”

During the race, he says he saw almost all of Australia’s famous animals – though most were dead on the road – and much of its unique countryside.

On Goodge’s website about the run, he also thanked Turnbull for sharing his knowledge and experience on how to tackle the journey.

Goodge also holds the record for the fastest British man to run across the US, crossing from Los Angeles to New York in 55 days.

“Whenever I was struggling, if it was going to be a really bad day, I could then start to chat to one of these bots, and it was like [having] a cheerleader, someone who’s going to give you some good vibes for the day.

“I’ve got this encouraging external voice going – ‘right – what are we going to do [today]?’ Like an imaginary friend, essentially.”

For months, Kelly spent up to three hours a day speaking to online “chatbots” created using artificial intelligence (AI), exchanging hundreds of messages.

At the time, Kelly was on a waiting list for traditional NHS talking therapy to discuss issues with anxiety, low self-esteem and a relationship breakdown.

She says interacting with chatbots on character.ai got her through a really dark period, as they gave her coping strategies and were available for 24 hours a day.

“I’m not from an openly emotional family – if you had a problem, you just got on with it.

“The fact that this is not a real person is so much easier to handle.”

People around the world have shared their private thoughts and experiences with AI chatbots, even though they are widely acknowledged as inferior to seeking professional advice. Character.ai itself tells its users: “This is an AI chatbot and not a real person. Treat everything it says as fiction. What is said should not be relied upon as fact or advice.”

But in extreme examples chatbots have been accused of giving harmful advice.

Character.ai is currently the subject of legal action from a mother whose 14-year-old son took his own life after reportedly becoming obsessed with one of its AI characters. According to transcripts of their chats in court filings he discussed ending his life with the chatbot. In a final conversation he told the chatbot he was “coming home” – and it allegedly encouraged him to do so “as soon as possible”.

Character.ai has denied the suit’s allegations.

And in 2023, the National Eating Disorder Association replaced its live helpline with a chatbot, but later had to suspend it over claims the bot was recommending calorie restriction.

In April 2024 alone, nearly 426,000 mental health referrals were made in England – a rise of 40% in five years. An estimated one million people are also waiting to access mental health services, and private therapy can be prohibitively expensive (costs vary greatly, but the British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy reports on average people spend £40 to £50 an hour).

At the same time, AI has revolutionised healthcare in many ways, including helping to screen, diagnose and triage patients. There is a huge spectrum of chatbots, and about 30 local NHS services now use one called Wysa.

Experts express concerns about chatbots around potential biases and limitations, lack of safeguarding and the security of users’ information. But some believe that if specialist human help is not easily available, chatbots can be a help. So with NHS mental health waitlists at record highs, are chatbots a possible solution?

Character.ai and other bots such as Chat GPT are based on “large language models” of artificial intelligence. These are trained on vast amounts of data – whether that’s websites, articles, books or blog posts – to predict the next word in a sequence. From here, they predict and generate human-like text and interactions.

The way mental health chatbots are created varies, but they can be trained in practices such as cognitive behavioural therapy, which helps users to explore how to reframe their thoughts and actions. They can also adapt to the end user’s preferences and feedback.

Hamed Haddadi, professor of human-centred systems at Imperial College London, likens these chatbots to an “inexperienced therapist”, and points out that humans with decades of experience will be able to engage and “read” their patient based on many things, while bots are forced to go on text alone.

“They [therapists] look at various other clues from your clothes and your behaviour and your actions and the way you look and your body language and all of that. And it’s very difficult to embed these things in chatbots.”

Another potential problem, says Prof Haddadi, is that chatbots can be trained to keep you engaged, and to be supportive, “so even if you say harmful content, it will probably cooperate with you”. This is sometimes referred to as a ‘Yes Man’ issue, in that they are often very agreeable.

And as with other forms of AI, biases can be inherent in the model because they reflect the prejudices of the data they are trained on.

Prof Haddadi points out counsellors and psychologists don’t tend to keep transcripts from their patient interactions, so chatbots don’t have many “real-life” sessions to train from. Therefore, he says they are not likely to have enough training data, and what they do access may have biases built into it which are highly situational.

“Based on where you get your training data from, your situation will completely change.

“Even in the restricted geographic area of London, a psychiatrist who is used to dealing with patients in Chelsea might really struggle to open a new office in Peckham dealing with those issues, because he or she just doesn’t have enough training data with those users,” he says.

Philosopher Dr Paula Boddington, who has written a textbook on AI Ethics, agrees that in-built biases are a problem.

“A big issue would be any biases or underlying assumptions built into the therapy model.”

“Biases include general models of what constitutes mental health and good functioning in daily life, such as independence, autonomy, relationships with others,” she says.

Lack of cultural context is another issue – Dr Boddington cites an example of how she was living in Australia when Princess Diana died, and people did not understand why she was upset.

“These kinds of things really make me wonder about the human connection that is so often needed in counselling,” she says.

“Sometimes just being there with someone is all that is needed, but that is of course only achieved by someone who is also an embodied, living, breathing human being.”

Kelly ultimately started to find responses the chatbot gave unsatisfying.

“Sometimes you get a bit frustrated. If they don’t know how to deal with something, they’ll just sort of say the same sentence, and you realise there’s not really anywhere to go with it.” At times “it was like hitting a brick wall”.

“It would be relationship things that I’d probably previously gone into, but I guess I hadn’t used the right phrasing […] and it just didn’t want to get in depth.”

A Character.AI spokesperson said “for any Characters created by users with the words ‘psychologist’, ‘therapist,’ ‘doctor,’ or other similar terms in their names, we have language making it clear that users should not rely on these Characters for any type of professional advice”.

For some users chatbots have been invaluable when they have been at their lowest.

Nicholas has autism, anxiety, OCD, and says he has always experienced depression. He found face-to-face support dried up once he reached adulthood: “When you turn 18, it’s as if support pretty much stops, so I haven’t seen an actual human therapist in years.”

He tried to take his own life last autumn, and since then he says he has been on a NHS waitlist.

“My partner and I have been up to the doctor’s surgery a few times, to try to get it [talking therapy] quicker. The GP has put in a referral [to see a human counsellor] but I haven’t even had a letter off the mental health service where I live.”

While Nicholas is chasing in-person support, he has found using Wysa has some benefits.

“As someone with autism, I’m not particularly great with interaction in person. [I find] speaking to a computer is much better.”

The app allows patients to self-refer for mental health support, and offers tools and coping strategies such as a chat function, breathing exercises and guided meditation while they wait to be seen by a human therapist, and can also be used as a standalone self-help tool.

Wysa stresses that its service is designed for people experiencing low mood, stress or anxiety rather than abuse and severe mental health conditions. It has in-built crisis and escalation pathways whereby users are signposted to helplines or can send for help directly if they show signs of self-harm or suicidal ideation.

For people with suicidal thoughts, human counsellors on the free Samaritans helpline are available 24/7.

Nicholas also experiences sleep deprivation, so finds it helpful if support is available at times when friends and family are asleep.

“There was one time in the night when I was feeling really down. I messaged the app and said ‘I don’t know if I want to be here anymore.’ It came back saying ‘Nick, you are valued. People love you’.

“It was so empathetic, it gave a response that you’d think was from a human that you’ve known for years […] And it did make me feel valued.”

His experiences chime with a recent study by Dartmouth College researchers looking at the impact of chatbots on people diagnosed with anxiety, depression or an eating disorder, versus a control group with the same conditions.

After four weeks, bot users showed significant reductions in their symptoms – including a 51% reduction in depressive symptoms – and reported a level of trust and collaboration akin to a human therapist.

Despite this, the study’s senior author commented there is no replacement for in-person care.

Aside from the debate around the value of their advice, there are also wider concerns about security and privacy, and whether the technology could be monetised.

“There’s that little niggle of doubt that says, ‘oh, what if someone takes the things that you’re saying in therapy and then tries to blackmail you with them?’,” says Kelly.

Psychologist Ian MacRae specialises in emerging technologies, and warns “some people are placing a lot of trust in these [bots] without it being necessarily earned”.

“Personally, I would never put any of my personal information, especially health, psychological information, into one of these large language models that’s just hoovering up an absolute tonne of data, and you’re not entirely sure how it’s being used, what you’re consenting to.”

“It’s not to say in the future, there couldn’t be tools like this that are private, well tested […] but I just don’t think we’re in the place yet where we have any of that evidence to show that a general purpose chatbot can be a good therapist,” Mr MacRae says.

Wysa’s managing director, John Tench, says Wysa does not collect any personally identifiable information, and users are not required to register or share personal data to use Wysa.

“Conversation data may occasionally be reviewed in anonymised form to help improve the quality of Wysa’s AI responses, but no information that could identify a user is collected or stored. In addition, Wysa has data processing agreements in place with external AI providers to ensure that no user conversations are used to train third-party large language models.”

Kelly feels chatbots cannot currently fully replace a human therapist. “It’s a wild roulette out there in AI world, you don’t really know what you’re getting.”

“AI support can be a helpful first step, but it’s not a substitute for professional care,” agrees Mr Tench.

And the public are largely unconvinced. A YouGov survey found just 12% of the public think AI chatbots would make a good therapist.

But with the right safeguards, some feel chatbots could be a useful stopgap in an overloaded mental health system.

John, who has an anxiety disorder, says he has been on the waitlist for a human therapist for nine months. He has been using Wysa two or three times a week.

“There is not a lot of help out there at the moment, so you clutch at straws.”

“[It] is a stop gap to these huge waiting lists… to get people a tool while they are waiting to talk to a healthcare professional.”

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has said it is time to move on from “political fights” about Brexit, as the UK and the European Union agreed to a major reset of relations.

The UK and the EU have struck a deal that covers fishing, trade, defence, energy and strengthening ties in a number of policy areas still up for negotiation.

A key part of the deal involves giving European fishing boats a further 12 years of access to British waters in exchange for easing some trade frictions.

It marks the biggest reboot since the UK officially left the EU in 2020 and comes after years of disagreements over Brexit.

The Conservatives and Reform UK have described the deal as a “surrender” to the EU, while the Liberal Democrats said the government had taken some “positive first steps” to rebuilding ties with Europe.

The agreement was finalised late on Sunday, ahead of a summit involving EU chiefs Ursula von der Leyen and Antonio Costa in London on Monday.

“It’s time to look forward,” Sir Keir said at the summit.

“To move on from the stale old debates and political fights to find common sense, practical solutions which get the best for the British people.

“We’re ready to work with partners if it means we can improve people’s lives here at home.”

At a news conference, European Commission President von der Leyen described the summit as a “historic moment” that was only possible “thanks to the leadership” of Sir Keir.

“We’re turning a page,” she said. “We’re opening a new chapter in our relationship.”

The president said the deal would make “a real difference to people in the UK and across our union” at a time of global instability.

The government said the deal would make it easier for food and drink to be imported and exported by reducing paperwork and checks.

Some routine checks on animal and plant products will be removed completely, the government said.

In return, the UK will give the EU access to its fishing waters until 2038 – a 12-year extension of arrangements already in place.

One diplomatic source said it amounted to a rollover of the existing terms agreed as part of the revised withdrawal agreement negotiated by former Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s government in 2019.

The text of the deal says: “We note the political agreements leading to full reciprocal access to waters to fish until 30 June 2038 and extending energy cooperation on a continuous basis.”

The post-Brexit deal on fishing rights, which gave EU boats continued access to UK waters, was set to expire at the end of June 2026.

The UK government has also unveiled a £360m investment fund in coastal communities and the fishing industry.

Fishing only accounts for an estimated 0.04% of UK GDP, but British control over its fishing waters was a big issue in the Brexit campaign.

Defending the agreement, Sir Keir said it would allow British fishing communities to “sell more easily into the European market” and give them “stability over the long term”.

Reform UK leader Nigel Farage said the 12-year deal on access for European boats “will be the end of the fishing industry”.

Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey said the prime minister “must ignore the naysayers and dinosaurs in Reform and the Conservative Party and be more ambitious in getting the best deal in the national interest”.

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said giving the EU access to British waters for 12 years “was three times longer than the government wanted”.

“We’re becoming a rule-taker from Brussels once again,” she said.

The deal requires the UK to follow rules set by Brussels in areas covering food trade, emissions trading and potential co-operation in the electricity market.

Known as dynamic alignment, this arrangement would mean the UK giving the European Court of Justice a role in any trading disputes.

In a post on X, Johnson said under this “sell out of a deal the UK will have to accept EU law on a host of measures from food standards to emissions trading”.

He said Sir Keir had agreed that the UK “will once again be paying countless millions of pounds into EU coffers – for the privilege of becoming the non-voting punk of the EU Commission”.

The prime minister’s spokesperson said payments to the EU in relation to the deals on agricultural products and energy were “not big”, but not did confirm the costs.

The government said there was a difference between these “administrative costs” and the payments required to be part of EU programmes, which would be part of future negotiations.

A security pact is also central to the agreement, as European nations come under pressure to invest more in defence to support Ukraine as it faces Russia’s full-scale invasion.

The agreement paves the way for the UK to participate in the EU’s proposed new £150bn defence fund, opening up opportunities for UK arms firms to bid for defence contracts.

The government said British businesses will not be hit by an EU carbon tax due to come in next year, under plans to link emissions-trading schemes.

The agreements on trade and energy would add nearly £9bn to the UK economy by 2040, the government estimated.

Other announcements include:

• Further co-operation on a youth mobility scheme. The scheme, which would be capped and time-limited, would mirror existing schemes the UK has with countries such as Australia and New Zealand
• A commitment to work towards the UK joining the Erasmus programme, an EU initiative that provides funding for student exchanges and training across Europe
• Allowing British travellers to use more passport e-gates – automated self-service barriers at European airports
• Working more closely together on developing energy networks, especially in the North Sea, and exploring the possibility of the UK joining the EU’s internal electricity market
• British steel exports will be protected from new EU rules and tariffs
• More co-operation on tackling illegal migration, including sharing more intelligence.

The reset comes after years of ill-tempered relations between the UK and the EU over Brexit, which triggered one of the most tumultuous periods in British political history.

Since Labour took office last year, governments worldwide have been forced to rethink their relationships on trade and defence, in response to US President Donald Trump’s policies and Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

Ministers believe there is no public clamour to reopen the biggest questions of Brexit – membership of the single market and customs union.

Polling by YouGov suggests a majority of Britons now regret the Brexit vote and favour closer ties with the EU.

But the Labour government’s reset of EU relations comes at a time when Reform UK – a Eurosceptic party – is leading in the polls.

Sign up for our Politics Essential newsletter to keep up with the inner workings of Westminster and beyond.

The US Supreme Court has said it will allow the Trump administration to terminate deportation protections for some 350,000 Venezuelans in the US.

The ruling lifts a hold that was placed by a California judge that kept Temporary Protected Status (TPS) in place for Venezuelans whose status’ would have expired last month.

Temporary Protected Status allows people to live and work in the US legally if their home countries are deemed unsafe due to things like countries experiencing wars, natural disasters or other “extraordinary and temporary” conditions.

The ruling marks a win for US President Donald Trump, who has repeatedly tried to use the Supreme Court to enact immigration policy decisions.

The Trump administration wanted to end protections and work permits for migrants with TPS in April 2025, more than a year before they were originally supposed to end in October 2026.

Lawyers representing the US government argued the California federal court, the US District Court for the Northern District of California, had undermined “the Executive Branch’s inherent powers as to immigration and foreign affairs,” when it stopped the administration from ending protections and work permits in April.

Ahilan Arulanantham, who represents TPS holders in the case, told the BBC he believes this to be “the largest single action stripping any group of non-citizens of immigration status in modern US history”.

“That the Supreme Court authorized this action in a two-paragraph order with no reasoning is truly shocking,” Mr Arulanantham said. “The humanitarian and economic impact of the Court’s decision will be felt immediately, and will reverberate for generations.”

Because it was an emergency appeal, justices on the Supreme Court did not provide a reasoning for the ruling.

The court’s order only noted one judge’s dissent, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.

In August, the Trump administration is also expected to revoke TPS protections for tens of thousands of Haitians.

The ruling on Monday by the Supreme Court marks the latest in a series of decisions on immigration policies from the high court that the Trump administration has left them to rule on.

• What is the 1798 law that Trump used to deport migrants?

Last week, the administration asked the Supreme Court to end humanitarian parole for hundreds of thousands of Cuban, Haitian, Nicaraguan and Venezuela immigrants.

Along with some of their successes, the Trump administration was dealt a blow on Friday when the high court blocked Trump from using the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to deport immigrants in north Texas.

Trump had wanted to use the centuries-old law to swiftly deport thousands from the US, but Supreme Court judges questioned if the president’s action was legal.

Imagine having a president called Nicky.

That’s what Romanians just voted for: a softly-spoken, slightly geeky mathematician who everyone refers to by his first name, Nicusor – or Nicky.

On Monday, hours after claiming victory in the elections, the new president picked up his daughter from school as usual. He’s promised his children nothing will change.

But for Romania things looked very different this morning.

Nicusor Dan has been mayor of Bucharest since 2020 but until now he was little known beyond the capital. That’s why his election is widely seen as an act of protest against the old political guard who have governed Romania for over three decades.

But it was also the least extreme option for change.

Dan’s opponent in the second-round vote was George Simion, a hard-right nationalist and Eurosceptic who regularly dishes out public insults.

He’s also banned from two neighbouring countries because he claims part of Ukraine and all of Moldova belong to Romania.

Simion won the first round with 41% of the vote but Dan caught up in the second, and then took over.

“This time, fear managed to defeat fury,” is how political analyst Radu Magdin explains the shift, and points to a significant increase in turnout.

“Clearly a lot of people are angry in Romania and want to see radical change. But at the same time, we saw massive mobilization of the urban middle class who feared that the country could be taken backwards.

“It was a fear of what may happen if Simion and friends came to power.”

I’ve met plenty of Simion supporters in recent days.

When he turned up to vote on Sunday, a colourful crowd were there at the polling station to greet him. Some were in embroidered national dress and others had brought Romanian flags.

They tended to talk about God and the “traditional values” they think Simion represents. Two men told me their priority was to prevent the EU “imposing” same-sex marriage on Romania.

Other voters are drawn to Simion’s “Romania first” rhetoric and promises of a better life.

“Nothing has been done for us, the working people, and I’m fed up,” Liliana told me this week from behind a Bucharest market stall piled with apples.

She and her husband voted for Simion thinking he wouldn’t be “so corrupt”.

So when the results came in she was disappointed.

“I don’t think Dan is capable of running a country. But what can we do if people don’t want change and progress?” Liliana shrugged.

“I think children came back to the villages and persuaded their parents against Simion. They scared them into voting for Dan.”

George Simion himself told me he was a patriot and a “man of my people”. But as the campaign advanced, he made mistakes.

Outside the market, feeding pigeons with her children, Diana said she’d been planning to vote for Simion until she saw a video from Paris just before the elections.

Attempting to speak French, Simion had described President Macron as having “dictatorial tendencies” and said the country was run by “the ayatollahs”.

“It wasn’t okay to do that, to go there and talk so rudely to the French people,” Diana thinks. “It made me change my vote.”

Analyst Radu Magdin spots other errors, including aggressive blog posts and the moment when Simion insulted his rival, Dan, calling him “autistic, poor guy”.

“Other than that, he seemed to flee the public debate and went shaking hands in the pan-European radical right instead,” Mr Magdin mentions, referring to meetings in Poland, France and Italy right before the vote.

“I would say there were many people who did not really appreciate that.”

For many Romanians, choosing Dan was also a strike against Moscow’s meddling.

At the election street celebrations last night, as well as yelling the new president’s name and cheering, people chanted their defiance: “Russia, don’t forget! Romania is not yours!”

They were referring to evidence Russia interfered in their election back in November to boost the chances of far-right conspiracy theorist, Calin Georgescu.

When he came from nowhere to win the first round, the vote was annulled.

This weekend was a re-run, with Georgescu banned and Simion in his place. The two were often seen side-by-side, even on voting day.

But Georgescu’s open sympathy for Russia – he once told me he admired Vladimir Putin – was a turn-off for many voters.

Nicusor Dan didn’t only win because he was not Simion.

His voters liked what he stood for, including a future firmly within Europe.

When thousands surrounded his campaign headquarters last night to wait for him to claim victory, many brought EU flags. There was relief as well as excitement.

Before the election, young voters had told me they planned radical action if Simion won.

“So many friends say that they will leave Romania because our values do not align with him at all,” politics graduate Sergiana told me in central Bucharest. “I feel like in a year or two he would completely mess up our chances to stay in the EU.”

By contrast, Dan put relations with Europe at the heart of his campaign.

“It’s better for the European way, for younger people and for Romania – because we get more EU funds, more development,” another young voter, Petrosanu, approved.

“Also Nicusor is the smartest guy since the revolution. He knows how to do things.”

In the end, Dan’s win was emphatic. But millions of Romanian voters chose a different way, different values. While hopes for the ‘change’ candidate are high, the challenges are huge and patience may be limited.

“In my view, this is the last chance for the mainstream political class to win an election on a ‘Save Europe, Save Democracy’ platform,” Radu Magdin warns.

George Simion is just 38 and going nowhere; his nationalist AUR party are strong in parliament.

“Next time, it’s ‘bye bye’ if these people do not do their job,” the analyst says. “Next time it could be somebody like Simion.”

Gary Lineker has confirmed he will leave the BBC after presenting his final episode of Match of the Day on Sunday.

The 64-year-old had been expected to continue fronting coverage of the men’s FA Cup and World Cup, but was criticised last week after sharing a social media post about Zionism that included an illustration of a rat, historically used as an antisemitic insult.

On Monday, Lineker said he did not see the image, and “would never consciously repost anything antisemitic”.

He added: “However, I recognise the error and upset that I caused, and reiterate how sorry I am. Stepping back now feels like the responsible course of action.”

The presenter has previously attracted criticism for his social media posts, but the latest example was thought to be the last straw for bosses, who considered his position untenable, the BBC’s culture and media editor Katie Razzall said.

The BBC’s director general Tim Davie, said in a statement: “Gary has acknowledged the mistake he made. Accordingly, we have agreed he will step back from further presenting after this season.

“Gary has been a defining voice in football coverage for the BBC for over two decades. His passion and knowledge have shaped our sports journalism and earned him the respect of sports fans across the UK and beyond. We want to thank him for the contribution he has made.”

• A sorry end to Gary Lineker’s BBC career
• Live updates: Host to leave the BBC after social media ‘error’
• From football sensation to headline-hitting presenter

Lineker said: “Football has been at the heart of my life for as long as I can remember – both on the pitch and in the studio.

“I care deeply about the game, and about the work I’ve done with the BBC over many years. As I’ve said, I would never consciously repost anything antisemitic – it goes against everything I stand for.

“However, I recognise the error and upset that I caused, and reiterate how sorry I am. Stepping back now feels like the responsible course of action.”

In addition to the written statement, the former footballer also posted a video on Instagram.

He said he would “never, ever have shared” the post if he had seen the emoji, which he said “has awful connotations”.

“I would like once again to say I’m sorry unreservedly for the hurt and upset caused. It was a genuine mistake and oversight,” he continued. “But I should have been more diligent. I know that.”

Lineker said he had “stood up for minorities and humanitarian issues, and against all forms of racism all of my life, including, of course, antisemitism, which I absolutely abhor”.

He told his followers it was “best for all concerned” that he “step down from BBC presenting duties altogether”.

Lineker described his 30 years at the BBC as a “pleasure and a huge privilege”, adding that Match of the Day had become “an integral part of my life”.

The presenter concluded by saying his relationship with the BBC had been “long and wonderful”, but that it was “time for the organisation and myself to go our separate ways”.

Replying to Lineker’s post, Match of the Day pundit Alan Shearer said: “Thank you for everything.”

Writing to staff shortly after the announcement, BBC Sport director Alex Kay-Jelski said he “appreciated the last week has been difficult and emotional for many of you”.

He said it was “sad to be saying goodbye to such a brilliant broadcaster” and thanked Lineker “for his years of service”.

He concluded: “Let’s finish the season strongly with Gary’s final show, enjoy an incredible summer of sport and look forward with excitement to what lies ahead.”

Lineker and the BBC had announced last year that he would leave Match of the Day at the end of this season, which concludes on Sunday.

But he had been due to remain at the forefront of the BBC coverage of the men’s FA Cup and the World Cup in 2026.

The former England striker replaced Des Lynam as the corporation’s main presenter of Match of the Day in 1999.

In a recent interview with the BBC’s Amol Rajan he said he had a sense during his latest contract negotiations that the BBC wanted him to step down from the Premier League highlights show.

Roger Mosey, former director of BBC Sport and ex-head of BBC television news, told Radio 4’s Today programme on Monday he believed the “difficulty” was that “you can’t both be the highest paid presenter and be a social media activist”.

“I think it’s always been a problem that allowing Gary to do the amount of social media he did and also be the BBC’s highest-paid presenter was never going to be easy,” he said.

Lineker was temporarily suspended from the BBC in 2023 after an impartiality row over comments he made criticising the then-government’s asylum policy.

He was also among 500 other high-profile figures who signed an open letter earlier this year urging the BBC to reinstate a documentary, Gaza: How To Survive A War Zone, to BBC iPlayer.

Lineker is also the co-founder of Goalhanger Podcasts, makers of the popular The Rest Is History series and its spin-offs about politics, football, entertainment and money.

The parting of ways between Lineker and the BBC also includes the licensing deal for the Goalhanger podcast titles on BBC Sounds which ends this year, the PA news agency reported.

Inside a laboratory nestled above the mist of the forests of South Dakota, scientists are searching for the answer to one of science’s biggest questions: why does our Universe exist?

They are in a race for the answer with a separate team of Japanese scientists – who are several years ahead.

The current theory of how the Universe came into being can’t explain the existence of the planets, stars and galaxies we see around us. Both teams are building detectors that study a sub-atomic particle called a neutrino in the hope of finding answers.

The US-led international collaboration is hoping the answer lies deep underground, in the aptly named Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment (Dune).

The scientists will travel 1,500 metres below the surface into three vast underground caverns. Such is the scale that construction crews and their bulldozers seem like small plastic toys by comparison.

The science director of this facility, Dr Jaret Heise describes the giant caves as “cathedrals to science”.

Dr Heise has been involved the construction of these caverns at the Sanford Underground Research Facility (Surf) for nearly ten years. They seal Dune off from the noise and radiation from the world above. Now, Dune is now ready for the next stage.

“We are poised to build the detector that will change our understanding of the Universe with instruments that will be deployed by a collaboration of more than 1,400 scientists from 35 countries who are eager to answer the question of why we exist,” he says.

When the Universe was created two kinds of particles were created: matter – from which stars, planets and everything around us are made – and, in equal amounts, antimatter, matter’s exact opposite.

Theoretically the two should have cancelled each other out, leaving nothing but a big burst of energy. And yet, here we – as matter – are.

Scientists believe that the answer to understanding why matter won – and we exist – lies in studying a particle called the neutrino and its antimatter opposite, the anti-neutrino.

They will be firing beams of both kinds of particles from deep underground in Illinois to the detectors at South Dakota, 800 miles away.

This is because as they travel, neutrinos and anti-neutrinos change ever so slightly.

The scientists want to find out whether those changes are different for the neutrinos and anti-neutrinos. If they are, it could lead them to the answer of why matter and anti-matter don’t cancel each other out.

Dune is an international collaboration, involving 1,400 scientists from thirty countries. Among them is Dr Kate Shaw from Sussex University, who told me that the discoveries in store will be “transformative” to our understanding of the Universe and humanity’s view of itself.

“It is really exciting that we are here now with the technology, with the engineering, with the computer software skills to really be able to attack these big questions,” she said.

Half a world away, Japanese scientists are using shining golden globes to search for the same answers. Gleaming in all its splendour it is like a temple to science, mirroring the cathedral in South Dakota 6,000 miles (9,650 km) away. The scientists are building Hyper-K – which will be a bigger and better version of their existing neutrino detector, Super-K.

The Japanese-led team will be ready to turn on their neutrino beam in less than three years, several years earlier than the American project. Just like Dune, Hyper-K is an international collaboration. Dr Mark Scott of Imperial College, London believes his team is in pole position to make one of the biggest ever discoveries about the origin of the Universe.

“We switch on earlier and we have a larger detector, so we should have more sensitivity sooner than Dune,” he says.

Having both experiments running together means that scientists will learn more than they would with just one, but, he says, “I would like to get there first!”

But Dr Linda Cremonesi, of Queen Mary University of London, who works for the Dune project, says that getting there first may not give the Japanese-led team the full picture of what is really going on.

“There is an element of a race, but Hyper K does not have yet all of the ingredients that they need to understand if neutrinos and anti-neutrinos behave differently.”

The race may be on, but the first results are only expected in a few years’ time. The question of just what happened at the beginning of time to bring us into existence remains a mystery – for now.

US President Donald Trump’s sweeping tax and spending bill is one step closer to a full vote in the House of Representatives.

The 1,116-page bill – officially known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act – was approved 17-16 by the budget committee on Sunday night.

Four Republican dissidents voted “present” rather than against the legislation, giving House Speaker Mike Johnson a rare win.

The hold-outs last week voted ‘no’ to the bill, citing concerns that its spending cuts were not deep enough to reduce the national debt.

The Senate must also pass the legislation and Republicans in that chamber are planning their own tweaks.

Let’s take a look at where the disagreements lie.

Among the primary sticking points in the negotiations is just how much to slash from the bill.

As things stand, the measure’s tax breaks total about $4.9tr (£3.7tn), partly paid for by cuts to the healthcare programme known as Medicaid, as well as to green energy tax breaks approved by former President Joe Biden.

Four right-wing lawmakers withheld their support, arguing that the cuts should be steeper to avoid swelling America’s public debt, which currently stands at $36tr. A fifth lawmaker also voted no, citing procedural reasons.

“The bill does not yet meet the moment,” one of the rebels, Texas Republican Chip Roy, posted on social media late on Sunday. “We can and must do better before we pass the final product.”

• Moody’s downgrades US credit rating citing rising debt
• Five House Republicans stall Trump’s ‘big, beautiful’ tax bill

Perhaps the most contentious item in the bill are cuts – partly through work requirements – to Medicaid, a healthcare programme aimed at lower-income Americans.

Roy and other Republicans – including South Carolina’s Ralph Norman, Oklahoma’s Josh Brecheen and Georgia’s Andrew Clyde – want further cuts to Medicaid and other social security programmes.

On Sunday night, Speaker Johnson said “minor modifications” had been promised to the four rebels.

Norman said these concessions include making the Medicaid work requirements take effect sooner, preventing undocumented immigrants from accessing Medicaid and ditching green energy tax credits.

The bill currently would require that states deny Medicaid coverage if able-bodied Americans using the programme are not working at least 80 hours a month or undertaking other community options – from 2029, after Trump has left office.

It would also end coverage for those who cannot show they are meeting work requirements.

Roy and other conservatives want those work requirements to start straightaway – rather than after President Trump has left office.

Other lawmakers, such as Missouri Republican Senator Josh Hawley, have argued against any cuts to Medicaid, warning it would affect millions of lower-income constituents.

Hawley wrote in the New York Times that such a move would be “both morally wrong and politically suicidal”.

Dozens of other House Republicans have also voiced concerns.

Another point of contention in the bill is a tripling of a local tax deduction – known as Salt – from $10,000 to $30,000 for couples.

Some lawmakers from states with high taxes such as New York, California and New Jersey have objected, saying that the proposed cap is not high enough.

In a joint statement earlier in May, New York Republican Congress members Elise Stefanik, Andrew Garbarino, Nick LaLota and Mike Lawler said Speaker Johnson’s offer was too low and ” insulting”.

Some so-called Salt Republicans want the cap raised to $62,000 for individuals and double for couples filing jointly.

House Republican leaders are reportedly seeking a compromise that would see the cap raised to $40,000 for individuals and $80,000 for joint filers.

The “Salt Caucus” formed in 2021 is a bipartisan effort that brings together both Democrats and Republicans who hope to repeal the current $10,000 cap.

As part of the bill, House Republicans have called for substantial reforms to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Programme, or Snap.

More than 42 million Americans currently benefit from the Snap programme, which allows them to use federal funds to buy groceries every year.

The legislation would require individual states to shoulder 5% of the benefit’s costs each year, as well as 75% of the administrative costs.

At the moment, states are not responsible for Snap costs and pay half of the administrative costs.

Republicans also hope to expand existing work requirements for recipients, which currently apply to people without dependants between the ages of 18 and 54. The current proposal would expand that to 64.

Democratic National Committee chair Ken Martin said the proposal “is a slap in the face” to millions of Americans “who rely on food assistance programme to put food on the table and make sure their kids don’t go hungry”.

Republicans argue the proposal would reduce government waste, promote work over welfare, and restore “common sense” to the programme.

The House Agriculture Committee has already approved $300m in cuts to the Snap programme to fund tax cuts.

Government data shows that about 12% of Americans received Snap benefits last year, with the figure higher in some Republican-leaning states such as Alabama and Oklahoma.

Just as India showed flickers of progress toward its long-held dream of becoming the world’s factory, Washington and Beijing announced a trade “reset” that could derail Delhi’s ambitions to replace China as the global manufacturing hub.

Last week, Trump’s tariffs on China dropped overnight – from 145% to 30%, vs 27% for India – as the two sides thrashed out an agreement in Switzerland.

As a result, there’s a chance manufacturing investment that was moving from China to India could either “stall” or “head back”, feels Ajay Srivastava of the Delhi-based think tank, Global Trade Research Institute (GTRI).

“India’s low-cost assembly lines may survive, but value-added growth is in danger.”

The change in sentiment stands in sharp relief to the exuberance in Delhi last month when Apple indicated that it was shifting most of its production of iPhones headed to the US from China to India.

That may well still happen, even though US President Donald Trump revealed that he had told Apple CEO Tim Cook not to build in India because it was “one of the highest tariff nations in the world”.

“India is well positioned to be an alternative to China as a supplier of goods to the US in the immediate term,” Shilan Shah, an economist with Capital Economics, wrote in an investor note before the deal was announced. He pointed out that 40% of India’s exports to the US were “similar to those exported by China”.

There were early signs that Indian exporters were already stepping in to fill the gap left by Chinese producers. New export orders surged to a 14-year high, according to a recent survey of Indian manufacturers.

Nomura, a Japanese broking house, also pointed to growing “anecdotal evidence” of India emerging as a winner from “trade diversion and supply-chain shift in low and mid-tech manufacturing” particularly in sectors like electronics, textiles and toys.

Some analysts do believe that despite the so-called trade “reset” between Beijing and Washington, a larger strategic decoupling between China and the US will continue to benefit India in the long run.

For one, there’s greater willingness by Narendra Modi’s government to open its doors to foreign companies after years of protectionist policies, which could provide tailwind.

India and the US are also negotiating a trade deal that could put Asia’s third-largest economy in a sweet spot to benefit from the so-called “China exodus” – as global firms shift operations to diversify supply chains.

India has just signed a trade pact with the UK, sharply cutting duties in protected sectors like whiskey and automobiles. It offers a glimpse of the concessions Delhi might offer Trump in the ongoing India-US trade talks.

But all of this optimism needs to be tempered for more reasons than one.

Apart from the fact that China is now back in the running, companies are also “not entirely writing off other Asian competitors, with countries like Vietnam still on their radars”, economists Sonal Verma and Aurodeep Nandi from Nomura said in a note earlier this month.

“Hence, for India to capitalise on this opportunity, it needs to complement any tariff arbitrage with serious ease-of-doing-business reforms.”

A tough business climate has long frustrated foreign investors and stalled India’s manufacturing growth, with its share of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) stuck at around 15% for two decades.

The Modi government’s efforts, such as the Production Linked Incentive (PLI) scheme, have delivered only limited success in boosting this figure.

The government’s think tank, Niti Aayog, has acknowledged India’s “limited success” in attracting investment shifting from China. It noted that factors like cheaper labour, simpler tax laws, lower tariffs, and proactive Free Trade Agreements helped countries like Vietnam, Thailand, Cambodia, and Malaysia expand exports – while India lagged behind.

Another major concern, says Nomura, is India’s ongoing reliance on China for raw materials and components used in electronics like iPhones, limiting Delhi’s ability to fully capitalise on supply chain shifts.

“India’s earnings from making iPhones will only rise if more of the phone is made locally,” Mr Srivastava told the BBC.

According to him, right now Apple earns over $450 per iPhone sold in the US while India keeps less than $25 – even though the full $1,000 is counted as an Indian export.

“Just assembling more iPhones in India won’t help much unless Apple and its suppliers also start making components and doing high-value work here. Without that, India’s share stays small, and the export numbers go up only on paper -possibly triggering more scrutiny from the US without real economic gain for India,” Mr Srivastava said.

The jobs created by such assembly lines aren’t very high quality either, says GTRI.

Quite unlike companies like Nokia which set up a factory in the southern city of Chennai in 2007 where suppliers moved in together, “today’s smartphone makers mostly import parts and push for lower tariffs instead of building supply chains in India”, explained Mr Srivastava. He noted that, in certain instances, the investment made could be lower than the subsidies received under India’s PLI scheme.

Finally there are concerns that Chinese exporters could try to use India to reroute products to the US.

India doesn’t seem averse to this idea despite the pitfalls. The country’s top economic adviser said last year that the country should attract more Chinese businesses to set-up export oriented factories and boost its manufacturing industry – a tacit admission that its own industrial policy hadn’t delivered.

But experts caution, this could further curtail India’s ability to build local know-how and grow its own industrial base.

All of this shows that beyond the headline-grabbing announcements by the likes of Apple, India is still a long way from realising its factory ambitions.

“Slash production costs, fix logistics, and build regulatory certainty,” Mr Srivastava urged policymakers in a social media post.

“Let’s be clear. This US-China reset is damage control, not a long-term solution. India must play the long game, or risk getting side-lined.”

Hidden beneath the slopes of a lush forest in Alberta, Canada, is a mass grave on a monumental scale.

Thousands of dinosaurs were buried here, killed in an instant on a day of utter devastation.

Now, a group of palaeontologists have come to Pipestone Creek – appropriately nicknamed the “River of Death” – to help solve a 72-million-year-old enigma: how did they die?

Trying to work out exactly what happened here starts with the hefty strike of a sledgehammer.

Brute force is needed to crack open the thick layer of rock that covers what Professor Emily Bamforth, who’s leading the dig, describes as “palaeo gold”.

As her team begins the more delicate job of removing the layers of dirt and dust, a jumble of fossilised bones slowly begins to emerge.

“That big blob of bone right there is, we think, part of a hip,” Prof Bamforth says, watched on by her dog Aster – whose job today is to bark if she spots any nearby bears.

“Then here, we have all of these long, skinny bones. These are all ribs. And this is a neat one – it’s part of a toe bone. This one here, we have no idea what it is – it’s a great example of a Pipestone Creek mystery.”

BBC News has come to Pipestone Creek to witness the sheer scale of this prehistoric graveyard and see how researchers are piecing together the clues.

Thousands of fossils have been collected from the site, and are constantly generating new discoveries.

The bones all belong to a dinosaur called Pachyrhinosaurus. The species, and Prof Bamforth’s excavation, feature in a new landmark BBC series – Walking With Dinosaurs – which uses visual effects and science to bring this prehistoric world to life.

These animals, which lived during the Late Cretaceous period, were a relative of the Triceratops. Measuring about five metres long and weighing two tonnes, the four-legged beasts had large heads, adorned with a distinctive bony frill and three horns. Their defining feature was a big bump on the nose called a boss.

The dig season has just started and lasts each year until autumn. The fossils in the small patch of ground that the team are working on are incredibly tightly packed; Prof Bamforth estimates there are up to 300 bones in every square metre.

So far, her team has excavated an area the size of a tennis court, but the bed of bones extends for a kilometre into the hillside.

“It’s jaw dropping in terms of its density,” she tells us.

“It is, we believe, one of the largest bone beds in North America.

“More than half of the known dinosaur species in the world are described from a single specimen. We have thousands of Pachyrhinosaurus here.”

Palaeontologists believe the dinosaurs were migrating together in a colossal herd for hundreds of miles from the south – where they had spent the winter – to the north for the summer.

The area, which had a much warmer climate than it does today, would have been covered in rich vegetation, providing abundant food for this enormous group of plant-eating animals.

“It is a single community of a single species of animal from a snapshot in time, and it’s a huge sample size. That almost never happens in the fossil record,” says Prof Bamforth.

And this patch of north-western Alberta wasn’t just home to Pachyrhinosaurus. Even bigger dinosaurs roamed this land, and studying them is essential to try and understand this ancient ecosystem.

Two hours drive away, we reach the Deadfall Hills. Getting there involves a hike through dense forest, wading – or doggy-paddling in the case of Aster – across a fast-running river, and clambering over slippery rocks.

No digging is required here; super-sized bones lie next to the shoreline, washed out from the rock and cleaned by the flowing water, just waiting to be picked up.

A huge vertebra is quickly spotted, as are bits of ribs and teeth scattered across the mud.

Palaeontologist Jackson Sweder is particularly interested in what looks like a chunk of dinosaur skull. “Most of what we find here is a duck-billed dinosaur called Edmontosaurus. If this is a skull bone, this is a dinosaur that’s large – probably 30ft (10m) long,” he says.

The Edmontosaurus, another herbivore, roamed the forests like the Pachyrhinosaurus – and is helping palaeontologists build up a picture of this ancient land.

Sweder is the collection manager at the Philip J Currie Dinosaur Museum in nearby Grande Prairie, where the bones from both of these giants are taken to be cleaned up and analysed. He is currently working on a huge Pachyrhinosaurus skull that’s about 1.5m long and has been nicknamed “Big Sam”.

He points to where the three horns should be at the top of the frill, but the one in the middle is missing. “All the skulls that are decently complete have a spike in that spot,” he says. “But its nice little unicorn spike doesn’t seem to be there.”

Throughout years working at the extraordinary site, the museum team has collected 8,000 dinosaur bones, and the surfaces of the lab are covered in fossils; there are bones from Pachyrhinosaurus of every size, from young to old.

Having material from so many animals allows researchers to learn about dinosaur biology, answering questions about how the species grows and the make-up of the community. They can also look at individual variations, to see how one Pachyrhinosaurus could stand out from the herd – as may be the case with Big Sam and his missing spike.

All of this detailed research, in the museum and at the two sites, is helping the team to answer the vital question: how did so many animals in Pipestone Creek die at the same time?

“We believe that this was a herd on a seasonal migration that got tangled up in some catastrophic event that effectively wiped out, if not the entire herd, then a good proportion of it,” Prof Bamforth says.

All the evidence suggests that this catastrophic event was a flash flood – perhaps a storm over the mountains that sent an unstoppable torrent of water towards the herd, ripping trees from their roots and shifting boulders.

Prof Bamforth says the Pachyrhinosaurus wouldn’t have stood a chance. “These animals are not able to move very fast because of their sheer numbers, and they’re very top heavy – and really not very good at swimming at all.”

Rocks found at the site show the swirls of sediment from the fast-flowing water churning everything up. It’s as if the destruction is frozen in time as a wave in the stone.

But this nightmare day for the dinosaurs is now a dream for palaeontologists.

“We know, every time we come here, it’s 100% guaranteed we’ll find bones. And every year we discover something new about the species,” says Prof Bamforth.

“That’s why we keep coming back, because we’re still finding new things.”

As the team packs up their tools ready to return another day, they know there’s a lot of work ahead. They’ve only just scratched the surface of what’s here – and there are many more prehistoric secrets just waiting to be revealed.

This is a sorry end to a long BBC career. Gary Lineker was among the corporation’s highest-paid presenters for a reason – he is popular with audiences, knowledgeable and brilliant at his job.

But it’s an understatement to suggest he has also caused problems for his BBC bosses over the years, as their high-profile football host began to morph into a presenter with opinions that he voiced on social media.

In the end, those two things were increasingly in conflict.

This has always been about reputation management for the BBC. Lineker had already, in the eyes of BBC bosses, caused the corporation damage with previous social media posts. Mistakenly sharing a video about Zionism which included a rat emoji was the final straw.

It was difficult to see how he could continue presenting for the corporation, particularly at a time when the BBC is enmeshed in another controversy surrounding a documentary about Gaza, which it pulled after discovering the child narrator was the son of a Hamas official.

I think what’s different is that on this occasion, Lineker regrets his actions. He has appeared bullish about previous posts, saying that while he regretted damaging the BBC, he didn’t believe, for example, that comparing the language of a Conservative asylum policy to that of 1930s Germany was wrong.

Lineker is genuinely upset by what happened. He is mortified that he reposted the video. His relationship with the BBC is coming to an end in circumstances nobody would have wanted, but some might have predicted.

He seemed unable or unwilling to accept that his high profile might prevent him from voicing strongly-held views that many believed had an impact on the BBC’s need for impartiality.

We live increasingly in an age when people want to express their opinions, and often do. Social media has given everyone a platform, and high-profile media figures have huge followings.

He could not keep quiet. In the end, it brought him down.

But he is a successful podcast entrepreneur, owning a third of the shares in Goalhanger, the company behind hit shows including The Rest is History and The Rest is Politics.

I would also not be surprised if he does appear in the future on TV, perhaps even as a presenter of the World Cup for another outlet.

He has shown contrition, but it has been a damaging few days.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) has ordered residents of Khan Younis to evacuate as it prepares to launch an “unprecedented attack”.

People were ordered to move towards al-Mawasi in the west of the strip, in one of the largest evacuation orders issued by the Israeli military in recent months.

An Arabic statement shared by IDF spokesperson Avichay Adraee said the area “will be considered a dangerous combat zone”, adding: “Terrorist organizations have brought you disaster. For your safety, evacuate immediately.”

The IDF launched a major new Gaza offensive on Friday named Operation Gideon’s Chariots. Hospitals have said more than 100 people have been killed in the last 24 hours.

One woman from Khan Younis told the BBC that the new evacuation order – which also covers the areas of Bani Suhaila and Abasan – was her “worst nightmare”.

Among those who fled was Tasneem Barakeh, 13, who said the order was issued while her father was out searching for food and that they were forced to leave without him.

“Please God, let the war stop. Where is my father?” she said. “We don’t know where he is. Please, just bring us my father.”

Abdallah Abu Shab, who also fled, said: “They told us to go to Al-Mawasi, and here we are. What do we do?”

“There is no tent for us there or anything,” he said, adding “there isn’t any transportation and people do not have money to ride a cart”.

Another woman, who is already living under an evacuation order in central Gaza, said she would not move “because there is no place to go”.

The IDF said the aim of its attack was to “destroy the capabilities of terrorist organizations in this area”.

Earlier on Monday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that Israel would “take control” of the whole of Gaza.

In a video posted on social media, he said: “We are engaged in massive fighting – intense and substantial – and there is progress.

“We are going to take control of all areas of the Strip, that’s what we’re going to do.”

The IDF said it had struck 160 targets across Gaza in the last 24 hours, including anti-tank positions, underground infrastructure and a weapons storage point.

One of the strikes killed seven at a school housing displaced families in Nuseirat, central Gaza, and three in a house in nearby Deir Al-Balah, the territory’s Hamas-run health authority said.

Overnight, a warehouse containing medical supplies at the Nasser Hospital was hit by an Israeli strike, local Hamas-run health authorities reported.

British charity Medical Aid for Palestinians said the strike happened “as Palestinians who were killed and wounded from other attacks were being brought to the hospital”.

“We are just seeing all our work being burned to ashes,” a spokesman for the charity said.

Separately, Palestinian media reported that Israeli special forces troops dressed in women’s clothing had entered a Khan Younis home undercover and killed one man on Monday morning, before arresting his wife and child.

Israeli media named him as Ahmad Sarhan, and reported he was a senior member of the military wing of the Popular Resistance Committees – a Palestinian militant group allied with Hamas.

The IDF has previously said the expanded Gaza operations are aimed at “achieving all the war’s objectives”, including releasing hostages and “the defeat of Hamas”.

But a group representing many of the hostage’s families said the operation posed “grave and escalating dangers” to hostages still held in Gaza.

“Testimonies from released hostages describe significantly worsened treatment following military strikes, including physical abuse, restraint and reduced food,” the Hostages and Missing Families Forum said.

On Sunday, Israel announced it would allow a “basic amount of food” to enter Gaza to ensure that “no starvation crisis develops” after blockading the territory for 11 weeks.

Netanyahu said the decision to allow a “minimal” amount of food into Gaza followed pressure from allies in the US Senate.

“We must not reach a situation of famine, both from a practical and a diplomatic standpoint,” he stressed in a video responding to criticism within Israel of the humanitarian situation.

The war was triggered by the Hamas-led attacks on southern Israel on 7 October 2023, which saw about 1,200 people killed and 251 taken hostage.

Some 58 hostages remain in Gaza, up to 23 of whom are believed to be alive.

More than 53,000 Palestinians have been killed during Israel’s military campaign in Gaza.

The Trump administration has agreed to pay a $5m (£3.7m) settlement to the family of Ashli Babbitt, a US Air Force veteran who was shot and killed by a Capitol police officer while breaching the US Congress on 6 January 2021.

Capitol Police Chief Tom Manger told CBS, the BBC’s US partner, he is “extremely disappointed” with the decision. The officer involved in her shooting has been cleared of any wrongdoing.

The settlement resolves a $30m wrongful death suit filed by Babbitt’s family and the conservative activist group Judicial Watch.

Thousands of Trump supporters descended on the US Capitol on 6 January in an attempt to halt the certification of Joe Biden’s victory in the 2020 election.

Babbitt was part of a group that smashed windows in an effort to enter the chamber of the House of Representatives while it was still in session, forcing lawmakers to delay certification and flee for safety.

Video of the incident shows her being shot in the shoulder after attempting to climb through a door. She later died in hospital.

The wrongful death lawsuit filed by Babbitt’s family claimed that the decision to open fire by Capitol Police officer Michael Byrd was negligent, and that Babbitt’s hands were in the air when she was shot.

Family members say that Babbitt was motivated to come to the Capitol by Trump’s claims of election fraud. No evidence has ever surfaced of widespread fraud in the 2020 election.

Mr Byrd previously defended the move to fire his gun, saying the group of lawmakers and security “were essentially trapped” and had “no way to retreat”.

In August 2021, a Capitol Police review found that Mr Byrd’s decision saved lives and was consistent with police training and procedures. A justice department review also found no evidence of any police wrongdoing.

“This is extremely disappointing and I completely disagree with the Department of Justice’s decision,” Chief Manger said in a statement to staff after learning of the settlement, the Washington Post reported.

“This settlement sends a chilling message to law enforcement officers across our nation – especially those who have a protective mission like ours,” he added.

In January, on his first day back in the White House, President Donald Trump issued a blanket pardon for more than 1,500 Capitol riot defendants, including hundreds accused of assaulting police. He also fired the federal prosecutors who handled those cases.

Trump in March told conservative news outlet Newsmax that he’s “a big fan of Ashli Babbitt” and that she was “innocently standing there” when she was shot.

“And a man did something unthinkable to her when he shot her, and I think it’s a disgrace,” he said, promising to “look into” the lawsuit brought by her family.

The US Department of Homeland Security has said 64 people took a government-funded flight to their home countries as part of a new programme encouraging undocumented immigrants to “self-deport.”

The initiative, dubbed “Project Homecoming”, is part of President Donald Trump’s sweeping crackdown on illegal immigration, which has also involved detaining hundreds of migrants in a Salvadoran mega-prison.

Immigrants can leave the country on their own, in exchange for free travel and a $1,000 (£749) stipend, and avoid detention or other punishments for being in the US illegally.

The first government-chartered flight took off from Texas and travelled to Honduras and Colombia.

Homeland Security characterised the trip as a “voluntarily charter flight,” and not an operation of the US Immigrations and Customs Enforcement agency.

Of the 64 individuals on the flight, 38 returned to Honduras and 26 people went to Colombia, the department said.

In March, the Trump administration announced that people in the US illegally could utilise the border patrol app, CPB Home, to depart the country voluntarily. Since then, it has sent some people home on commercial flights.

Officials have described Project Homecoming as a smoother alternative to forcible deportations.

“If you are here illegally, use the CBP Home App to take control of your departure and receive financial support to return home,” Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said in a statement.

“If you don’t, you will be subjected to fines, arrest, deportation and will never be allowed to return,” Noem said.

Trump’s other deportation initiatives have faced significant pushback from immigrants rights groups and numerous lawsuits.

Some of the legal battles have reached the US Supreme Court, with a mix of wins and losses for Trump.

On Saturday, the justices barred the administration from continuing to use the 18th century law known as the Alien Enemies Act to continue to deport Venezuelan migrants it has accused of gang membership.

Then on Monday, the court allowed the Trump administration to end protections against deportation for 350,000 Venezuelans who had been given Temporary Protected Status, which allows migrants to live and work legally in the US if their home country is deemed unsafe.

One of the highest-profile battles involves the deportation of a man living in Maryland, Kilmar Abrego-Garcia, to El Salvador over allegations he was a violent gang member.

A federal judge ordered the administration to facilitate his return, and that order was upheld by the US Supreme Court. However, Mr Abrego-Garcia remains in El Salvador, with the government arguing in court that it cannot compel the other country to take action, even though Trump has said in an interview that he “could” return Mr Abrego-Garica.

Britain and Iran have summoned each other’s envoys after three Iranians were charged with spying in the UK.

Three Iranian men were arrested on 3 May and appeared in court in London on Saturday on charges of spying for the Islamic republic.

Iran’s IRNA news agency said the British charge d’affaire was asked on Sunday to give an explanation for what it said was “unjustified” and “politically motivated” arrests. The UK Foreign Office then responded on Monday by summoning Tehran’s ambassador to the UK.

Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said the UK would “not tolerate growing state-backed threats on UK soil”.

“I can confirm the Iranian ambassador has been summoned and [Foreign Secretary David Lammy] is raising with Iranian foreign minister in the strongest terms that the UK will not accept any Iranian state threat activity in the UK,” she said in Parliament on Monday.

She added that the government would draft new powers of proscription to cover state threats.

She said they would create a power “stronger than current National Security Act powers in allowing us to restrict the activity and operations of foreign state-backed organisations in the UK.”

• Alleged Iranian spies charged with targeting UK-based journalists

The Foreign Office said the government “is clear that protecting national security remains our top priority and Iran must be held accountable for its actions”.

“The [ambassador] summons follows this weekend’s announcement which stated that three Iranian nationals had been charged with engaging in conduct likely to assist a foreign intelligence service,” it added.

The alleged spying took place from August 2024 to February 2025, according to the Metropolitan Police.

Police have identified the suspects as Mostafa Sepahvand, 39, Farhad Javadi Manesh, 44, and Shapoor Qalehali Khani Noori, 55, all living in London.

A fourth man had been arrested on 9 May as part of the investigation, but was released without charge, the Met said.

The three men who were charged had arrived in the UK between 2016 and 2022 were granted temporary leave to remain after claiming asylum.

It is alleged they carried out surveillance with a view to locating journalists associated with Iran International, which produces coverage that is critical of the current regime in Iran. It has been proscribed in Iran as a terrorist organisation.

Home Secretary Cooper said the charges against the Iranian nationals came alongside a “series of grave wider issues”, including “rising numbers of Iran-linked operations on UK soil” and a “nearly 50% in a year” increase in MI5 state threats investigations.

“The Iranian regime poses an unacceptable threat to our domestic security which cannot continue,” she said.

Five other Iranian men were also arrested on 5 May in London, Swindon, Stockport, Rochdale and Manchester as part of a separate counter-terrorism investigation.

Four of the men – who had been held on suspicion of preparation of a terrorist act – had been released from custody, although the investigation “remains active and is ongoing”, police said.

The fifth man was earlier bailed to an unspecified date in May.

France will build a new high-security prison in its overseas territory of French Guiana to house drug traffickers and radical Islamists, the country’s justice minister announced during a visit to the territory.

Gérald Darmanin told Le Journal du Dimanche (JDD) newspaper that the prison would target organised crime “at all levels” of the drug supply chain.

The €400m (£337m) facility, which could open as early as 2028, will be built in an isolated location deep in the Amazon jungle in the northwestern region of Saint-Laurent-du-Maroni.

The plan was announced after a series of violent incidents linked to criminal gangs which saw prisons and staff targeted across France in recent months.

The prison will hold up to 500 people, with a separate wing designed to house the most dangerous criminals.

In an interview with JDD, the minister said the new prison would be governed by an “extremely strict carceral regime” designed to “incapacitate the most dangerous drug traffickers”.

Darmanin said the facility would be used to detain people “at the beginning of the drug trail”, as well as serving as a “lasting means of removing the heads of the drug trafficking networks” in mainland France.

French Guiana is a region of France on the north-east coast of South America. Its residents are eligible to vote in French elections and have access to the French social security system, as well as other subsidies.

Its distance from the French mainland means drug lords “will no longer be able to have any contact with their criminal networks”, Darmanin told JDD.

French authorities have long struggled to control the infiltration of mobile phones into the prison network. Tens of thousands are known to circulate through French jails.

Earlier this year, the French government announced new legislation designed to crack down on the activity of criminal gangs.

The measures will create a dedicated branch of the prosecutors’ office to deal with organised crime. It will also introduce extra powers for investigators, and a special protected status for informers.

It will also see the creation of new high-security prisons – including the facility in French Guiana – to hold the most powerful drugs barons, with stricter rules governing visits and communication with the outside world.

France has seen a series of attacks on prisons in recent months, which Darmanin has described as “terrorist” incidents that come in response to the government’s new legislation.

The perpetrators of these attacks have set vehicles outside prisons alight, while Toulon’s La Farlede prison was hit by gunfire.

In some incidents the perpetrators of these attacks have styled themselves as defenders of prisoners’ rights.

The proposed new facility in French Guiana is to be built at a “strategic crossroads” for drugs mules, particularly from Brazil and Suriname, according to AFP news agency.

Saint-Laurent-du-Maroni is the former port of entry to the infamous Devil’s Island penal colony, where 70,000 convicts from mainland France were sent between 1852 and 1954.

The penal colony was the setting of French writer Henri Charrière’s book Papillon, which was later made into a Hollywood film starring Steve McQueen and Dustin Hoffman.

The BBC has contacted the French justice ministry for comment.

Rapper Drake has shared a petition asking California’s governor to pardon fellow Canadian rapper Tory Lanez, who was attacked last week in prison.

“Come home soon,” Drake wrote on his Instagram story with a link to the petition.

Lanez was stabbed 14 times by a fellow inmate in a California prison last week, an attack that caused both of his lungs to collapse. He was rushed to a hospital and is expected to recover.

Lanez, whose legal name is Daystar Peterson, is serving a 10-year prison sentence for shooting another musician, Megan Thee Stallion, in 2020.

The prison attack happened around 07:20 local time (15:20 GMT) on 12 May, said Pedro Calderón Michel of the state’s corrections department.

Staff began first aid before Lanez, 32, was taken to a local medical facility for further treatment, he said.

A post on Lanez’s Instagram said he was stabbed in the back, torso, head and face and had to be temporarily placed on a breathing apparatus. He is now able to breathe on his own.

“Despite being in pain, he is talking normally, in good spirits, and deeply thankful to God that he is pulling through,” the post said.

• Tory Lanez’s trial for shooting Megan Thee Stallion was divisive. Here’s how it played out
• Rapper Tory Lanez stabbed 14 times in California prison attack
• Convicted killer named as suspect in prison stabbing of rapper Tory Lanez

The prisoner suspected of the attack, Santino Casio, 41, is serving a life sentence for second-degree murder and other violent offences, officials told the BBC. They said he has been placed in “restricted housing” pending an investigation.

Casio arrived at the Tehachapi institution in February 2004, according to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR), and has received additional sentences for assaulting a fellow prisoner in 2008 and for possessing a deadly weapon in 2018.

Lanez was convicted of shooting Megan Thee Stallion, whose legal name is Megan Pete, as they were leaving a 2020 pool party at reality star Kylie Jenner’s Hollywood mansion.

The case divided the hip-hop world, with rappers – including 50 Cent and Iggy Azalea – appearing to take sides in the conflict and some asking the court for leniency at Lanez’s sentencing.

Drake’s song Circo Loco, a collaboration with 21 Savage, appeared to reference the case and imply that Megan lied about being shot.

Megan, in turn, accused Drake of making jokes about assaulting a woman.

The petition shared by Drake now has about 270,000 signatures calling on Gov Gavin Newsom to grant Lanez a “full pardon”. The Change.org petition, created by the Caldwell Institute for Public Safety, also points to arguments questioning both evidence and witness accounts in the case.

Newsom has not commented on the request.

Lanez had seven US top 10 albums in the seven years before his conviction. He has teased the release of a new album from prison titled Peterson.

The Spanish prime minister has called for Israel to be banned from the Eurovision Song Contest over its military action in Gaza.

Pedro Sánchez noted Russia has been banned from the contest since 2022 following its invasion of Ukraine, and said there should not be “double standards”.

Israel came second in the contest’s grand final in Switzerland on Saturday, but topped the public vote – with Spanish viewers giving Israel the maximum 12 points.

Israeli minister for diaspora affairs, Amichai Chikli, ridiculed Sánchez with a social media post that said the vote had been a “slap in the face” for the Spanish PM, “which we have heard here in Jerusalem”.

BBC News has asked Eurovision organisers the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) for comment.

Speaking at a news conference in Madrid, Sánchez said: “Nobody was up in arms when the Russian invasion of Ukraine began three years ago and [Russia] had to leave international competitions and could not take part, as we have just seen, in Eurovision.

“Therefore Israel shouldn’t either, because what we cannot allow is double standards in culture.”

He also expressed solidarity with “the people of Palestine who are experiencing the injustice of war and bombardment”.

“Spain’s commitment to international law and human rights must be constant and must be coherent,” he said. “Europe’s should be too.”

Sánchez and his government, which officially acknowledged a Palestinian state last year, have been harsh critics of Israel, and last week in Congress the prime minister referred to the country as “a genocidal state”.

Israel has strenuously denied accusations of genocide, and its foreign ministry summoned the Spanish ambassador for a formal reprimand over Sánchez’s “serious remarks”.

At Eurovision, Spain’s televote saw the country award Israel maximum points for its song New Day Will Rise by Yuval Raphael. Spain’s broadcast network RTVE has since requested an audit of the votes.

Ahead of the Eurovision final on Saturday, RTVE aired a message in support of Palestinians – despite being warned to avoid references to Gaza by the EBU.

Spain’s entry, Esa Diva by Melody, finished in 24th place on Saturday night in Basel.

Last year, Donald Trump promised he would end the Ukraine War in “24 hours”.

Last week, he said that it would not be resolved until he and Russian President Vladimir Putin could “get together” and hash it out in person.

On Monday, the ground shifted again.

After a two-hour phone call with Putin, he said that the conditions of a peace deal could only be negotiated between Russia and Ukraine – and maybe with the help of the Pope.

Still, the US president has not lost his sense of optimism about the prospect for peace, posting on social media that the combatants would “immediately start” negotiations for a ceasefire and an end to the war.

That sentiment was somewhat at odds with the Russian view. Putin only said that his country is ready to work with Ukraine to craft a “memorandum on a possible future peace agreement”.

Talks about memorandums and a “possible future” of peace hardly seems the kind of solid ground on which lasting deals can be quickly built.

• Russia and Ukraine to ‘immediately’ start ceasefire talks, says Trump
• Trump says he will call Putin to discuss stopping Ukraine ‘bloodbath’
• Rosenberg: Trump-Putin call seen as victory in Russia

Putin again emphasised that any resolution would have to address the “root causes” of the war – which Russia has claimed in the past to be Ukraine’s desire for closer ties to Europe.

There is a possibility that Trump’s latest take on the war in Ukraine could be a sign that the US will ultimately abandon the negotiating table.

“Big egos involved, but I think something’s going to happen,” Trump said on Monday afternoon. “And if it doesn’t, I’ll just back away and they’ll have to keep going.”

Such a move, however, comes with its own set of questions – and risks.

If the US washes its hands of the war, as Vice-President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio have also threatened, does it mean the US would also end any military and intelligence support for Ukraine?

And if that is the case, then it may be a development that Russia, with its greater resources compared to a Ukraine cut off from American backing, would welcome.

That prospect is enough to have Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky concerned.

“It’s crucial for all of us that the United States does not distance itself from the talks and the pursuit of peace,” he said on Monday after the Trump-Putin call.

• Trump’s frantic peace brokering hints at what he really wants

Putting aside Monday’s rhetoric, it appears that Ukraine and Russia are set to continue some kind of talks – and talking in any form is progress after nearly three years of war. Still to be determined is whether the Russian team will be more than the low-level delegation that travelled to Istanbul to meet with the Ukrainians last Friday.

Trump is holding out the promise of reduced sanctions on Russia – and new trade deals and economic investment – as the enticement that will move Putin toward a peace agreement. He mentioned that again in his post-call comments. Not discussed, on the other hand, were any negative consequences, such as new sanctions on Russian banking and energy exports.

The US president last month warned that he would not tolerate Putin “tapping me along” and said that Russia should not target civilian areas. But yesterday, Russia launched its largest drone strike of the war on Ukrainian cities, and Monday’s call between the two world leaders makes clear that any ceasefire or peace deal still seems well over the horizon.

The four-day conflict between arch-rivals India and Pakistan this month ended with a ceasefire and both claiming victory – but it now appears that China’s defence industry might also be an unlikely winner.

The latest flare-up began on 7 May when India launched attacks on what it called “terrorist infrastructure” inside Pakistan in response to the brutal killing of 26 people, mostly tourists by militants in Pahalgam on 22 April.

Many of them were killed in the scenic valley in Indian-administered Kashmir in front of their wives and family members. Delhi accused Islamabad of supporting militant groups involved in the carnage, a charge Pakistan denied.

After India’s response – which it called Operation Sindoor – to the militant attack, tit-for-tat military manoeuvres from both sides followed, involving drones, missiles and fighter jets.

India reportedly used its French and Russian-made jets, while Pakistan deployed its J-10 and J-17 aircraft, which Islamabad co-produces with Beijing. Both sides say their jets did not cross the border and they were firing missiles at each other from a distance.

Islamabad claims that its fighter aircraft shot down at least six Indian planes, including the newly-acquired French-made Rafale fighter jets. Delhi hasn’t responded to these claims.

“Losses are a part of combat,” Air Marshal AK Bharti of the Indian Air Force (IAF) said last week when a reporter asked him about these claims. Air Marshal Bharti declined to comment on the specific claim of Pakistan downing Indian jets.

“We have achieved the objectives that we selected, and all our pilots are back home,” he added.

India said it had killed at least “100 terrorists” while targeting the headquarters of the banned Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed militant outfits based in Pakistan.

A definitive account of what really happened in the aerial battle is yet to emerge. Some media outlets reported plane crashes in the state of Punjab and Indian-administered Kashmir around the same time but the Indian government has not responded to the reports.

A Reuters report quoting American officials said Pakistan possibly had used the Chinese-made J-10 aircraft to launch air-to-air missiles against Indian fighter jets. Pakistan claiming victory after hugely relying on Chinese weapons systems in an active combat situation is being seen by some experts as a boost for Beijing’s defence industry but some also disagree with the claim.

Some of the experts have called this a “DeepSeek moment” for the Chinese weapons industry, referring to January this year when the Chinese AI start-up shook US giants with its cost-effective technology.

“The aerial fight was a big advertisement for the Chinese weapons industry. Until now, China had no opportunity to test its platforms in a combat situation,” Zhou Bo, a retired senior colonel in the Chinese People’s Liberation Army, told the BBC.

The Beijing-based analyst said the outcome of the air duel showed “China has some systems that are next to none”. Shares in the Chinese Avic Chengdu Aircraft company, that manufactures fighter jets like the J-10, surged by up to 40% last week after the reported performance of the fighter jet in the India-Pakistan conflict.

Other experts, however, feel it’s too early to declare the superiority of Chinese weapons systems.

Professor Walter Ladwig from the King’s College in London said it was yet to be determined whether the Chinese jets had actually outmanoeuvred the Indian Air Force (IAF) planes, particularly the Rafale.

“In a standard military doctrine, you would suppress the enemy’s air defences and get air superiority before you struck ground targets. Instead, it appears the IAF’s mission was clearly not to provoke any Pakistani military retaliation,” he said.

Mr Ladwig thought that the Indian pilots were given instructions to fly despite the fact that the entire Pakistani air defence was on high alert and their jets were already in the sky. The IAF hasn’t given details of the mission or about its air operations strategy.

Beijing also hasn’t made any comment on reports of the J-10 taking down Indian fighter jets, including the Rafale. But unconfirmed reports of the J-10 bringing down a Western weapon system has triggered jubilation and triumphalism on Chinese social media.

Carlotta Rinaudo, a China researcher at the International Team for the Study of Security in Verona, said Chinese social media was flooded with nationalistic messages even though it’s difficult to reach a conclusion with the available information.

“At the moment perception matters way more than reality. If we see it in that way, the main winner is really China,” she said.

For China, Pakistan is a strategic and economic ally. It is investing more than $50bn (£37bn) to build infrastructure in Pakistan as part of its China-Pakistan Economic corridor.

So, a weak Pakistan is not in China’s interest.

China made a critical difference in the latest India-Pakistan conflict, says Imtiaz Gul, a Pakistani security analyst. “It took the Indian planners by sheer surprise. They didn’t probably envision the depth of co-operation in the modern warfare between Pakistan and China,” he said.

Experts say the performance of the Chinese jets in a real combat situation was keenly analysed in Western capitals as this will have cascading impact on global arms trade. The US is the world’s largest arms exporter, while China is the fourth.

China sells weapons mostly to developing countries like Myanmar and Pakistan. Previously the Chinese weapon systems were criticised for their poor quality and technical problems.

Reports said the Burmese military grounded several of its JF-17 fighter jets – jointly manufactured by China and Pakistan in 2022 – due to technical malfunctions.

The Nigerian military reported several technical problems with the Chinese made F-7 fighter jets.

Another point to be noted is that this was not the first time that India lost an aircraft to Pakistan.

In 2019, during a brief air battle between the two sides following similar Indian air strikes on suspected terrorist targets in Pakistan, a Russian-made MiG-21 jet was shot down inside Pakistani territory and the pilot was captured. He was released a few days later.

India, however, said that the pilot had ejected after successfully shooting down Pakistani fighter jets, including a US-made F-16. Pakistan has denied the claim.

Despite reports of the downing of Indian jets last week, experts like Mr Ladwig argue that India was able to hit an “impressive breadth of targets” inside Pakistan early in the morning of 10 May and this fact has gone largely unnoticed by the international media.

The Indian military said in a co-ordinated attack, it launched missiles on 11 Pakistani air bases across the country, including the strategic Nur Khan air base outside Rawalpindi, not far from the Pakistani military headquarters. It’s a sensitive target that took Islamabad by surprise.

One of the furthest targets was in Bholari, 140km (86 miles) from the southern city of Karachi.

Mr Ladwig says this time the IAF operated with standard procedures – first attacking Pakistani air defence and radar systems and then focusing on ground targets.

The Indian jets used an array of missiles, loitering munitions and drones despite the Pakistanis operating the Chinese-provided HQ 9 air defence system.

“It seems the attacks were relatively precise and targeted. The craters were in the middle of runways, exactly the ideal spot. If it were a longer conflict, how long would it take the Pakistani Air Force to get these facilities up and running again, I can’t say,” Mr Ladwig pointed out.

Nevertheless, he said, by refusing to get into the details of the mission briefing, India’s military “lost control of the narrative thread”.

In response to the Indian strikes, Pakistan said it launched missile and air strikes on several Indian forward air bases, but Delhi said the attacks caused no damage to equipment and personnel.

Realising that the situation was getting out of control, the US and its allies intervened and put pressure on both countries to stop the fighting.

But for India, experts say, the whole episode is a wake-up call.

Beijing may not comment on the details of the recent India-Pakistan conflict, but it’s keen to show that its weapon systems are fast catching up with the West.

Delhi is aware that the jets China has supplied to Pakistan are some of the earlier models. Beijing has already inducted the more advanced J-20 stealth fighter jets, that can evade radars.

India and China have a long-standing border dispute along the Himalayas and fought a brief border war in 1962 that resulted in a defeat for India. A brief border clash took place in Ladakh in June 2020.

Experts say India is acutely aware that it needs to accelerate investments in its homegrown defence manufacturing industry and speed up international buying.

For now, China’s defence industry seems to be enjoying the limelight following the claims of success of one of its aircraft in the India-Pakistan conflict.

US President Donald Trump says Russia and Ukraine will “immediately” start negotiating towards a ceasefire and an end to the war, after a two-hour phone call with Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin.

Trump, who described the conversation as having gone “very well”, also said conditions for peace would need to be negotiated between the two parties.

Despite the note of optimism from Trump, who also spoke with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, any ceasefire or peace deal does not appear close.

Putin said he was ready to work with Ukraine on a “memorandum on a possible future peace agreement”, while Zelensky said “this is a defining moment”, and urged the US not to distance itself from talks.

While Trump has expressed positivity towards his conversation with Putin, there was no indication about when peace negotiations would take place. Nor did the Russian president address demands from the US and European countries for an unconditional 30-day ceasefire.

After his one-on-one call with Trump, Zelensky reaffirmed Ukraine’s desire for a “full and unconditional ceasefire”, and warned if Moscow is not ready, “there must be stronger sanctions”.

Speaking earlier before Trump’s conversation with Putin, Zelensky said he had asked that any decisions about Ukraine were not made without his country, calling them “matters of principles” for Ukraine.

He added he did not have any details on a “memorandum” but said once they have received anything from the Russians, they will “be able to formulate their vision accordingly”.

Writing on his Truth Social page after the call, Trump said: “Russia and Ukraine will immediately start negotiations toward a Ceasefire and, more importantly, an END to the War,” adding he had informed Zelensky of this in a second call, which also included other world leaders.

He added: “The conditions for that will be negotiated between the two parties, as it can only be, because they know details of a negotiation that nobody else would be aware of.”

Zelensky said the negotiation process “must involve both American and European representatives at the appropriate level”.

“It is crucial for all of us that the United States does not distance itself from the talks and the pursuit of peace, because the only one who benefits from that is Putin,” he explained.

Talking at a White House event later in the day, Trump said the US would not be stepping away from brokering talks between Russia and Ukraine, but that he has a “red line in his head” on when he will stop pushing on them both.

He also denied that the US was stepping back from its negotiating role.

In recent weeks, Trump has repeatedly warned that the US would step away from negotiations as he became increasingly frustrated at the lack of developments from both Moscow and Kyiv in the way of peace.

When asked on what he believes on Russia, he said he thinks Putin has had enough of the war and wants it to end.

Meanwhile, Putin – who described the call with Trump, which he took from a music school on a visit to the city of Sochi, as “frank, informative and constructive” – also spoke of the potential for a ceasefire.

“We have agreed with the US president that Russia will offer and is ready to work with Ukraine on a memorandum on a possible future peace agreement,” he said.

This, he added would define “a number of positions” including “principles of the settlement and a timeline for concluding a possible peace agreement…including a possible ceasefire for a certain period of time, should relevant agreements be reached”.

Yury Ushakov, an aide to the Russian president, said a ceasefire timeframe was not “discussed… although Trump, of course, emphasises his interest in reaching one or another agreement as soon as possible”.

Zelensky held a second call with Trump after the US president spoke to Putin, which also included President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen, and the leaders of France, Italy, Germany and Finland.

“I want to thank President Trump for his tireless efforts to bring a ceasefire to Ukraine,” von der Leyen said, adding: “It’s important that the US stays engaged.”

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni said Pope Leo’s offer to host potential peace talks was a gesture welcomed by the US and the other leaders in the call, and “judged positively”.

Earlier this month, the new Pope offered the Vatican as a venue for possible peace talks after Putin turned down Zelensky’s offer to meet face-to-face in Turkey for negotiations.

Kyiv has previously said Putin’s comments saying he desires peace are hollow.

“Putin wants war,” Andriy Yermak, a top aide to the Ukrainian president, said after Russia on Sunday launched what Ukraine said was its biggest drone attack since the full-scale invasion began.

Ukraine says at least 10 people have been killed in Russian strikes in recent days – including nine people in an attack on a civilian minibus in north-eastern Ukraine. Russia says it has also intercepted Ukrainian drones.

The strike on the bus happened just hours after Russia and Ukraine held their first face-to-face talks in more than three years. A prisoner swap was agreed but there was no commitment to a ceasefire.

Trump had offered to attend the talks in Turkey if Putin would also be there, but the Russian president declined to go.

Russia has declared ceasefires before – but only temporary ones. It declared one for 8-11 May – which coincided with victory celebrations to mark the end of World War Two – but Kyiv would not sign up to it, saying Putin could not be trusted and that an immediate 30-day ceasefire was needed.

The Kremlin announced a similar, 30-hour truce over Easter, but while both sides reported a dip in fighting, they accused each other of hundreds of violations.

Russia and Ukraine have been at war since Moscow launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

The US Supreme Court has said it will allow the Trump administration to terminate deportation protections for some 350,000 Venezuelans in the US.

The ruling lifts a hold that was placed by a California judge that kept Temporary Protected Status (TPS) in place for Venezuelans whose status’ would have expired last month.

Temporary Protected Status allows people to live and work in the US legally if their home countries are deemed unsafe due to things like countries experiencing wars, natural disasters or other “extraordinary and temporary” conditions.

The ruling marks a win for US President Donald Trump, who has repeatedly tried to use the Supreme Court to enact immigration policy decisions.

The Trump administration wanted to end protections and work permits for migrants with TPS in April 2025, more than a year before they were originally supposed to end in October 2026.

Lawyers representing the US government argued the California federal court, the US District Court for the Northern District of California, had undermined “the Executive Branch’s inherent powers as to immigration and foreign affairs,” when it stopped the administration from ending protections and work permits in April.

Ahilan Arulanantham, who represents TPS holders in the case, told the BBC he believes this to be “the largest single action stripping any group of non-citizens of immigration status in modern US history”.

“That the Supreme Court authorized this action in a two-paragraph order with no reasoning is truly shocking,” Mr Arulanantham said. “The humanitarian and economic impact of the Court’s decision will be felt immediately, and will reverberate for generations.”

Because it was an emergency appeal, justices on the Supreme Court did not provide a reasoning for the ruling.

The court’s order only noted one judge’s dissent, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.

In August, the Trump administration is also expected to revoke TPS protections for tens of thousands of Haitians.

The ruling on Monday by the Supreme Court marks the latest in a series of decisions on immigration policies from the high court that the Trump administration has left them to rule on.

• What is the 1798 law that Trump used to deport migrants?

Last week, the administration asked the Supreme Court to end humanitarian parole for hundreds of thousands of Cuban, Haitian, Nicaraguan and Venezuela immigrants.

Along with some of their successes, the Trump administration was dealt a blow on Friday when the high court blocked Trump from using the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to deport immigrants in north Texas.

Trump had wanted to use the centuries-old law to swiftly deport thousands from the US, but Supreme Court judges questioned if the president’s action was legal.

Joe Biden expressed his gratitude for the words of support that have poured in from across the world, including a private letter from Britain’s King Charles, after the former US president announced his cancer diagnosis on Sunday.

“Cancer touches us all,” Biden wrote on social media on Monday morning. “Like so many of you, Jill and I have learned that we are strongest in the broken places. Thank you for lifting us up with love and support.”

On Sunday, Biden’s office disclosed that he was diagnosed with an aggressive form of prostate cancer that has spread to his bones.

The news comes as fresh questions are being raised about the former president’s health while he was in office.

President Donald Trump posted that he was “saddened” by Biden’s diagnosis but later questioned – without providing any evidence – whether Biden’s team had known earlier about his illness and concealed the news from the public.

“I am surprised that the public wasn’t notified a long time ago because to get to stage nine that takes a long time,” he said at the White House on Monday afternoon.

“It could take years to get to this level of danger,” he said, adding: “I feel very badly about it, and I think people should try and find out what happened.”

Late-stage diagnoses for cancer are not unheard of, however. One UK study in 2014 found 46% of cancer diagnoses in that country were only made at an advanced stage.

Biden’s office said that he was diagnosed on Friday with prostate cancer “characterised by a Gleason score of 9 (Grade Group 5) with metastasis to the bone”.

“While this represents a more aggressive form of the disease, the cancer appears to be hormone-sensitive which allows for effective management.”

A Gleason score of nine means his illness is classified as “high-grade” and the cancer cells could spread quickly, according to Cancer Research UK.

• What we know about Biden’s prostate cancer diagnosis
• Analysis: Cancer diagnosis is another formidable challenge

Biden said his diagnosis was made after he reported urinary symptoms which led doctors to find a small nodule on his prostate.

In the wake of the cancer diagnosis, many have offered Biden their support including former President Barack Obama and former Vice-President Kamala Harris.

King Charles has written privately to Biden offering his support and best wishes, Buckingham Palace said.

The king, 76, who has met Biden a number of times, is also receiving treatment for an unspecified type of cancer after his diagnosis in 2024.

Biden had then sent his best wishes, saying: “I’m concerned about him. Just heard about his diagnosis. I’ll be talking to him, God willing.”

Vice-President JD Vance offered well wishes, but questioned whether the American people had a clear picture of Biden’s health while the former president was in office.

“We really do need to be honest about whether the former president was capable of doing the job,” Vance said on Monday. “And that’s that’s … you can separate the desire for him to have the right health outcome with a recognition that whether it was doctors or whether there were staffers around the former president, I don’t think he was able to do a good job for the American people.”

Vance also said he blamed the people around him more than Biden himself.

“This is not child’s play, and we can pray for good health, but also recognise that if you’re not in good enough health to do the job, you shouldn’t be doing the job,” he added.

The announcement comes as Biden staves off criticism from a forthcoming book that claims he and his advisers hid his deteriorating health while he was in the White House.

Details revealed last week from the book entitled, Original Sin: President Biden’s Decline, Its Cover-Up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again, include Biden not recognising actor and frequent Democratic donor George Clooney at a fundraiser last year and aides discussing putting the former president in a wheelchair.

The book will be released on Tuesday.

Nearly a year ago, the former president was forced to drop out of the 2024 US presidential election because of concerns about his health and age.

Inside a laboratory nestled above the mist of the forests of South Dakota, scientists are searching for the answer to one of science’s biggest questions: why does our Universe exist?

They are in a race for the answer with a separate team of Japanese scientists – who are several years ahead.

The current theory of how the Universe came into being can’t explain the existence of the planets, stars and galaxies we see around us. Both teams are building detectors that study a sub-atomic particle called a neutrino in the hope of finding answers.

The US-led international collaboration is hoping the answer lies deep underground, in the aptly named Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment (Dune).

The scientists will travel 1,500 metres below the surface into three vast underground caverns. Such is the scale that construction crews and their bulldozers seem like small plastic toys by comparison.

The science director of this facility, Dr Jaret Heise describes the giant caves as “cathedrals to science”.

Dr Heise has been involved the construction of these caverns at the Sanford Underground Research Facility (Surf) for nearly ten years. They seal Dune off from the noise and radiation from the world above. Now, Dune is now ready for the next stage.

“We are poised to build the detector that will change our understanding of the Universe with instruments that will be deployed by a collaboration of more than 1,400 scientists from 35 countries who are eager to answer the question of why we exist,” he says.

When the Universe was created two kinds of particles were created: matter – from which stars, planets and everything around us are made – and, in equal amounts, antimatter, matter’s exact opposite.

Theoretically the two should have cancelled each other out, leaving nothing but a big burst of energy. And yet, here we – as matter – are.

Scientists believe that the answer to understanding why matter won – and we exist – lies in studying a particle called the neutrino and its antimatter opposite, the anti-neutrino.

They will be firing beams of both kinds of particles from deep underground in Illinois to the detectors at South Dakota, 800 miles away.

This is because as they travel, neutrinos and anti-neutrinos change ever so slightly.

The scientists want to find out whether those changes are different for the neutrinos and anti-neutrinos. If they are, it could lead them to the answer of why matter and anti-matter don’t cancel each other out.

Dune is an international collaboration, involving 1,400 scientists from thirty countries. Among them is Dr Kate Shaw from Sussex University, who told me that the discoveries in store will be “transformative” to our understanding of the Universe and humanity’s view of itself.

“It is really exciting that we are here now with the technology, with the engineering, with the computer software skills to really be able to attack these big questions,” she said.

Half a world away, Japanese scientists are using shining golden globes to search for the same answers. Gleaming in all its splendour it is like a temple to science, mirroring the cathedral in South Dakota 6,000 miles (9,650 km) away. The scientists are building Hyper-K – which will be a bigger and better version of their existing neutrino detector, Super-K.

The Japanese-led team will be ready to turn on their neutrino beam in less than three years, several years earlier than the American project. Just like Dune, Hyper-K is an international collaboration. Dr Mark Scott of Imperial College, London believes his team is in pole position to make one of the biggest ever discoveries about the origin of the Universe.

“We switch on earlier and we have a larger detector, so we should have more sensitivity sooner than Dune,” he says.

Having both experiments running together means that scientists will learn more than they would with just one, but, he says, “I would like to get there first!”

But Dr Linda Cremonesi, of Queen Mary University of London, who works for the Dune project, says that getting there first may not give the Japanese-led team the full picture of what is really going on.

“There is an element of a race, but Hyper K does not have yet all of the ingredients that they need to understand if neutrinos and anti-neutrinos behave differently.”

The race may be on, but the first results are only expected in a few years’ time. The question of just what happened at the beginning of time to bring us into existence remains a mystery – for now.

Rapper Drake has shared a petition asking California’s governor to pardon fellow Canadian rapper Tory Lanez, who was attacked last week in prison.

“Come home soon,” Drake wrote on his Instagram story with a link to the petition.

Lanez was stabbed 14 times by a fellow inmate in a California prison last week, an attack that caused both of his lungs to collapse. He was rushed to a hospital and is expected to recover.

Lanez, whose legal name is Daystar Peterson, is serving a 10-year prison sentence for shooting another musician, Megan Thee Stallion, in 2020.

The prison attack happened around 07:20 local time (15:20 GMT) on 12 May, said Pedro Calderón Michel of the state’s corrections department.

Staff began first aid before Lanez, 32, was taken to a local medical facility for further treatment, he said.

A post on Lanez’s Instagram said he was stabbed in the back, torso, head and face and had to be temporarily placed on a breathing apparatus. He is now able to breathe on his own.

“Despite being in pain, he is talking normally, in good spirits, and deeply thankful to God that he is pulling through,” the post said.

• Tory Lanez’s trial for shooting Megan Thee Stallion was divisive. Here’s how it played out
• Rapper Tory Lanez stabbed 14 times in California prison attack
• Convicted killer named as suspect in prison stabbing of rapper Tory Lanez

The prisoner suspected of the attack, Santino Casio, 41, is serving a life sentence for second-degree murder and other violent offences, officials told the BBC. They said he has been placed in “restricted housing” pending an investigation.

Casio arrived at the Tehachapi institution in February 2004, according to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR), and has received additional sentences for assaulting a fellow prisoner in 2008 and for possessing a deadly weapon in 2018.

Lanez was convicted of shooting Megan Thee Stallion, whose legal name is Megan Pete, as they were leaving a 2020 pool party at reality star Kylie Jenner’s Hollywood mansion.

The case divided the hip-hop world, with rappers – including 50 Cent and Iggy Azalea – appearing to take sides in the conflict and some asking the court for leniency at Lanez’s sentencing.

Drake’s song Circo Loco, a collaboration with 21 Savage, appeared to reference the case and imply that Megan lied about being shot.

Megan, in turn, accused Drake of making jokes about assaulting a woman.

The petition shared by Drake now has about 270,000 signatures calling on Gov Gavin Newsom to grant Lanez a “full pardon”. The Change.org petition, created by the Caldwell Institute for Public Safety, also points to arguments questioning both evidence and witness accounts in the case.

Newsom has not commented on the request.

Lanez had seven US top 10 albums in the seven years before his conviction. He has teased the release of a new album from prison titled Peterson.

A British ultra-endurance athlete has broken the world record for running across the length of Australia, after a gruelling 35-day journey.

William Goodge, 31, started the 3,800km (2,361 miles) run from Cottesloe Beach in Perth on 15 April, and finished on Monday afternoon at Australia’s iconic Bondi Beach, his father by his side.

Originally from Bedfordshire in England, Goodge ran the equivalent of two-and-a-half marathons – about 100km – every day.

He started running marathons after his mother, Amanda, died from cancer in 2018, with this journey raising money for cancer charities in the UK, US and Australia.

The previous world record for running across Australia was held by Chris Turnbull, who managed the feat in 39 days in 2023. The year before, Australian electrician Nedd Brockmann ran the same route in 47 days, raising millions for charity.

Speaking to local media after he crossed the finish line, Goodge said the run was “like a revolving nightmare that wouldn’t end”.

“The first nine days were extremely challenging…but you have to tell your body and mind that even though you’re struggling, you’re going to persevere, and you’re going to get through it,” he told the Sydney Morning Herald (SMH).

Moments after crossing the finish line, Goodge placed a bunch of flowers on Bondi’s famous shoreline in memory of his late mother.

“She was the most special person in my life,” he told the Guardian Australia, adding, “she would be proud of everything I’ve done – she’d also be concerned”.

Along the way toenails have fallen off, his feet began rotting and he sometimes hallucinated due to broken sleep caused by pain in his bones.

Goodge said thinking about how his mother battled cancer was crucial during his journey, and helped him overlook his own suffering.

“So in the moments where it’s tough, I’ll think back to those times, I think about the woman she was, and how she handled herself, and how she supported me,” he told the SMH.

“I feel like she’s there with me a lot of the time.”

During the race, he says he saw almost all of Australia’s famous animals – though most were dead on the road – and much of its unique countryside.

On Goodge’s website about the run, he also thanked Turnbull for sharing his knowledge and experience on how to tackle the journey.

Goodge also holds the record for the fastest British man to run across the US, crossing from Los Angeles to New York in 55 days.

Sean “Diddy” Combs allegedly used a hammer to try to break into his ex-girlfriend’s apartment after the now-infamous assault at an Intercontinental Hotel in 2016, a New York court has heard.

Security video of Mr Combs’ assault on his then-girlfriend Casandra “Cassie” Ventura has been shown to the jury several times in his sex-trafficking trial.

Ms Ventura’s former best friend Kerry Morgan on Monday recounted how Mr Combs allegedly tried to smash his way into Ventura’s apartment in the aftermath, and described the incident as terrifying.

Mr Combs, 55, has pleaded not guilty to racketeering, sex trafficking and transportation to engage in prostitution. He could face life in prison if convicted.

Ms Morgan told the court she was at Ms Ventura’s Los Angeles apartment after the hotel incident and watched through the peephole as Mr Combs was “banging on the door with a hammer”.

Ms Morgan told the court that as it unfolded, she didn’t think Ms Ventura cared if Mr Combs “came in and killed her”.

Mr Combs did not enter the apartment and police officers arrived about three hours later, Ms Morgan said. No complaint was filed.

The court heard more allegations of violent outbursts by the hip-hop mogul. Ms Morgan said that during a vacation in Jamaica, she saw him drag Ms Ventura down a 50-yard hallway by her hair because she was “taking too long in the bathroom”.

The witness told the court she too had experienced violence at the hands of Mr Combs, alleging he choked her and threw a wooden hanger at her head in 2018 while demanding to know who Ms Ventura was cheating on him with.

The court heard Ms Morgan had a concussion and had to go to urgent care.

The two women were best friends for 17 years, but after that, their friendship was over, Ms Morgan said.

She told the court that Ms Ventura met her at a West Hollywood pizza place about a month later and offered her $30,000 (£22,450) to sign a non-disclosure agreement. They agreed, and have not spoken in the seven years since.

“I draw my line at physical abuse,” Ms Morgan said.

After Ms Morgan stepped down from the witness stand, David James, the former personal assistant of Mr Combs, testified.

Mr James, who told the court he often worked 20 hours a day for six to seven days a week, was once shown a photograph of Mr Combs at his Bad Boy Entertainment office and a high-ranking staff member told him “this is Mr Combs’ kingdom. We’re all here to serve it”.

The former assistant also recounted a conversation he overheard in Manhattan, when he was in an Escalade SUV with Combs and some of his entourage.

When a friend asked how Ms Ventura was, Mr Combs allegedly said: “Cassie’s good. I got her right where I want her, she’s young”.

“He said she was very mouldable,” Mr James recalls his boss saying.

The trial will continue on Tuesday with Mr James on the witness stand.

Police in India have arrested a local YouTuber on suspicions of spying for Pakistan.

Jyoti Malhotra, a travel influencer from the northern Indian state of Haryana, allegedly travelled to the neighbouring country several times – her last trip was in March 2025.

Police in Haryana allege that she was in touch with a Pakistan High Commission official, who was expelled from India earlier this month.

The YouTuber’s father has denied allegations that she was a spy, saying she went to Pakistan after acquiring necessary permissions.

Ms Malhotra describes herself on social media as a “modern girl with old ideas”, and has 377,000 subscribers on YouTube and 133,000 followers on Instagram.

But officers have questioned how she financed her travel around the globe, with her videos documenting visits to places like Bangladesh, China, Thailand, United Arab Emirates and Indonesia. She has also visited several Indian destinations and religious places. Police say it defies her known source of income.

Police claim Ms Malhotra was in touch with “Pakistani intelligence operatives” and had continuous contact with a Pakistani citizen.

Ms Malhotra is also being investigated for any links with the Pahalgam attack, Shashank Kumar Sawan, the superintendent of police in Haryana’s Hisar district, told ANI news agency.

They say they have leads on others who may have collaborated with the influencer, who does not have direct access to any military or defence information.

“She was in touch with other YouTube influencers… She used to go to Pakistan on sponsored trips,” Mr Sawan added.

Her arrest comes after the Indian government asked Ahsan-ur-Rahim, the Pakistan High Commission official with whom the YouTuber was alleged to have been in contact, to leave the country on 13 May, alleging he had indulged in activities “not in keeping with his official status in India”.

Pakistan also asked an Indian embassy staff member in Islamabad to leave for indulging in activities “incompatible” with his privileged status.

According to a complaint registered by the police, Ms Malhotra met Ahsan-ur-Rahim for the first time in 2023 when she had visited the Pakistan High Commission in Delhi, seeking a visa to visit the neighbouring country.

Her last video on Pakistan was uploaded in March, in which she was seen in the Pakistan High Commission in Delhi attending a Ramadan dinner.

In other videos from Pakistan, she is seen visiting Hindu and Sikh temples, famous local markets, and interacting with locals.

Arrests in India and Pakistan over allegations of spying are not uncommon.

Ms Malhotra’s arrest comes following days of military tensions between the neighbours earlier this month.

On 7 May, India struck what it calls “terror infrastructure” inside Pakistan, days after a deadly militant attack on tourists in Pahalgam, a picturesque valley in Indian-administered Kashmir. Pakistan has denied any involvement in the attacks.

After four tense days of deadly clashes between the nuclear-armed neighbours, both countries agreed to a ceasefire on 10 May, announced by US President Donald Trump.