Iranian authorities have carried out a wave of arrests and multiple executions of people suspected of links to Israeli intelligence agencies, in the wake of the recent war between the two countries.

It comes after what officials describe as an unprecedented infiltration of Iranian security services by Israeli agents.

Authorities suspect information fed to Israel played a part in a series of high-profile assassinations during the conflict. This included the targeted killings of senior commanders from the elite Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and nuclear scientists, which Iran attributes to operatives of Israel’s Mossad intelligence agency working inside the country.

Shaken by the scale and precision of these killings, authorities have been targeting anyone suspected of working with foreign intelligence, saying it is for the sake of national security.

But many fear this is also a way to silence dissent and tighten control over the population.

During the 12-day conflict, Iranian authorities executed three people accused of spying for Israel. On Wednesday – just one day after the ceasefire – three more individuals were executed on similar charges.

Officials have since announced the arrest of hundreds of suspects across the country on accusations of espionage. State television has aired alleged confessions from several detainees, purportedly admitting to collaboration with Israeli intelligence.

Human rights groups and activists have expressed fears over the latest developments, citing Iran’s longstanding practice of extracting forced confessions and conducting unfair trials. There are concerns that more executions may follow.

Iran’s Ministry of Intelligence claims it is engaged in a “relentless battle” against what it calls Western and Israeli intelligence networks – including the CIA, Mossad, and MI6.

According to Fars News Agency, which is affiliated with the IRGC, since the beginning of Israel’s attack on Iran on 13 June, “the Israeli spy network has become highly active inside the country”. Fars reported that over the course of 12 days, Iranian intelligence and security forces arrested “more than 700 individuals linked to this network”.

Iranians have told BBC Persian they received warning text messages from Iran’s intelligence ministry informing them their phone numbers had appeared on social media pages related to Israel. They were instructed to leave these pages or face prosecution.

The Iranian government has also stepped up pressure on journalists working for Persian-language media outlets abroad, including BBC Persian and the London-based Iran International and Manoto TV.

According to Iran International, the IRGC detained the mother, father, and brother of one of its TV presenters in Tehran to pressure her into resigning over the channel’s coverage of the Iran-Israel conflict. The presenter received a phone call from her father – prompted by security agents – urging her to quit and warning of further consequences.

After the conflict began, threats directed at BBC Persian journalists and their families have become increasingly severe. According to the journalists recently affected, Iranian security officials contacting their families have claimed that, in a wartime context, they are justified in targeting family members as hostages. They have also labelled the journalists as “mohareb” — a term meaning ‘one who wages war against God’ — a charge that, under Iranian law, can carry the death penalty.

Manoto TV has reported similar incidents, including threats against employees’ families and demands to cut all ties with the outlet. Some relatives were reportedly threatened with charges such as “enmity against God” and espionage – both capital offences under Iranian law.

Analysts view these tactics as part of a broader strategy to silence dissent and intimidate exiled media workers.

Security forces have also detained dozens of activists, writers and artists, in many cases without formal charges. There are also reports of arrests targeting family members of those killed during the 2022 “Woman, Life, Freedom” anti-government protests.

These actions suggest a broader campaign aimed not only at current activists but also at those connected to previous waves of dissent.

During the war, the Iranian government severely restricted access to the internet, and even after the ceasefire, full access has not yet been restored. Limiting internet access during crises, especially during nationwide protests against the government, has become a common pattern by Iran. Additionally, most of the social networks like Instagram, Telegram, X and YouTube, as well as news websites such as BBC Persian, have long been blocked in Iran and cannot be accessed without using a Virtual Private Network (VPN) proxy service.

Human rights advocates and political observers have drawn parallels to the 1980s, when the Iranian authorities brutally suppressed political opposition during the Iran-Iraq War.

Many fear that, in the wake of its weakened international standing after the conflict with Israel, the Iranian authorities may again turn inward, resorting to mass arrests, executions, and heavy-handed repression.

Critics point to events of 1988, when, according to human rights groups, thousands of political prisoners – many already serving sentences – were executed following brief, secretive trials by so-called “death commissions.” Most victims were buried in unmarked mass graves.

Iran’s supreme leader has insisted the US “gained no achievements” from strikes on its nuclear facilities, in his first public address since a ceasefire with Israel was agreed on Tuesday.

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said the strikes did not “accomplish anything significant” to disrupt Iran’s nuclear programme, and described the retaliation against an American air base in Qatar as dealing a “heavy blow”.

It came as Washington doubled down on its assessment that the strikes had severely undermined Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth said intelligence gathered by the US and Israel indicated the operation “significantly damaged the nuclear programme, setting it back by years”.

Previously, US President Donald Trump said the strikes against three key nuclear sites inside Iran “totally obliterated” them, and has responded furiously to reports citing unnamed American officials suggesting the damage may have been less extensive than anticipated.

Speaking alongside senior general Dan Caine at a Pentagon press conference on Thursday morning, Hegseth said the mission was a “historic success” that had “rendered [Iranian] enrichment facilities inoperable”.

During an at times combative exchange with reporters, Hegseth also said the US was “not aware of any intelligence” which indicated the enriched uranium had moved out of Fordo – the deeply buried facility which the US targeted with powerful so-called bunker buster bombs – prior to the strikes.

Khamenei, who had been largely out of public view since direct conflict with Israel broke out on 13 June, released a televised address on Thursday morning, ending a week-long public silence.

The supreme leader has reportedly been sheltering in a bunker and limiting communications, which has sparked speculation about his whereabouts. Iranian authorities did not disclose where he was speaking from on Thursday, though a senior official acknowledged he was in a safe place earlier this week.

Khamenei used Thursday’s video address to threaten to carry out more strikes on US bases in the Middle East if Iran was attacked again, and declared victory over both Israel and the US.

Khamenei said Trump had “exaggerated” the impact of the nuclear site strikes, adding: “They couldn’t accomplish anything and did not achieve their objective.”

Referencing the attack on the US air base in Qatar, Khamenei said: “This incident is also repeatable in the future, and should any attack take place, the cost for the enemy and the aggressor will undoubtedly be very high.”

No one was killed during that attack, which Trump said had been flagged before it was launched. The US says the base was not damaged.

CBS News, the BBC’s US partner, reports that the White House is considering a range of options to entice Iran back to the negotiating table, including facilitating funding for a civilian, non-enrichment nuclear program.

However, Iran’s foreign minister told Iranian state TV on Thursday that there no talks with the US are planned.

Direct confrontation broke out between Iran and Israel on 13 June, after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that “if not stopped, Iran could produce a nuclear weapon in a very short time”.

A day earlier the global nuclear watchdog’s board of governors declared Iran was in breach of its non-proliferation obligations for the first time in 20 years.

Iran has maintained that its nuclear programme is for civilian purposes alone and that it had never sought to develop a nuclear weapon.

On Thursday, Iran approved a parliamentary bill calling for an end to the country’s co-operation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), meaning it is no longer committed to allowing nuclear inspectors into its sites.

Iran’s health ministry said 610 people were killed during the 12 days of air attacks, while Israeli authorities said 28 were killed in Israel.

The US became directly involved last weekend, striking facilities in Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan, before Trump sought to rapidly mediate a ceasefire between Israel and Iran, which has held since.

UN nuclear watchdog chief Rafael Grossi said on Wednesday that there was a chance Tehran had moved much of its highly enriched uranium elsewhere as it came under attack.

Japan has executed a man who murdered nine people in 2017, the first time since 2022 that the country has enacted capital punishment.

The serial killings by Takahiro Shiraishi, dubbed the “Twitter killer”, had shocked the country and triggered debate over how suicide was discussed online.

Shiraishi, then 30, lured his victims – most of them young women between the ages of 15 and 26 – to his apartment, before strangling and dismembering them.

The killings came to light in October 2017, when police found body parts in the Japanese city of Zama, near Tokyo, when they were searching for one of the victims.

Shiraishi later admitted to murdering nine suicidal victims and revealed that he got acquainted with them on Twitter, the social media platform now known as X.

He then told them he could help them die, and in some cases claimed he would kill himself alongside them.

His Twitter profile contained the words: “I want to help people who are really in pain. Please DM [direct message] me anytime.”

Nine dismembered bodies were found in coolers and tool boxes when officers visited his flat, which was dubbed by media outlets as a “house of horrors”.

While prosecutors sought the death penalty for Shiraishi, his lawyers argued for the lesser charge of “murder with consent”, claiming his victims had given their permission to be killed.

They also called for an assessment of his mental state.

Shiraishi later disputed his own defence team’s version of events and said he killed without the victims’ consent.

Hundreds of people showed up at his verdict hearing in December 2020, when he was sentenced to death.

The murders also prompted a change by Twitter, which amended its rules to state users should not “promote or encourage suicide or self-harm”.

Japan’s justice minister Keisuke Suzuki, who said he ordered Shiraishi’s execution, said the killer acted “for the genuinely selfish reason of satisfying his own sexual and financial desires”, according to an AFP report.

The case “caused great shock and anxiety to society”, Suzuki said.

Dame Anna Wintour is stepping back as editor-in-chief of American Vogue after 37 years.

The British-born fashion magnate, 75, is leaving the role she has held longer than any other editor, but will retain senior positions at its publisher.

Dame Anna will continue as Vogue’s global editorial director, as well as chief content officer for its parent company Conde Nast.

She was made a dame by the late Queen Elizabeth II for services to fashion and journalism in 2017, and was made Companion of Honour by King Charles earlier this year.

Dame Anna announced to staff on Thursday that a new role, head of editorial content, would be introduced at American Vogue.

According to an account published by the company, Dame Anna told staff she wanted to help “the next generation of impassioned editors storm the field with their own ideas” as she announced her departure from the editor-in-chief role.

She said she would continue with many of her responsibilities, and that “it goes without saying that I plan to remain Vogue’s tennis and theatre editor in perpetuity”.

Raised in London, Dame Anna was the editor of British Vogue before she took the helm at its US sister publication in 1988.

She is credited with giving American Vogue a new lease of life, turning it into one of the world’s top fashion publications and was credited with overhauling its output, including featuring less well-known models and mixing inexpensive clothes with couture.

Over her long career, Dame Anna has become one of the most recognisable and influential figures in the fashion industry.

Outside of her work with Vogue, she has also organised the Met Gala, a New York fundraiser which attracts high-profile celebrities, since 1995.

She is known for her trademark bob and dark glasses. Last December, she told the BBC’s culture editor Katie Razzall the signature shades were a “prop”, and “they help me see and they help me not see”.

Dame Anna’s tenure as editor-in-chief of US Vogue is also widely rumoured to have inspired the tyrannical but revered character of Miranda Priestly in the Devil Wears Prada – a novel by a former assistant of Wintour, Lauren Weisberger.

Earlier this year, King Charles asked Dame Anna whether she would stop working – to which she said she replied “firmly no”.

Get our flagship newsletter with all the headlines you need to start the day. Sign up here.

At least 18 Palestinians have been killed after an Israeli drone strike targeted a Hamas police unit attempting to assert control over a market in the city of Deir al-Balah in central Gaza, a doctor and eyewitnesses told the BBC.

Eyewitnesses said Israeli drones fired at members of a Hamas police force, dressed in civilian clothing and wearing masks, who were confronting vendors they accused of price gouging and selling goods looted from aid trucks.

The Hamas-run Ministry of Interior condemned the strike, accusing Israel of committing “a new crime against a police unit tasked with maintaining public order”.

The BBC has contacted the Israeli military for comment.

One eyewitness told the BBC clashes broke out on Thursday after police confronted the vendors, with the unit commander shouting: “Either sell at a fair price or we will confiscate the goods.”

Some of the vendors then “pulled out handguns and one man had a Kalashnikov”, the eyewitness said.

Israeli drones then fired two missiles, local residents said.

Video footage from the aftermath shows bodies strewn on the ground and panicked shoppers screaming, as ambulances rush to attend to those injured.

A doctor at Deir al-Balah’s Al-Aqsa Hospital told the BBC 18 bodies were brought to the morgue there. It was not immediately clear how many of those killed were police officers.

The incident came as civilians in Gaza continued to struggle to access food, with near daily shootings reported at and around US and Israel-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) distribution sites in south and central Gaza, and the limited goods available in markets selling for highly inflated prices.

The GHF – which has been accused of violating humanitarian principles by international aid groups – received a further $30m in funding on Thursday from the US, which has supported Israeli efforts to see it become the largest aid organisation in Gaza.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Thursday accused Hamas of “once again taking control of humanitarian aid… and stealing it from civilians” in northern Gaza, as he gave the military two days to devise an “action plan” to prevent this.

It came after video footage was filmed on Wednesday of a truck convoy carrying aid into northern Gaza, after entering through the Zikim gate, with armed and masked men on top.

Israel’s far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir shared the video on social media, saying Hamas was “taking control of the food and goods” and calling on Netanyahu to halt the entry of aid into Gaza.

Hamas has denied stealing or profiting from aid, and Gaza’s higher committee for tribal affairs – a non-Hamas affiliated committee created during the war – also dismissed Israel’s “false claims” in a statement on Thursday.

“The securing of aid has been carried out purely through tribal efforts,” it said.

At a warehouse in Gaza City on Thursday, thousands of aid parcels were distributed.

Hamas political officials were present but said their role was “supervisory”, with an NGO in charge of distributing some 6,000 food parcels.

“This morning, when I woke up to the message telling me to go get aid, all my children, young and old, started singing and dancing with joy. I pray to God that this blessing remains with us,” one woman waiting for food there said.

Also on Thursday, the World Health Organization (WHO) announced its first medical shipment into Gaza since 2 March had been delivered on Wednesday.

Nine trucks carrying medical supplies, 2,000 units of blood, and 1,500 units of plasma were transported without any looting “despite the high-risk conditions”, WHO’s chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said.

He added the amount was “only a drop in the ocean”.

The blood and plasma were delivered to Nasser Medical Complex for onward distribution to hospitals “facing critical shortages amid a growing influx of injuries, many linked to incidents at food distribution sites”, he said.

Before Thursday’s strike at the market, at least 14 Palestinians had been killed and dozens injured in Israeli military attacks across Gaza since midnight, a spokesperson for the Hamas-run Civil Defence said.

Rescue teams evacuated 14 bodies, including those of three Palestinians who were waiting for humanitarian aid near the Wadi Gaza bridge close to the Netzarim corridor in central Gaza.

A medical source at Al-Awda Hospital nearby confirmed that three Palestinians were killed and several others injured by Israeli gunfire near the Wadi Gaza bridge.

Witnesses said Israeli drones opened fire at a big crowd of civilians reportedly waiting for humanitarian aid at the time of the attack.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) told the BBC that overnight, a gathering was identified in an area adjacent to troops in the Netzarim corridor, and troops fired warning shots to prevent suspects from approaching them.

The IDF said it was aware of reports regarding the number of injured individuals in the area, but said an initial inquiry suggested the number does not align with the IDF’s information. However, the details of the incident are under additional review, the IDF added.

Elsewhere, five people were killed in an Israeli air strike on a school sheltering displaced families in western Gaza City.

In the Al-Mawasi area of Khan Younis, in the south of the Strip, five members of the Abu Arab family were killed when an Israeli air strike hit a tent sheltering displaced persons. Another Palestinian was also killed in a strike that hit a tent in Al-Mawasi.

Others were wounded in the strikes.

The IDF said it was looking into these reports, but requested specific coordinates and times. In general, the IDF said it was “operating to dismantle Hamas military capabilities”.

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

At least 56,259 people have been killed in Gaza since then, according to the territory’s Hamas-run health ministry.

Actor Brad Pitt’s home in Los Angeles has been ransacked by a trio of thieves.

Three suspects broke into the home in Los Feliz late on Wednesday through a front window and “ransacked the location,” according to the Los Angeles Police Department.

Police did not confirm the home belonged to the Oscar-winning actor, but the address matched that of a home Mr Pitt purchased in 2023.

Authorities said the suspects fled with stolen items, though it’s unclear what was taken. The actor was not home at the time of the burglary, US media reported.

Mr Pitt was in the UK earlier this week for the London premier of his new film F1, which is released on Friday. He was accompanied by fellow Hollywood star Tom Cruise and Lewis Hamilton, who has seven Formula One World Drivers’ Championship titles.

Authorities said the burglary happened around 22:30 local time on Wednesday.

LA police would not confirm the value of items stolen. The BBC also contacted representatives for the actor.

The large three-bedroom home sits just outside Griffith Park – which is home to the famous Hollywood Sign. It is surrounded by a large fence and greenery that shields the home from public view.

The burglary follows others reported in the city targeting other celebrities, including Nicole Kidman and Keith Urban.

Last month, a man was also arrested on stalking and vandalism charges after he allegedly rammed his vehicle into the gate of the home of Pitt’s ex-wife, Jennifer Aniston.

Get our flagship newsletter with all the headlines you need to start the day. Sign up here.

The prosecution in Sean “Diddy” Combs’s trial made its final case Thursday, arguing the music mogul used a business “kingdom”, violence, drugs and fraud to coerce women into unwanted sex acts

“You’ve learned a lot about Sean Combs,” Assistant US Attorney Christy Slavik told 12 New Yorkers on Thursday. “He’s the leader of a criminal enterprise. He doesn’t take no for an answer.”

Combs has pleaded not guilty to charges of sex trafficking, racketeering and transportation to engage in prostitution.

For four hours, Ms Slavik reviewed seven weeks of evidence, accusing Combs of manipulating women into fulfilling his sexual fantasies with employees’ help.

The rapper, wearing a cream sweater, watched, leaning back in his chair at the defence table, while his twin daughters and 85-year-old mother sat a few rows behind.

For the racketeering charges – the allegation that Mr Combs relied on a loyal network of employees to facilitate and conceal sex trafficking and other crimes – Ms Slavik reminded jurors that they needed to find Combs committed only two crimes through his “criminal enterprise”.

She alleged he committed “hundreds” with the help of his employees.

Among those crimes, she included drug trafficking – when his employees allegedly procured drugs for him and others – as well as arson, when prosecutors say he hired someone to blow up musician Kid Cudi’s car.

But the “brutal crimes at the heart of the case” were sex trafficking, Ms Slavik said, citing harrowing testimony from two of Combs’ ex girlfriends, Casandra Ventura and “Jane”.

They had testified Combs manipulated them into participating in freak-offs – having sex with a male escort while Combs watched and filmed. Combs used repeated beatings to coerce Ms Ventura into the unwanted sex acts, Ms Slavik said – a rebuttal to the defence’s main argument that Combs’ domestic violence did not amount to sex trafficking.

“The cloud of abuse was hanging over Cassie’s head – always hovering,” she said.

• Who testified in the Diddy trial?

Jurors again watched the viral 2016 video of Mr Combs beating Ms Ventura in a Los Angeles hotel hallway, attempting to drag her back to a room, allegedly after she tried to leave a freak-off.

Combs kept his head down and his daughters shifted in their seats as jurors were shown the footage, played repeatedly during ther trial.

“This is what happened when Cassie said no,” Ms Slavik told the court.

The video is particularly effective in helping prosecutors turn theoretical sex trafficking arguments into something more concrete, said Mitchell Epner, a New York-based lawyer and former prosecutor.

“The government is doing a very good job saying that these particular incidents on these particular days constituted sex trafficking,” he said.

Ms Slavik also described other ways Combs allegedly coerced the women into unwanted sex, including “plying” them with copious amounts of drugs, and in the case of Jane, refusing to pay her rent if she did not comply.

She cited texts from Jane telling the rapper she did not want to participate and that she was “in fear of losing the roof over my head”.

The prosecution was not there to “criminalize dysfunctional relationships” or criticize “unconventional sex lives”, she told jurors. Combs’ lawyers have argued he participated in a “swingers” lifestyle.

“Cassie and Jane did not want to have sex with escorts while the defendant watched,” Ms Slavik said.

The government’s summation did what it needed to do, said Anna Cominsky, associate professor at New York Law School.

“They have marshaled the evidence – walked the jury through their case and told them the significance of each piece of evidence.”

The 12 jurors could begin deliberations on Combs’ fate as soon as Friday. His lawyers are set to give closing arguments then, after which the judge will instruct the jurors on its deliberations.

Earlier this week, Combs’ legal team rested its case after about 20 minutes, introducing text messages from Jane, but calling no witnesses.

Combs faces a maximum sentence of life in prison if convicted of the most serious charges of sex trafficking and racketeering.

The Grammy Award-winning composer of the Mission: Impossible theme, Lalo Schifrin, has died aged 93, his family announced.

The Argentine musician’s son, Ryan Schifrin, confirmed his father died of complications from pneumonia on Thursday, in a statement shared with the BBC’s US partner CBS.

Schifrin was known for his unique percussive and jazzy style during a career that spanned more than six decades, with over 100 film and TV soundtracks to his name.

He was nominated for six Oscars and won four Grammys, three of which were for his most celebrated theme for the Mission: Impossible TV series in 1966, which he later updated for the Tom Cruise blockbuster film franchise.

Schifrin’s family said he “passed peacefully” surrounded by loved ones and thanked the public for their moving messages of support.

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences paid tribute to the musician’s “genius” compositions which “built tension, ignited adrenaline and gave stories their pulse”.

“We’ll forever remember the composer who turned every beat into a thrill, and every silence into suspense,” it said in a post on X.

The prolific artist – a composer, pianist and conductor – was a consistent nominee at the Oscars with scores for films such as The Sting II, Cool Hand Luke, The Amityville Horror and Dirty Harry.

In 2018, Schifrin received an honorary lifetime achievement Oscar presented by Dirty Harry lead Clint Eastwood, who hailed his “unique musical style, his compositional integrity, and his influential contributions to the art of film scoring”.

When accepting the honour, the Argentine musician said composing for film had given him “a lifetime of joy and creativity” and the award was “a culmination of a dream”.

“It is a Mission: Accomplished,” he said at the time.

Born into a musical family in Buenos Aires, Schifrin studied classical piano as a child before moving to Paris in his early 20s to play jazz – later sharing the stage with famous artists such as Dizzy Gillespie, Ella Fitzgerald and Count Basie.

After a move to America, he began writing for Hollywood with an eccentric blend of musical genres including jazz, classical, contemporary and pop.

His most unforgettable melody for Mission: Impossible was written in an unusual 5/4 time signature and, in his words, was intended to inject “a little humour, lightness” to form a theme “that didn’t take itself too seriously”.

The result became a global earworm to introduce one of the most successful film franchises, with the latest iteration Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning crossing $540m (£393m) worldwide.

One of the two charismatic criminals involved in the kidnapping that gave the world the term “Stockholm syndrome” has died aged 78, his family has said.

Clark Olofsson – who rose to global notoriety in 1973 following a kidnapping and bank robbery in the Swedish capital – died following a lengthy illness, his family told online media outlet Dagens ETC.

During a six-day siege, Olofsson’s hostages began to sympathise with him and his accomplice, defending their actions while growing more hostile to the police outside.

The incident lends its name to a theorised psychological condition whereby kidnap victims develop affections for their captors.

• What is Stockholm syndrome?

The notorious bank siege was instigated by another man, Jan-Erik Olsson. After seizing three women and a man hostage, he demanded Olofsson – who he had previously befriended in prison – be brought to the bank from jail.

Swedish authorities agreed to his demand, and Olofsson entered the bank, which was surrounded by police.

Years later, in an interview with the Aftonbladet newspaper, he claimed he was asked to work as an inside man to keep the captives safe in exchange for a reduced sentence, but accused officials of not honouring the agreement.

Olofsson persuaded one of the hostages, Kristin Enmark, to speak to the Swedish prime minister on the phone on behalf of the robbers.

She begged to be allowed to leave the bank in a getaway car with the kidnappers, telling him: “I fully trust Clark and the robber… They haven’t done a thing to us.”

She went on: “On the contrary, they have been very nice… Believe it or not but we’ve had a really nice time here.”

Over the course of several phone calls, Enmark said she feared her captors would be harmed by police and repeatedly defended their actions.

In her memoir, she said of Olofsson: “He promised that he would make sure nothing happened to me and I decided to believe him. I was 23 years old and feared for my life.”

The hostage situation ended after six days when police officers broke through the roof and used tear gas to subdue the pair.

Initially, hostages refused to leave their captors over fears they would be shot by police. The hostages also later refused to testify against Olofsson and Olsson.

Experts have since debated whether Stockholm syndrome is an actual psychiatric condition, with some arguing it is a defence mechanism to cope with traumatic situations.

The term was coined in the aftermath of the siege by Swedish criminologist and psychiatrist Nils Bejerot to explain the seemingly irrational affection some captives felt for their hostage-takers.

The theory reached a wider audience the following year when Californian newspaper heiress Patty Hearst was kidnapped by revolutionary militants.

Speaking on the BBC’s Sideways podcast in 2021, Enmark rubbished the concept of Stockholm syndrome, saying: “It’s a way of blaming the victim. I did what I could to survive.”

Olofsson was a repeat offender and spent much of his life in prison. He was released for the last time in 2018 after serving a sentence for a drug offence in Belgium.

In 2022, actor Bill Skarsgård portrayed him in the Netflix drama series Clark.

At his 1,200-person cleaning business in Maryland, chief executive Victor Moran carefully screens new recruits to make sure they are authorised to work in the US.

Even so, President Donald Trump’s crackdown on immigrants is starting to chip away at his workforce.

About 15 people have left his company, Total Quality, since Trump won a fight to strip immigrants from Venezuela and Nicaragua from temporary protections shielding them from deportation, he says.

If the White House expands its efforts, it could cost him hundreds more of his workers, who rely on similar work permits and would be difficult to replace.

Similar kinds of concerns are reverberating at businesses across the US, as Trump’s deportation drive appears to pick up pace, threatening to choke off a supply of workers that is increasingly critical to the US economy.

Nearly one in five workers in the US was an immigrant last year, according to census data. That marked a record high in data going back decades, up from less than 10% in 1994.

Trump has said he is targeting people in the US illegally, who account for an estimated 4% of the US workforce. His pledge to conduct mass deportations was a centrepiece of his campaign and an issue on which he drew widespread support, including many Hispanic voters.

His administration has resumed raids at workplaces, a tactic that had been suspended under Biden.

But White House efforts have been much broader in scope, taking aim at people in the US on student visas; suspending admissions of refugees; and moving to revoke temporary work permits and other protections that had been granted to immigrants by previous presidents.

The actions threaten disruption to millions of people, many of whom have lived and worked in the US for years.

“We are terrified,” says Justino Gomez, who is originally from El Salvador and has lived in the US for three decades.

The 73-year-old is authorised to work under a programme known as TPS, which grants temporary work permits and protection from deportation, based on conditions in immigrants’ home countries.

His employment, first as a dishwasher and line cook in a restaurant and now as a cleaner, helped him send an adopted daughter in El Salvador to school to become a teacher.

But Trump has already taken steps to end the programme for people from Haiti and Venezuela. Mr Gomez, who lives in Maryland, fears El Salvador could be next.

“Every time I leave home, I have this stress on my mind,” he tells the BBC, through a translator provided by his labour union, 32BJ SEIU. “Even when I go to the metro, I’m afraid that ICE will be there waiting to abduct us.”

Many of Trump’s actions have been subject to legal challenge, including a lawsuit over TPS brought by the SEIU.

But even if the White House does not successfully ramp up arrests and deportations, analysts say his crackdown could weigh on the economy in the near-term, as it scares people like Mr Gomez into hiding and slows arrivals.

Growth in the workforce, which has been powered by immigrants, has already flattened since January, when Trump took office.

As firms have a harder time finding workers, it will limit their ability to grow, slowing the economy, warns economist Giovanni Peri of University of California, Davis.

A smaller workforce could also feed inflation, by forcing firms to pay more to recruit staff.

If the policies are sustained, they could have far-reaching economic consequences, Prof Peri adds. He points to the example of Japan, which has seen its economy shrink as it keeps a lid on immigration and the population ages.

“The undocumented raids are a piece of a policy that really wants to transform the United States from one of the places where immigrants come, are integrated and part of the success of society to a closed country,” he says.

“Instead of an engine of growth, it will become a more stagnant and slow growing and less dynamic economy.”

Many firms say it is already hard to find people to fill the jobs available.

Adam Lampert, the chief executive of Texas-based Cambridge Caregivers and Manchester Care Homes, which provides assisted living and in-home care, says about 80% of his 350 staff are foreign-born.

“I don’t go out and place ads for non-citizens to fill our roles,” he says. “It is the immigrants who are answering the call.”

Like Mr Moran, he said Trump’s moves had already cost him some workers, who had been authorised to work on temporary permits.

He said he was also worried about the ripple effects of Trump’s crackdown on his business, which in some ways competes with undocumented workers employed directly by families to provide care.

He said if those workers are forced out, it will drive up demand for his own staff – forcing him to pay more, and ultimately raise his rates.

“We’re going to have incredible inflation if you scrape all these people out of the economy,” he warned. “We can’t do without these people in the workforce.”

At Harris Health System, a major hospital network in Texas, Trump’s policy changes have already led to the loss of some workers, says chief executive Esmail Porsa.

He says training American workers to fill the jobs available in his sector would take years, given the rising needs.

“As the population is getting older and we are clamping down on one viable source of current and future workforce, this issue will come to a head,” he says.

Trump last week acknowledged the disruption his policies were creating for sectors that rely heavily on undocumented labour, such as hospitality and agriculture, even reportedly pausing workplace raids in some industries temporarily after receiving blowback from fellow Republicans.

But despite the concerns about the economic impact, Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin told the BBC that such raids remain a “cornerstone” of their efforts.

In the homebuilding industry, firms across the country are reporting seeing some work crews stop showing up for work, which will slow construction and raise costs in a sector where prices are already a concern, says Jim Tobin, president of the National Association of Homebuilders, which represents businesses in the sector.

The industry has called on Congress to reform immigration laws, including creating a special visa programme for construction workers.

But Mr Tobin says he was not expecting big changes to immigration policy anytime soon.

“I think it’s going to take a signal from the president about when it’s time to engage,” he says. “Right now it’s all about enforcement.”

Parents in several Indian cities, including capital Delhi, are protesting against what they call “unsustainable” fee raises by private schools. These increases, they say, are stretching household budgets to a breaking point and taking a toll on their children.

Aaditya Mattey, 14, woke up on 9 May feeling confident about his English exam.

His father dropped him off at his school in Indian capital Delhi, but Aaditya never got to write his exam.

“Two or three minutes after I entered the class, guards and bouncers asked me to leave the room,” Aaditya recalls.

His father was still standing outside the school gates when Aaditya and a few other students were asked to get on the school bus, which dropped them off at their homes.

Aaditya’s name was removed from Delhi Public School Dwarka’s rolls after his father refused to pay a recent fee hike which he alleges was arbitrary and unauthorised.

The BBC reached out to DPS Dwarka and the Delhi Public School Society – which runs the DPS chain of schools – for comment, but did not receive a response.

Aaditya’s case is not an isolated one and DPS is not the only school which is facing allegations of arbitrary fee increase.

Over the past two months, protests have erupted across Indian cities – from Delhi to Pune to Hyderabad – as a growing number of parents accuse private schools of imposing steep fee raises.

In Delhi, which has emerged as the epicentre of the protests, the issue recently made headlines after DPS Dwarka allegedly confined students in the library, hired security guards to stop them from entering classes and expelled them over unpaid dues. Parents have accused the school of punishing children for financial decisions made by their families.

Government-run schools operate nationwide but often suffer from poor, inconsistent quality, prompting even many low-income families to choose private schools for better opportunities.

In Delhi, rules say that private schools on government-leased land must get Directorate of Education (DoE) approval before raising fees and must admit 25% economically weaker or disadvantaged students – a condition tied to their subsidised leases.

The BBC has contacted the DoE for comment on the fee rises, which parents have reported to us, but has not received a response.

Schools, on the other hand, have argued in court and told parents that they are struggling. They cite inflation, rising staff salaries, delayed reimbursements from the government for economically weaker students and the need for infrastructure upgrades as reasons for raising fees.

Divya Mattey says his son Aaditya’s annual fee in 2020 was 93,400 rupees ($1,077; £802). This, he says, has more than doubled to 189,096 rupees in 2025-26.

Mr Mattey is among dozens of parents who have taken the school to court, alleging it has unlawfully removed students from rolls and harassed families over the fee issue.

“We never thought a school of this stature would treat children like this – bar them from classrooms, assign bouncers and make them sit in the library for days,” he says.

The school did not answer the BBC’s questions over email and on a phone call. But in court, it reportedly argued that there was no legal obligation to retain students whose fees haven’t been paid. According to a report in The Indian Express newspaper, DPS claimed it suffered losses of 490m rupees last year and had to raise fees.

A notice on the school’s website meanwhile accuses “a small group of parents” of spreading “false and malicious information regarding the school fee structure” in an attempt to “mislead and create confusion”.

But the controversy reflects a broader problem.

A recent survey by online community platform LocalCircles found that more than 80% of parents with children in private schools said fees had increased by over 10% this academic year. In cities like Delhi, Mumbai and Bengaluru, the rise in some schools was as high as 30%.

India has no centralised regulation for private schools; each state sets its own rules.

For example, Maharashtra allows a 15% fee rise every two years – subject to review if 25% of parents object – while Karnataka permits a 10% annual increase with audit justification. Enforcement, however, is weak, and legal disputes over fees often drag on for years, providing little timely relief to families.

Gagandeep Singh, whose son attends Mira Model School in West Delhi, says fees rose 45% last year and over 10% this year.

Singh is willing to pay the earlier DoE-approved fee, but says the school has refused his cheque for the current term, which began nearly three months ago.

The BBC reached out to Mira Model School but received no response.

“It’s not our job to regulate schools,” Mr Singh says. “That’s what the government is supposed to do.”

Meanwhile, many parents fear that the DPS case has set a troubling precedent.

“We don’t want our children to be thrown out of their classes, like what happened there,” says Pankaj Gupta, whose son studies at Delhi’s Maharaja Agarsain Public School.

Mr Gupta said the school increased fees by 25% this year without advance notice.

“We had no choice. We had to pay,” he added.

Mr Gupta runs a small convenience store but has faced declining sales since the pandemic. The rise of online shopping has further squeezed physical stores. Now, rising school fees are pushing his family to the brink.

The BBC has reached out to Maharaja Agarsain Public School for comment.

Another parent, who wanted to remain anonymous, said she’s considering withdrawing her son from the school he attended since childhood due to an “unsustainable” 30% fee hike this year.

“Both my husband and I work, but our salaries haven’t gone up significantly. As a parent, you try to give your child the best but sometimes that comes at great personal cost,” she said.

But she admits that switching schools also feels risky – what if the next one also increases fees?

“It’s the same situation everywhere,” she said.

The uproar has prompted the Delhi government to act.

On 10 June the state cabinet approved the Delhi School Education (Transparency in Fixation and Regulation of Fees) Ordinance, 2025, pending the Lieutenant Governor’s approval – necessary for it to become a law.

Though not yet public, Education Minister Ashish Sood says it will tighten private school fee regulations.

But parents are demanding greater transparency. Last weekend, hundreds protested in Delhi, urging the government to consider their feedback when drafting the bill.

Shikha Sharma Bagga, Supreme Court lawyer and secretary of a group called Justice for All, urges timely audits: “Schools’ finances must be audited before each academic year so parents know what they’re paying for.”

Back in Dwarka, Aaditya is still trying to get back to class.

Media reports say DPS Dwarka has agreed to reinstate students expelled for not paying fees. But Mr Mattey says they are still waiting.

“The school has shown some reciprocation, but to this date my child’s name is not back on the register,” he says, adding that he hasn’t received any assignments for the current academic session.

“My son is only 14. He should be focusing on his studies, not worrying about whether he’ll be allowed to sit in class tomorrow.”

Kenya has been hit by a recent wave of repression, tarnishing its reputation as a beacon of democracy in East Africa.

Critics fear that it is sliding down the path of her neighbours – Uganda and Tanzania, both of which are notorious for cracking down on dissent.

Kenya’s laws are widely regarded as being more progressive – particularly in protecting fundamental freedoms like the right to protest.

But Kenya has witnessed an increasing crackdown on protests – the latest example being the killing of at least 10 people in nationwide demonstrations against President William Ruto’s government while it attempted to ban live TV and radio coverage of the protests.

“Rogue Regime” – declared the headline of Kenya’s respected Standard newspaper as it pointed out that young people had flooded the streets in defiant remembrance of those gunned down a year ago in mass anti-tax demonstrations but “Instead of a listening ear they were met with razor wire, armoured trucks and the cold grip of repression”.

But as far as Interior Minister Kipchumba Murkomen is concerned, the police showed “remarkable restraint” as they foiled an “attempted coup”.

“We condemn the criminal anarchists who in the name of peaceful demonstrations unleashed a wave of violence, looting, sexual assault and destruction upon our people,” he said, accusing the protesters of attacking police stations and injuring 300 officers.

However, the Law Society of Kenya (LSK) condemned the police for their handling of the protest.

“The unnecessary aggression and brute force that culminated in the senseless loss of life and senseless destruction of property have no place in a free democratic society,” it said.

The crackdown came just weeks after a 31-year-old blogger and teacher, Albert Ojwang, died in police custody. He was arrested after being accused of defaming a senior police officer – and died in detention of assault wounds, an autopsy found.

His death triggered a small protest in the capital, Nairobi, which police clamped down on and a street vendor, who was caught in the crossfire – shot at close-range, is fighting for his life in hospital.

The LSK denounced his shooting as unbefitting for “any sane democracy”.

Its comment brought into sharp focus the fact that Kenya risks losing its status as a democracy that many Tanzanians and Ugandans envied – and drew inspiration from.

Tanzanian political analyst Nicodemus Minde said there had long been an “appreciation” among Tanzanians of the ability of Kenyans to “speak truth to power”.

It was a view shared by Tanzania’s main opposition leader Tundu Lissu who told the BBC last year that “We have not pressed hard enough for democratic reform”.

“What Kenya did to build its democratic space is something we need to do,” he said.

Having miraculously survived an assassination attempt after being shot 16 times in 2017, Lissu has become a symbol of state repression in Tanzania.

He is currently in detention, charged with treason for rallying his supporters under the slogan “No reform; no elections”.

The government saw this as an attempt by Lissu to launch a rebellion – and he risks being sentenced to death if convicted.

The 57-year-old opposition leader sees his detention as an attempt by the Chama Cha Mapinduzi (CCM) party – which has been in power since independence in 1961– to clear its path to victory in presidential and parliamentary elections scheduled for October.

This perception has been strengthened by the fact that his Chadema party has been barred from contesting the poll after it refused to sign an electoral code of conduct that it believed would undermine its right to campaign freely.

The opposition in Uganda sees itself in a similar situation, pointing out that President Yoweri Museveni has been in power for almost 40 years, and – along with his son, Muhoozi Kainerugaba, who heads the army – is cracking down on political rivals in the build-up to elections in early 2026.

Ugandan opposition politician Kizza Besigye has been in detention since November, with the government wanting to try him for treason in a military court after accusing him of plotting to overthrow the government – a charge he denies.

Although Kenya has an independent judiciary and holds regular elections that lead to power changing hands, Martha Karua – one of the country’s most respected human rights lawyers, a former justice minister and the leader of a small opposition party – believes that democracy is under threat in all three East African states.

“We are staring at a regional crisis – not at an economic crisis, not a crisis of trade, but of democracy itself,” she said at a recent press conference.

Activists like her are alarmed by the fact that more than 80 Kenyans have been abducted in the past year by people who never identified themselves, raising fears that this was the government’s latest strategy to crush dissent after the protests over moves to increase taxes amidst a cost-of-living crisis.

There is also mounting evidence that Kenya is no longer a safe haven for Ugandans and Tanzanians, with security agencies from the three states apparently colluding to crack down on the opposition.

Besigye was in Nairobi for a book launch in November, when he vanished – only to surface four days later in a military court in Uganda.

The government in Uganda accused him of trying to negotiate an arms deal in Kenya to launch a rebellion back home and said he had been arrested in a cross-border operation carried out with the knowledge of Kenya’s intelligence services.

Kenya’s government initially denied this, saying it was unaware of the Ugandan operation on its soil, although Kenya’s foreign minister recently told local media that “there were certain issues” about Besigye’s visit in Kenya and “he had to go”. He did not elaborate.

About two months after Besigye’s ordeal, exiled Tanzanian activist Maria Sarungi Tsehai said she was abducted by armed men in Nairobi who then, luckily for her, released her several hours later.

Ms Tsehai said she was manhandled and choked by four assailants who forced her into a vehicle.

“I am sure that the reason for the abduction was to get access to my social media and [because of] the whistleblowing job that I do,” she said, as her abductors kept asking how to unlock her phone.

Ms Tsehai is a staunch critic of Tanzania’s President Samia Suluhu Hassan, and has accused her government of bringing “tyranny back” to the country, despite promising reforms when she took office in 2021 following the death of her authoritarian predecessor, John Magufuli.

Karua said that despite the “backsliding” of democracy and human rights in East Africa, there was little concern about this internationally, with the African Union “silent”, the United Nations offering “rhetoric – not redress”, while the US – “a self-declared champion of liberty” – was facing its “own issues of liberty” under the administration of President Donald Trump.

Tanzania deported Karua and two Kenyan activists when they flew into the country in May to show solidarity with Lissu, while Kenyan activist Boniface Mwangi and Ugandan lawyer Agather Atuhaire were detained after being allowed to enter.

Following their release, both accused the Tanzanian police of sexually abusing them.

Tanzania’s police denied the accusation, however amidst the outcry over the detention and deportation of foreign activists, President Samia issued a stark warning.

“If they have been contained in their country, let them not come here to meddle. Let’s not give them a chance. They have already created chaos in their own country,” she said.

To the dismay of activists, Kenya’s President Ruto failed to condemn the alleged abuse and instead, apologised to the Tanzanian government.

“To our neighbours from Tanzania, if we have wronged you in any way, forgive us,” he said.

“If there is anything that Kenyans have done that is not right, we want to apologise.”

Macharia Munene, a Kenyan professor in international relations, told the BBC that Ruto’s apology stemmed from his “perceived failure to keep people [Kenyans] in check”.

He added that the Tanzanian government had become “jittery” of the potential influence of Kenyan activists on the October elections, with Ruto’s government under pressure to “contain troublemakers”.

For Kenyan activists the worsening repression in the three states has merely strengthened their resolve to fight back.

Mr Mwangi, one of Kenya’s most prominent human rights campaigners, summed it up by saying: “If these people are united in oppressing their citizens, then we must be united in fighting to remove them from power.”

• ‘We live in fear’ – forced expulsions taint Kenya’s safe haven image
• BBC identifies security forces who shot Kenya anti-tax protesters
• Could this be the end of the road for Tanzania’s great survivor, Tundu Lissu?
• Why Kenya’s president has so many nicknames
• Uganda’s Yoweri Museveni: How an ex-rebel has stayed in power for 35 year

When the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) announced last month that it would disband and end its decades-long insurgency against Turkey, Leila hoped she might soon be reunited with her son.

Three years ago, the former sandwich seller left home to join the group – proscribed as a terrorist organisation by Turkey, the US, UK and EU – in the remote Qandil Mountains, near Iraq’s border with Iran.

Apart from two videos he’s sent, the last in March, Leila hasn’t seen him since.

“When I first heard about the announcement I was very happy,” says Leila, whose name we have changed because she fears reprisals from the group.

“But as time has passed, nothing has changed.”

For 40 years the PKK has been at war with Turkey in a conflict that has killed more than 40,000 people, many of them civilians, and is one of the longest-running in the world.

Some families the BBC spoke to bitterly condemned the PKK, while others spoke proudly of how family members had died fighting for the group and felt this sacrifice had paved the way for peace talks.

The PKK’s announcement that it would stop fighting was seen as a historic moment for Turkey, its Kurdish minority, and neighbouring countries into which the conflict has spilled over.

But since then, no formal peace process with Turkey has begun and there is no official ceasefire in place, with reports of killing continuing on both sides.

Initially set up with the aim of fighting for an independent Kurdish state in Turkey, the PKK has, since the 1990s, shifted focus to demand greater cultural and political autonomy for the Kurds.

Leila, who lives in the semi-autonomous Kurdistan Region of Iraq, which borders Turkey, says she hadn’t even heard of the PKK until her son, an Iraqi-Kurd in his twenties, came home one day talking about the group’s ideologies.

She accuses the group of “brainwashing” her son, convincing him they were defending the ethnic Kurdish minorities in Turkey, Iraq, Syria and Iran. The Kurds are the fourth largest ethnic group in the Middle East but do not have a nation state.

Leila says over time her son started to become more independent, making his bed, washing his clothes and doing the dishes. She now believes the PKK was preparing him for the tough life he would soon be living in the mountains.

On the day he left, he came home with three “comrades” to tell his mother he was going to the mountains to begin six months of training.

She says she repeatedly tried to dissuade him from joining the PKK but he was determined to go.

“He was so determined. Arguing with him would have been of no use.”

Since then, Leila says she has regularly visited the Qandil Mountains in the hope of catching a glimpse of her son, but has never seen him.

“If they just let me see him once a year, I would be happy,” she says.

The BBC travelled to the Qandil Mountains, having been granted rare access by the PKK to film there.

The mountains, which are sparsely populated and known for their natural beauty, help shield thousands of PKK fighters from Turkish air strikes.

The journey took hours of driving up narrow, bumpy roads, in an area where there are few signs of inhabitation apart from a handful of farmers and shepherds.

As the BBC approached a PKK checkpoint, we saw large pictures of the group’s leader and founding member Abdullah Ocalan – imprisoned by Turkey in solitary confinement since 1999 – displayed across the mountains. But when the BBC reached the checkpoint, the PKK denied us entry.

We were later told by PKK authorities that talks are underway with the group and they did not want media attention.

They did not say what the talks were about, though Iraq’s Foreign Minister Fuad Mohammed Hussein last month told the BBC discussions would be taking place with the PKK, Turkey, Iraq and the Kurdistan Regional Government to discuss how the group’s weapons will be handed over.

So far, the terms of a possible peace deal between Turkey and the PKK are unknown.

The PKK told the BBC in a written statement that it is sincere and serious about the process, insisting its leader, Ocalan, must be freed.

“The ball is now in Turkey’s court. A peace process cannot develop based on unilateral steps,” said Zagros Hiwa, the spokesman for the PKK-linked Kurdistan Democratic Communities Union (KCK), an umbrella group of regional Kurdish organisations.

But in a possible sign of the hurdles ahead, a senior local commander, who’s part of the second line of leadership within the group in Iraq, told the BBC in a written statement that in his view disarmament is “not up for discussion”.

Still suspicious about Turkey’s intentions, he adds that “when we address the reasons of the armed conflict, weapons will be of no use for both sides”.

Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s apparent willingness to bring an end to the conflict with the PKK has been interpreted by some as a bid to attract Kurdish support for a new constitution to extend his 22-year-rule, which he denies.

He has described the PKK’s decision to disband as an important step towards “our goal of a Turkey without terrorism”.

Writing on X, the Turkish president said a new era was about to begin after “the elimination of terror and violence”.

For some families whose loved ones were killed fighting for the PKK, the idea the conflict might soon end is bitter-sweet.

Kawa Takoor was 21 when he was killed two years ago. His sister, Rondek Takoor, who lives in Iraqi Kurdish city of Sulaimaniya, last saw him in the Qandil Mountains in 2019.

Speaking from the family home, where photos of Kawa adorn the living room walls, Rondek says her brother’s death changed the family’s life. “I always dream about him,” she says with tearful eyes.

Rondek, who is in her twenties, still remembers the last conversation they had together.

“I asked him if he would like to go back home with me and he said ‘never’. He even asked me to join him in the mountains,” she says.

For Rondek and her family, who are pro-PKK, the group disbanding would be both a moment of “pride and pain, especially after our huge loss”.

She believes that “it’s the sacrifices we’ve made and the martyrs we’ve lost, that paved the way for leaders to talk peace”.

What happens next is uncertain.

There are questions about what would happen to thousands of Turkish PKK fighters and whether they would be allowed to reintegrate into Turkish society.

Turkish officials have yet to say whether these fighters will be treated as criminals and face prosecution. But Turkish media reports have suggested fighters who haven’t committed crimes in Turkey could return without fear of prosecution, though PKK leaders might be forced into exile to other countries or required to stay in Iraq.

It is also unclear what the group disbanding would mean for other Kurdish groups, notably in north-east Syria, which Turkey regards as being off-shoots of the PKK.

During the Syrian civil war, Turkish forces and Turkish-backed Syrian fighters launched a series of offensives to capture border areas held by a Syrian Kurdish militia called the People’s Protection Units (YPG).

The YPG dominates an alliance of Kurdish and Arab militias called the Syrian Democratic Forces, which drove the Islamic State group out of a quarter of Syria with the help of a US-led multinational coalition.

The YPG says it is a distinct entity from the PKK, but Turkey rejects that and proscribes it as a terrorist organisation.

Erdogan has said the PKK’s decision to disband should “cover all extensions of the organisation in Northern Iraq, Syria and Europe”. SDF commander Mazloum Abdi said the PKK’s decision would “pave the way for a new political and peaceful process in the region”.

However, he has also said that the PKK’s disarmament does not apply to the SDF, which signed a separate deal to merge with the Syrian armed forces in December.

In Iran, the PJAK group, which is also part of the KCK, has told BBC Turkish that it supports the “new process” in Turkey, but that it is not planning to disarm or disband itself.

PJAK is designated as a terrorist organisation by Turkey and Iran. There has been a de facto ceasefire between the group and the Iranian government since 2011.

Turkey says the PJAK is the Iranian arm of the PKK, but the Kurdish groups deny this.

For mothers like Leila, all the complexities of politics and the intricate balance of military powers across the region are irrelevant. What she cares about is having her son with her again.

“He will come back home when he gets tired of the harsh life in the mountains, at some point he will realise that he can take it no more.”

If this happens, Leila plans to leave their home city where her son was recruited by the PKK.

“This city has brought me nothing but pain.”

Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough may not be a household name, but the so-called referee of the Senate has found herself at the centre of a firestorm after she objected to several parts of US President Donald Trump’s mega-sized tax bill.

The 1,000-page document, which he’s dubbed the “big beautiful bill”, would slash spending and extend tax cuts.

But Ms MacDonough has said that certain provisions violate Senate rules, throwing billions of dollars of cuts into doubt.

Her findings have also made it difficult for Congress to pass the bill by 4 July – a deadline set by the president himself.

Now, some Republicans are calling for the Senate to ignore her recommendations – going against long-standing tradition – or to fire her.

Earlier this month, the House of Representatives narrowly passed a massive spending bill that included cuts to low-income health insurance programme Medicaid, reforms to the food assistance programme SNAP, and a measure to end taxes on tips and overtime pay.

That version then went to the Senate, where both Republicans and Democrats wanted adjustments made.

The US Senate has spent recent weeks debating changes and writing a new version of the bill.

• A look at the key items in Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill’
• ‘Our food doesn’t even last the month’ – Americans brace for Trump’s welfare cuts

Legislators are now racing against the clock to deliver the bill to Trump’s desk by 4 July.

Republicans maintain a majority in both the House and the Senate, which should make it easy to pass legislation. But leadership in both chambers has struggled to get consensus on a number of provisions – particularly on social programs like Medicaid – from competing factions within the party.

The Senate parliamentarian’s job is to decide whether a bill complies with budget rules.

Ms MacDonough – the first woman to hold the role – has held the position since 2012. Before that, she spent 25 years as a Senate staffer and worked for the Justice Department.

While she was appointed by former Democratic Senator Harry Reid, she has served Senates controlled by both Republicans and Democrats.

In 2021, multiple Democratic legislators called on the Senate to overrule Ms MacDonough when she said a minimum wage increase could not be included in a policy bill at the time.

People serving as the Senate parliamentarian have been fired before, too.

In 2001, the Senate majority leader at the time fired then Senate parliamentarian, Robert Dove, after one of Dove’s rulings on a bill infuriated Republicans.

Several of the provisions Republican senators have proposed violate the Byrd Rule, she said, which is a 1985 rule the Senate adopted that says “extraneous” provisions cannot be tacked onto “reconciliation” bills.

The budget bill is a reconciliation bill, which means it does not need a 60-vote supermajority to pass the Senate. Reconciliation bills tell the government how to spend money, not how to issue policy, the Byrd rule says.

Because of these rules, Republicans can avoid a Democratic filibuster on the bill and pass it with a simple majority.

But as Ms MacDonough has examined the text she has found a number of places where the reconciliation bill tries to change policy.

Among the provisions Ms MacDonough has ruled against is a plan that would cap states’ ability to collect more federal Medicaid funding through healthcare provider taxes and a measure that would have made it harder to enforce contempt findings against the Trump administration.

And more rulings could come as she continues to examine the large bill.

Some Republicans, like Alabama Senator Tommy Tuberville, are not pleased with her rulings and have gone as far as calling for her to be fired.

“President Trump’s landslide victory was a MANDATE from 77 million Americans,” he wrote on X on Thursday. “The One Big Beautiful Bill delivers on that mandate. The Parliamentarian is trying to UNDERMINE the President’s mandate and should be fired.”

Kansas Senator Roger Marshall urged his party to pass a resolution to term limit the parliamentarian.

He noted in a social media post that the Senate parliamentarian was fired during reconciliation in 2001: “It’s 2025 during reconciliation & we need to again fire the Senate Parliamentarian.”

Texas Senator John Cornyn said Republicans should not let “an unelected Senate staffer” stop the party from passing the bill.

Such a move by Republicans could set a precedent for Democrats, however, whose past legislative priorities also have been thwarted by the parliamentarian’s rulings. When the party held the majority in 2022, they came two votes from scrapping the filibuster rule in order to pass voting rights legislation – and overriding or dismissing the parliamentarian would be a different means to achieve a similar procedural objective.

But Senate Republican Leader John Thune, of South Dakota, does not seem to agree with calls to oust her.

Thune, who is the chief spokesperson for the party in the chamber, told reporters on Capitol Hill on Thursday he would not overrule Ms MacDonough.

Instead, he described the senate referee’s rulings as “speed bumps”, and said his party had other options to reach Republican-promised budget cuts, namely rewriting the bill.

Thune had previously said a vote on the bill was expected on Friday, though it remains unclear if Republicans can agree on a bill to move to the floor for a vote by then.

Once the bill passes the Senate, it goes back to the House for approval. Some Republicans in the House have already indicated their displeasure with the Senate’s edits to the bill.

After the bill passes both houses, then it can go to Trump’s desk.

Karoline Leavitt, White House Press Secretary, said the Trump administration is sticking by the 4 July deadline.

“This is part of the process, this is part of the inner workings of the United States Senate, but the president is adamant about seeing this bill on his desk here at the White House by Independence Day,” she said referring to the parliamentarian’s rulings.

Rama Duwaji, a 27-year-old artist and animator, has been thrust into the spotlight as her husband Zohran Mamdani this week became the likely Democratic candidate for mayor of New York City.

Ms Duwaji is a New York-based artist with Syrian roots whose work often explores Middle Eastern themes. Her work has appeared on BBC News, and in The New York Times, The Washington Post, Vice and London’s Tate Modern museum.

“Rama isn’t just my wife; she’s an incredible artist who deserves to be known on her own terms,” Mamdani wrote in a post on 12 May, announcing they had been married three months earlier.

“Omg she’s real,” Ms Duwaji joked in a comment on that post.

Ms Duwaji was rarely seen during her husband’s primary election campaign to lead the most populous US city, leading opponents to claim that the 33-year-old state assemblyman was “hiding” his wife.

Her absence was notable, given that US candidates often put their spouses on full display to show off their commitment to family values.

Mamdani, a 33-year-old democratic socialist, declared a stunning victory in the Democratic party’s primary on Tuesday, defeating his main rival and political veteran Andrew Cuomo who previously served as state governor.

Mamdani addressed the criticism over his wife’s absence in his May post, which included a series of photos showing their marriage at the New York City Clerk’s office.

“If you take a look at Twitter today, or any day for that matter, you know how vicious politics can be,” he wrote.

“I usually brush it off, whether it’s death threats or calls for me to be deported. But it’s different when it’s about those you love…. You can critique my views, but not my family.”

After results from the Democratic primary came in earlier this week, she took to her own Instagram page to post black-and-white photos of the couple embracing with the caption “couldn’t possibly be prouder”.

The couple met on dating app Hinge, “so there is still hope in those dating apps,” the candidate said in an interview for The Bulwark last week.

“Before their civil ceremony in New York City, Zohran and his wife celebrated their engagement in Dubai last year – where her family lives – with a small, joyful ceremony surrounded by their loved ones,” the Mamdani campaign said in a statement.

Photos posted by a florist in Dubai showed the Dubai city skyline in the background, as the couple stood on the rooftop where they held a traditional Islamic wedding ceremony known as a nikah.

Ms Duwaji graduated from Virginia Commonwealth University before earning a master’s degree in illustration from the School of Visual Arts in New York City.

“Using drawn portraiture and movement, Rama examines the nuances of sisterhood and communal experiences,” Ms Duwaji’s professional website reads.

Much of her work is in black and white, and depicts scenes from the Arab world. Ms Duwaji herself was born in Texas and is ethnically Syrian, a campaign spokesman told the New York Times on Wednesday.

In 2022, her works appeared in the BBC World Service documentary “Who killed my grandfather” that investigated the assassination of a Yemeni politician in 1974.

Some of her works listed on Instagram criticise “American imperialism,” what she called Israeli war crimes and denounce the “ethnic cleansing” of Palestinians, mirroring some of her husband’s policy positions. Israel emphatically denies accusations of genocide in Gaza.

Her works also show support for Mahmoud Khalil, a Columbia University graduate that the Trump administration is seeking to deport over claims that his work advocating for Palestinians amounts to “antisemitism” towards Jews.

The Brooklyn-based artist spent most of the coronavirus pandemic in Dubai, where her family lives, she said in an April interview with website YUNG.

In that interview, she was asked about recent events in the Middle East, the return to the White House of Donald Trump and sharp uptick in immigration raids.

“I’m not going to lie, things are dark right now in NYC. I worry for my friends and family, and things feel completely out of my hands,” she said.

“With so many people being pushed out and silenced by fear, all I can do is use my voice to speak out about what’s happening in the US and Palestine and Syria as much as I can,” she added.

She was also asked about the responsibly that artists have to speak out about global issues.

“An artist’s duty as far as I’m concerned is to reflect the times,” she said, quoting musician Nina Simone.

“I believe everyone has a responsibility to speak out against injustice, and art has such an ability to spread it,” she continued.

“I don’t think everybody has to make political work, but art is inherently political in how it’s made, funded, and shared. Even creating art as a refuge from the horrors we see is political to me. It’s a reaction to the world around us.”

A bitter standoff between Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and the Armenian Apostolic Church has seen mass arrests, allegations of a coup plot, and an extraordinary offer by Armenia’s leader to reveal his private parts to prove he is a Christian.

Earlier this week, Pashinyan told his 1.1 million followers on Facebook he was prepared to expose himself to the head of the Armenian Church and his spokesman, to prove they were wrong that he had been circumcised.

Social media became his preferred means of communication after he came to office after Armenia’s so-called Velvet Revolution of 2018.

Pashinyan faces pivotal elections next year and the Church has become a prominent anti-government voice since Armenia was defeated in a 2020 war with neighbouring Azerbaijan.

His extraordinary offer last Monday followed a Facebook post by a priest in the southwestern town of Masis who alleged Pashinyan had been circumcised, comparing him to Judas and implying that he was not Christian.

“I believe that our Apostolic Holy Church must immediately cleanse itself,” said Father Zareh Ashuryan, “of those false ‘believers’ who have betrayed the nation, dishonoured the memory of their ancestors, violated the baptism, and replaced the seal of the Holy Cross with the sign of circumcision.”

The confrontation between Church and state began at the end of May when the prime minister accused the head of the Armenian Apostolic Church, Catholicos Karekin II, of breaking his vow of celibacy and fathering a child, demanding the church leader’s replacement.

The Church released a statement accusing Pashinyan of undermining Armenia’s “spiritual unity” but did not address the claim about the child.

Government-affiliated media subsequently circulated photos and names of Karekin II’s alleged daughter, while Pashinyan established a “co-ordination group” to organise the election of a new Church leader – despite constitutional provisions guaranteeing separation of Church and state.

When Karekin II returned from a trip to the UAE last week, hundreds of supporters gathered at Yerevan airport chanting (Pontiff).

He called for unity and restraint, saying they would “overcome this difficulty” together.

The crisis then escalated on Wednesday, when security services detained 16 people, including Archbishop Bagrat Galstanyan, a senior cleric who leads the opposition Sacred Struggle movement. They face allegations of plotting terrorist acts to seize power.

Among the others detained are an opposition member, a former MP, a businessman and a blogger.

Armenia’s Investigative Committee alleges the group planned to establish 250 “assault” groups” of 25 members each to carry out attacks and cause mass disturbances, and that “a large quantity of items and objects intended for criminal activity” were found during the searches.

The archbishop led major anti-government protests last year and a court has now ruled that he should spend two months in pre-trial detention. He faces charges of planning terrorism and attempting to overthrow the state.

His lawyers have dismissed the allegations as “political persecution”.

The arrests followed the publication of what government-affiliated media claimed was a detailed opposition coup plan, allegedly involving the Church, recently detained Russian-Armenian billionaire Samvel Karapetyan, and two former presidents – Robert Kocharyan and Serzh Sargsyan.

Nikol Pashinyan shared a montage of the photos of the four men and said that the event would remain history as a “failed revolution of crooks”.

In a statement, Sargsyan’s Republican Party accused the government of using the “law enforcement system to silence political opponents”.

Samvel Karapetyan, who holds dual Russian and Armenian citizenship, is one of the richest men in Armenia, with an estimated wealth of $4bn (£2.9bn).

He owns the Tashir Group, known across Russia for its pizza brand. It is a conglomerate that operates real estate as well as the Electric Networks of Armenia – a major energy distributor in the country.

Karapetyan, one of the most prominent benefactors of the Armenian Apostolic Church and the recipient of high Church awards, was arrested after he made a public video pledging his support for the Church.

“I have always stood with the Armenian Church and the Armenian people. If the politicians do not succeed, we will intervene in our own way in this campaign against the Church,” he warned.

Hours after the statement, law enforcement officers conducted searches in Karapetyan’s mansion, he was arrested and later charged with publicly calling for the seizure of power.

He has denied all the charges against him.

Pashinyan’s spokesman suggested that the billionaire had decided to use a “classic manual received from the north” – a clear reference to Russia.

The prime minister later announced his intention to nationalise Karapetyan’s Electric Networks of Armenia (ENA) and he told a cabinet meeting on Thursday the government would start taking control of it.

“We must do this swiftly and effectively,” Pashinyan said.

Following Karapetyan’s arrest giant billboards with his photos appeared in Moscow – and Russia’s Armenian diaspora expressed support for the billionaire.

Russian foreign ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said that Moscow was “closely monitoring” the situation around “Russian national Samvel Karapetyan” promising to provide him necessary assistance to ensure that his legal rights were respected.

Canada’s parliament has passed a landmark bill giving Prime Minister Mark Carney’s government new powers to fast-track major national projects.

The One Canadian Economy Act was passed by the Senate on Thursday, and allows the cabinet to streamline approvals processes and bypass certain provisions of federal laws for projects that could boost the economy.

Supporters have argued the legislation is a critical step in reducing Canada’s dependence on the United States, amid trade tensions sparked by President Donald Trump’s tariffs.

But it has been criticised by Indigenous groups and environmental activists who say expediting the projects could stifle opposition voices.

The legislation does not determine what will be built, but the prime minister has previously signalled that it could be used to construct energy corridors, such as pipelines and electricity grids, and expand mines and ports.

The act will “remove trade barriers, expedite nation-building projects, and unleash economic growth, with Indigenous partnership at the centre of this growth,” Carney said last week.

The government said the act will reduce barriers for internal trade and labour mobility. It will also give the government sweeping powers to approve projects “that are in the national interest”.

That has alarmed Indigenous leaders, who fear they will not be consulted adequately before such projects are approved.

The passage of the bill into law is a significant victory for Carney, and upholds an election promise to remove interprovincial barriers by Canada Day on 1 July.

Trump has imposed tariffs on Canadian steel, aluminium and its auto sector. Carney had campaigned heavily on bolstering the country’s economy to counter tariff threats from the US, with whom Canada does the bulk of its trade.

Paul Prosper, a Nova Scotia senator who belongs to the Mi’kmaq Indigenous group, unsuccessfully attempted to insert an amendment that would require consent from Indigenous groups before a project could go ahead.

He criticised the speed with which the legislation passed, saying that rights holders could have been consulted by “investing a few more months”.

He said he supports development, but the law could allow the government and industry leaders to ignore Indigenous rights.

“No one wants to watch our children grow up in squalor, with no access to clean drinking water, no opportunity for good-paying jobs and no support for our sick and dying. However, we do not want success and progress to come on the backs of Indigenous Peoples,” he said in the Senate, as quoted by CBC.

However a supporter of the bill, Senator Hassan Yussuff, said it was a response to an “urgent and immediate crisis”, in comments reported by CBC.

The legislation states that the government will consult with Indigenous peoples before fast-tracking a project.

Nike says US President Donald Trump’s tariffs on key trading partners could add around $1bn (£730m) to its costs this year.

Company executives also said the the sportwear giant would cut its reliance on producing goods in China to ease the impact of US trade policies.

Last month, Nike said it would raise prices on some trainers and clothing in the US from early June, weeks after rival Adidas warned it would have to hike the cost of goods due to tariffs.

Nike’s shares jumped by more than 10% in extended trading after the firm forecast a smaller drop in first quarter revenue than many analysts had expected.

The company’s earnings for the last three months also topped estimates, despite being its worst quarterly figures for more than three years.

Nike announced fourth quarter revenue of $11.1bn – the lowest since the third quarter of 2022.

Chief financial officer Matthew Friend said Nike would move some production from China, which was hit with the biggest tariff increases, to other countries in response to Trump’s tariffs.

China currently manufacturers 16% of Nike footwear that ends up in the US. Mr Friend said that figure would be cut to a “high single-digit percentage range” by the end of May 2026.

Trump announced sweeping “Liberation Day” tariffs on most goods from countries around the world on 2 April.

Later that month, he suspended most of those tariffs to allow for talks with the affected countries, with one top adviser promising “90 deals in 90 days”.

The move dropped tariffs to 10%, instead of the far higher rates that goods from many trading partners faced.

• What tariffs has Trump announced and why?

The White House is now facing growing questions about what the president is planning to do about tariffs, as the 90-day pause is due to expire on 9 July.

In remarks at the White House on Thursday, Trump maintained that talks were going well, pointing to an agreement reached with China and saying there was another “coming up with India, maybe”.

But he also warned “We’re not going to make deals with everybody”.

“Some we’re just going to send them a letter, say thank you very much. You’re going to pay 25, 35, 45%. That’s the easy way to do it,” he said.

“My people don’t want to do it that way. They want to do some of it, but they want to make more deals than I would do,” he added.

Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick later told Bloomberg that the agreement with China formalised terms laid out in trade talks, which included a commitment from Beijing to deliver rare earths minerals used in everything from planes to wind turbines.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has previously raised the possibility that Trump could extend the deadline, depending on how talks are going.

On Thursday, White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt said both that the deadline was “not critical” and that Trump was prepared to present countries with “deals” that would set new tariff rates.

The US and China announced an agreement earlier this month aimed at ensuring US supply to critical magnets and rare earths, after concerns about access had risked re-igniting trade tensions between the two economic superpowers.

At the White House on Thursday, Trump said he had “signed” a deal with China without giving further details. “The administration and China agreed to an additional understanding for a framework to implement the Geneva agreement,” a White House official said later.

Trade between the two sides was nearly shut down after Trump raised tariffs and China hit back in a barrage of tariffs in April that had nearly shut down trade between the two countries.

The US and China subsequently agreed to reduce – but not eliminate – those tariffs.

Sabrina Carpenter has revealed alternative artwork “approved by God” for her new album after the original cover sparked controversy.

Earlier in June, the Espresso singer shared art for her album, Man’s Best Friend, which shows her on her hands and knees in a black minidress with a suited man grabbing her hair.

The photo prompted a heated debate, with some arguing that it pandered to the male gaze and promoted misogynistic stereotypes.

On Wednesday, the pop princess posted two less contentious black-and-white images of herself holding a suited man’s arm, with the caption: “Here is a new alternate cover approved by God.”

Users responding to Carpenter’s post on Instagram included fellow pop star Katy Perry, who simply replied: “Gahahahaha.”

Man’s Best Friend is Carpenter’s seventh studio album and will be released on 29 August. Fans can purchase the album with either set of artwork.

Those criticising the initial artwork included Glasgow Women’s Aid, a charity supporting victims of domestic abuse, which said it was “regressive” and “promotes an element of violence and control”.

Not everyone was against it, and some defended the singer, explaining that the image was satirical.

“There’s a deeper meaning, portraying how the public views her, believing she is just for the male gaze,” a fan wrote on X.

But Heather Binning of Women’s Rights Network, told the BBC that violence against women should “never be used as satire”.

Many of Carpenter’s fans are young women, and Ms Binning said the imagery “grooms girls to believe that it is a fun, casual, sexy thing to submit to men’s sexual (sometimes sexually violent) desires”.

On social media, some also criticised Carpenter for the timing, suggesting the image was not appropriate given the current political climate in the US.

“Women’s control over their bodies are being taken away in the US and this is kind of insensitive,” one user wrote on Instagram.

Professor Catherine Rottenberg from Goldsmiths University of London said that regardless of how the artwork should be interpreted, Carpenter was “fanning the flames of controversy in order to sell her brand”.

“Debates around representation that this album has already generated will likely mean more sales, more popularity, and more traction,” she told the BBC.

It is not the first time the 26-year-old’s music has sparked an outcry.

Carpenter has built her brand around fun and risque pop music, and her sexual lyrics, X-rated ad-lib Nonsense outros and provocative performances regularly cause a stir.

At the Brit Awards in March, media watchdog Ofcom received 825 complaints, with the majority involving Carpenter’s pre-watershed opening performance that saw her wearing a red sparkly military-style mini-dress with matching stockings and suspenders.

She was also seen having a close encounter with a dancer dressed as a soldier wearing a bearskin hat during the show, which was broadcast live on ITV.

Lucy Ford, a culture critic, previously told the BBC that Carpenter is “in on the joke” when she performs.

“Sabrina is being unabashedly horny in her music and it feels like an embrace of fun and silliness and not taking things too seriously.”

India has refused to sign a joint statement at the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit in China as it did not reflect the country’s concerns on terrorism, India’s foreign ministry has said.

Spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said on Thursday that India’s desire for its concerns to be reflected was “not acceptable to one particular country”.

While he did not share more details, Indian media reported that Delhi refused to sign the statement after it omitted the Pahalgam attack, a deadly militant attack that killed 26 tourists in Indian-administered Kashmir.

India has blamed its neighbour Pakistan for sheltering a militant group it blames for the attack. Pakistan has rejected the allegations.

China, Russia and four Central Asian countries formed the SCO in 2001 as a countermeasure to limit the influence of the West in the region. India and Pakistan joined in 2017.

The latest signing ceremony took place during the SCO defence ministers’ meeting in China, held ahead of the leaders’ annual summit this autumn.

According to media reports, India perceived the joint statement as being “pro-Pakistan” after it omitted the Pahalgam attack but mentioned militant activities in Balochistan.

Pakistan has accused India of backing the Balochistan freedom movement, which India denies.

After the meeting, India’s Defence Minister Rajnath Singh urged the SCO to hold the perpetrators of cross-border terrorism accountable, though he didn’t explicitly mention Pakistan.

“Some countries use cross-border terrorism as an instrument of policy and provide shelter to terrorists. There should be no place for such double standards. SCO should not hesitate to criticise such nations,” he said in a statement.

India and Pakistan have fought three wars over Kashmir, which they claim to own in full but administer in parts.

The Pahalgam attack in April brought the two nuclear-armed countries to the brink of another war.

In May, India launched a series of airstrikes, targeting sites it called “terror infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir”.

Pakistan denied the claim that these were terror camps and also responded by firing missiles and deploying drones into Indian territory.

The hostilities between the two countries continued until 10 May when US President Donald Trump announced that India and Pakistan had agreed to a “full and immediate ceasefire”, brokered by the US.

India has, however, consistently denied any intervention by the US.

Twenty-nine children who were taking their school exams in the Central African Republic have been killed in a crush after a nearby explosion caused panic, a hospital director told the BBC.

The blast, on the second day of the high-school finals on Wednesday, occurred at an electricity transformer, said Abel Assaye from the Bangui community hospital.

“The noise of the explosion, combined with smoke” caused alarm among the almost 6,000 students sitting the baccalaureate at a school in the capital, Bangui, local radio station Ndeke Luka reported.

President Faustin-Archange Touadéra has declared a period of national mourning.

He also ordered that the more than 280 who were wounded in the crush get free treatment in hospital.

Students from five different schools in the capital had gone to the Lycée Barthélémy Boganda to sit the baccalaureate exam.

The education ministry said the explosion happened after power was restored at the electricity transformer, located on the ground floor of the main building, that had been undergoing repairs.

“I also offer our sincere condolences to the parents of the affected candidates and wish a speedy recovery to the injured candidates,” Education Minister Aurelien-Simplice Kongbelet-Zimgas said in a statement.

He also announced the suspension of further exams.

A female survivor spoke to the BBC.

“I don’t even remember what happened. We were in the exam room and when I heard a noise, I immediately fell into a daze,” she said. “Since then, I have had a pain in my pelvis that is causing me a lot of problems.”

Radio France Internationale spoke to another student whose face was covered in blood after he had climbed out of a window.

Magloire explained that the blast happened during the history and geography exam.

“The students wanted to save their lives, and as they fled, they saw death because there were so many people and the door was really small. Not everyone could get out,” he told RFI.

The CAR continues to face political instability and security challenges.

Government forces, backed by Russian mercenaries, are battling armed groups threatening to overthrow Touadéra’s administration.

Three Palestinians have been shot dead after dozens of Israeli settlers attacked a Palestinian village in the occupied West Bank, Palestinian authorities say.

Video footage from Kafr Malik, near Ramallah, on Wednesday night showed a car and a home on fire and Palestinians running away as gunfire is heard.

The Israeli military said forces deployed to the scene found settlers and villagers throwing stones at each other. It added that several “terrorists” opened fire and threw stones at the forces, who returned fire and identified hits. They also arrested five Israelis.

The Palestinian foreign ministry said settlers fired at villagers in their homes during what it called their “terrorist assault”.

The ministry also said Israeli forces prevented ambulance crews from reaching the wounded and obstructed fire crews from entering the village for several hours.

Another villager, a 13-year-old boy, was shot dead – reportedly by Israeli troops – earlier in the week.

Israel has built about 160 settlements housing some 700,000 Jews since it occupied the West Bank and East Jerusalem – land Palestinians want, along with Gaza, for a hoped-for future state – in the 1967 Middle East war. An estimated 3.3 million Palestinians live alongside them.

The vast majority of the international community considers the settlements illegal under international law – a position supported by an advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) last year – although Israel disputes this.

“What do you expect us to do when our homes are being attacked by settlers with petrol bombs?” asked one elderly man, sitting quietly with hundreds of other mourners on Thursday after the funerals of the three men who were killed – Murshid Nawwaf Hamayel, Mohammed Qaher al-Naji and Lutfi Sabri Bearat.

Kafr Malik has been attacked numerous times in recent weeks by settlers increasingly emboldened by Israeli government ministers who often support their actions and who have endorsed the building of many more settlements.

“They think they can take my land and force me to leave, but I’m not going anywhere,” said Hamdallah Bearat, a retired professor of engineering who has lived in Kafr Malik for most of his life.

For many younger Palestinians, though, the realities of an increasingly restrictive occupation and its economic consequences make life here more difficult by the day.

Shortly after the incident in Kafr Malik, there was another attack in the Palestinian community of Dar Fazaa, near the village of Taybeh.

Israeli human rights group B’Tselem said three people were injured and three cars were torched. It posted CCTV footage showing a group of at least 10 masked men setting one car on fire and throwing stones.

“The settler violence and rampage, under the protection of the occupation army, is a political decision by the Israeli government, implemented by the settlers,” Palestinian Vice-President Hussein al-Sheikh wrote on X.

“The Israeli government’s behaviour and decisions are pushing the region toward an explosion. We call on the international community to urgently intervene to protect our Palestinian people.”

Since Hamas’s attack on southern Israel on 7 October 2023, which triggered the war in Gaza, more than 900 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli forces in the West Bank – a period in which more than 20 Israelis have also been killed.

There has also been a sharp increase in the number and severity of settler attacks in the West Bank over the same period.

The UN says there were 487 attacks by settlers resulting in casualties or property damage in the first four months of this year, including 122 in April. At least 181 Palestinians were reportedly injured by settlers in the attacks.

Human rights organisations and witnesses say the Israeli military and police frequently stand by while settlers attack Palestinian towns and villages.

Since the right-wing, pro-settler governing coalition headed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu took office in late 2022, it has decided to establish 49 new settlements and begin the legalisation process for seven settler outposts which were built without government authorisation, according to the Israeli anti-settlement watchdog Peace Now.

Last month, Israeli ministers said 22 new settlements had been approved across the length and width of the West Bank, hailing it as a move that “prevents the establishment of a Palestinian state that would endanger Israel”.

In a separate incident on Wednesday, a 15-year-old Palestinian boy was shot and killed by Israeli forces in the town of al-Yamoun, near Jenin, the Palestinian health ministry said.

The Israeli military said “terrorists” threw explosive devices at its forces during an operation there. Afterwards, they approached while holding additional explosives and the forces responded by opening fire, it added.

In January, Israeli forces launched a large-scale operation against Palestinian armed groups in Jenin and two other governorates in the northern West Bank, which Netanyahu said aimed to “defeat terrorism”.

The UN’s human rights chief said in April that the operation had destroyed entire refugee camps and makeshift medical sites, and displaced more than 40,000 Palestinians, who had been told not to return to their homes for a year.

Iranian authorities have carried out a wave of arrests and multiple executions of people suspected of links to Israeli intelligence agencies, in the wake of the recent war between the two countries.

It comes after what officials describe as an unprecedented infiltration of Iranian security services by Israeli agents.

Authorities suspect information fed to Israel played a part in a series of high-profile assassinations during the conflict. This included the targeted killings of senior commanders from the elite Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and nuclear scientists, which Iran attributes to operatives of Israel’s Mossad intelligence agency working inside the country.

Shaken by the scale and precision of these killings, authorities have been targeting anyone suspected of working with foreign intelligence, saying it is for the sake of national security.

But many fear this is also a way to silence dissent and tighten control over the population.

During the 12-day conflict, Iranian authorities executed three people accused of spying for Israel. On Wednesday – just one day after the ceasefire – three more individuals were executed on similar charges.

Officials have since announced the arrest of hundreds of suspects across the country on accusations of espionage. State television has aired alleged confessions from several detainees, purportedly admitting to collaboration with Israeli intelligence.

Human rights groups and activists have expressed fears over the latest developments, citing Iran’s longstanding practice of extracting forced confessions and conducting unfair trials. There are concerns that more executions may follow.

Iran’s Ministry of Intelligence claims it is engaged in a “relentless battle” against what it calls Western and Israeli intelligence networks – including the CIA, Mossad, and MI6.

According to Fars News Agency, which is affiliated with the IRGC, since the beginning of Israel’s attack on Iran on 13 June, “the Israeli spy network has become highly active inside the country”. Fars reported that over the course of 12 days, Iranian intelligence and security forces arrested “more than 700 individuals linked to this network”.

Iranians have told BBC Persian they received warning text messages from Iran’s intelligence ministry informing them their phone numbers had appeared on social media pages related to Israel. They were instructed to leave these pages or face prosecution.

The Iranian government has also stepped up pressure on journalists working for Persian-language media outlets abroad, including BBC Persian and the London-based Iran International and Manoto TV.

According to Iran International, the IRGC detained the mother, father, and brother of one of its TV presenters in Tehran to pressure her into resigning over the channel’s coverage of the Iran-Israel conflict. The presenter received a phone call from her father – prompted by security agents – urging her to quit and warning of further consequences.

After the conflict began, threats directed at BBC Persian journalists and their families have become increasingly severe. According to the journalists recently affected, Iranian security officials contacting their families have claimed that, in a wartime context, they are justified in targeting family members as hostages. They have also labelled the journalists as “mohareb” — a term meaning ‘one who wages war against God’ — a charge that, under Iranian law, can carry the death penalty.

Manoto TV has reported similar incidents, including threats against employees’ families and demands to cut all ties with the outlet. Some relatives were reportedly threatened with charges such as “enmity against God” and espionage – both capital offences under Iranian law.

Analysts view these tactics as part of a broader strategy to silence dissent and intimidate exiled media workers.

Security forces have also detained dozens of activists, writers and artists, in many cases without formal charges. There are also reports of arrests targeting family members of those killed during the 2022 “Woman, Life, Freedom” anti-government protests.

These actions suggest a broader campaign aimed not only at current activists but also at those connected to previous waves of dissent.

During the war, the Iranian government severely restricted access to the internet, and even after the ceasefire, full access has not yet been restored. Limiting internet access during crises, especially during nationwide protests against the government, has become a common pattern by Iran. Additionally, most of the social networks like Instagram, Telegram, X and YouTube, as well as news websites such as BBC Persian, have long been blocked in Iran and cannot be accessed without using a Virtual Private Network (VPN) proxy service.

Human rights advocates and political observers have drawn parallels to the 1980s, when the Iranian authorities brutally suppressed political opposition during the Iran-Iraq War.

Many fear that, in the wake of Iran’s weakened international standing after the conflict with Israel, the authorities may again turn inward, resorting to mass arrests, executions, and heavy-handed repression.

Critics point to events of 1988, when, according to human rights groups, thousands of political prisoners – many already serving sentences – were executed following brief, secretive trials by so-called “death commissions.” Most victims were buried in unmarked mass graves.

Actor Brad Pitt’s home in Los Angeles has been ransacked by a trio of thieves.

Three suspects broke into the home in Los Feliz late on Wednesday through a front window and “ransacked the location,” according to the Los Angeles Police Department.

Police did not confirm the home belonged to the Oscar-winning actor, but the address matched that of a home Mr Pitt purchased in 2023.

Authorities said the suspects fled with stolen items, though it’s unclear what was taken. The actor was not home at the time of the burglary, US media reported.

Mr Pitt was in the UK earlier this week for the London premier of his new film F1, which is released on Friday. He was accompanied by fellow Hollywood star Tom Cruise and Lewis Hamilton, who has seven Formula One World Drivers’ Championship titles.

Authorities said the burglary happened around 22:30 local time on Wednesday.

LA police would not confirm the value of items stolen. The BBC also contacted representatives for the actor.

The large three-bedroom home sits just outside Griffith Park – which is home to the famous Hollywood Sign. It is surrounded by a large fence and greenery that shields the home from public view.

The burglary follows others reported in the city targeting other celebrities, including Nicole Kidman and Keith Urban.

Last month, a man was also arrested on stalking and vandalism charges after he allegedly rammed his vehicle into the gate of the home of Pitt’s ex-wife, Jennifer Aniston.

Get our flagship newsletter with all the headlines you need to start the day. Sign up here.

Japan has executed a man who murdered nine people in 2017, the first time since 2022 that the country has enacted capital punishment.

The serial killings by Takahiro Shiraishi, dubbed the “Twitter killer”, had shocked the country and triggered debate over how suicide was discussed online.

Shiraishi, then 30, lured his victims – most of them young women between the ages of 15 and 26 – to his apartment, before strangling and dismembering them.

The killings came to light in October 2017, when police found body parts in the Japanese city of Zama, near Tokyo, when they were searching for one of the victims.

Shiraishi later admitted to murdering nine suicidal victims and revealed that he got acquainted with them on Twitter, the social media platform now known as X.

He then told them he could help them die, and in some cases claimed he would kill himself alongside them.

His Twitter profile contained the words: “I want to help people who are really in pain. Please DM [direct message] me anytime.”

Nine dismembered bodies were found in coolers and tool boxes when officers visited his flat, which was dubbed by media outlets as a “house of horrors”.

While prosecutors sought the death penalty for Shiraishi, his lawyers argued for the lesser charge of “murder with consent”, claiming his victims had given their permission to be killed.

They also called for an assessment of his mental state.

Shiraishi later disputed his own defence team’s version of events and said he killed without the victims’ consent.

Hundreds of people showed up at his verdict hearing in December 2020, when he was sentenced to death.

The murders also prompted a change by Twitter, which amended its rules to state users should not “promote or encourage suicide or self-harm”.

Japan’s justice minister Keisuke Suzuki, who said he ordered Shiraishi’s execution, said the killer acted “for the genuinely selfish reason of satisfying his own sexual and financial desires”, according to an AFP report.

The case “caused great shock and anxiety to society”, Suzuki said.

An Egyptian national has pleaded guilty after he kicked a customs dog so hard it became airborne at a Washington, DC area airport, authorities say.

Hamed Ramadan Bayoumy Aly Marie, 70, pleaded guilty to kicking Freddie the Beagle, who was working with US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to detect smuggled agricultural products at Washington Dulles International Airport.

Authorities say he kicked the dog after it allegedly detected over 100lb (45kg) of prohibited food products in his luggage.

Marie was ordered to pay for Freddie’s veterinarian bills and was deported back to Egypt.

The incident unfolded early on Tuesday in the baggage claim area of the airport, which is located just outside of Washington in Virginia.

Freddie and his handler were roaming the area around 06:30 local time when the dog alerted to a piece of luggage which had arrived on a flight from Cairo, a federal criminal complaint reads.

Hamed Aly Marie, who owned the bag, briefly spoke with the CBP officer before he kicked Freddie “so hard that he was lifted off of the ground,” the complaint states.

Still images from surveillance footage inside the airport show the dog on his hind legs and another of him in the air with his ears standing up.

Freddie, who weighs 25lb (11kg), was taken to a veterinary emergency room and was found to have contusions to his right rib area, CBP said.

Hamed Aly Marie’s bags were searched and authorities found beef, rice, eggplant, cucumbers, bell peppers, corn seeds, and herbs, according to CBP, which said the items were prohibited from entering the country.

Such products can carry diseases which can hurt native flora and fauna, and prove difficulty to eradicate once inside a country.

At an initial court appearance on Wednesday, Hamed Aly Marie pleaded guilty to one count of harming animals used in law enforcement. He was sentenced to time served and ordered to pay for the animal’s veterinarian bill, which court records show was $840.

Hamed Aly Marie was removed from the US on Thursday afternoon and placed on a flight back to Egypt after the court hearing, according to CBP.

Iran’s supreme leader has insisted the US “gained no achievements” from strikes on its nuclear facilities, in his first public address since a ceasefire with Israel was agreed on Tuesday.

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said the strikes did not “accomplish anything significant” to disrupt Iran’s nuclear programme, and described the retaliation against an American air base in Qatar as dealing a “heavy blow”.

It came as Washington doubled down on its assessment that the strikes had severely undermined Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth said intelligence gathered by the US and Israel indicated the operation “significantly damaged the nuclear programme, setting it back by years”.

Previously, US President Donald Trump said the strikes against three key nuclear sites inside Iran “totally obliterated” them, and has responded furiously to reports citing unnamed American officials suggesting the damage may have been less extensive than anticipated.

Speaking alongside senior general Dan Caine at a Pentagon press conference on Thursday morning, Hegseth said the mission was a “historic success” that had “rendered [Iranian] enrichment facilities inoperable”.

During an at times combative exchange with reporters, Hegseth also said the US was “not aware of any intelligence” which indicated the enriched uranium had moved out of Fordo – the deeply buried facility which the US targeted with powerful so-called bunker buster bombs – prior to the strikes.

Khamenei, who had been largely out of public view since direct conflict with Israel broke out on 13 June, released a televised address on Thursday morning, ending a week-long public silence.

The supreme leader has reportedly been sheltering in a bunker and limiting communications, which has sparked speculation about his whereabouts. Iranian authorities did not disclose where he was speaking from on Thursday, though a senior official acknowledged he was in a safe place earlier this week.

Khamenei used Thursday’s video address to threaten to carry out more strikes on US bases in the Middle East if Iran was attacked again, and declared victory over both Israel and the US.

Khamenei said Trump had “exaggerated” the impact of the nuclear site strikes, adding: “They couldn’t accomplish anything and did not achieve their objective.”

Referencing the attack on the US air base in Qatar, Khamenei said: “This incident is also repeatable in the future, and should any attack take place, the cost for the enemy and the aggressor will undoubtedly be very high.”

No one was killed during that attack, which Trump said had been flagged before it was launched. The US says the base was not damaged.

CBS News, the BBC’s US partner, reports that the White House is considering a range of options to entice Iran back to the negotiating table, including facilitating funding for a civilian, non-enrichment nuclear program.

However, Iran’s foreign minister told Iranian state TV on Thursday that there no talks with the US are planned.

Direct confrontation broke out between Iran and Israel on 13 June, after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that “if not stopped, Iran could produce a nuclear weapon in a very short time”.

A day earlier the global nuclear watchdog’s board of governors declared Iran was in breach of its non-proliferation obligations for the first time in 20 years.

Iran has maintained that its nuclear programme is for civilian purposes alone and that it had never sought to develop a nuclear weapon.

On Thursday, Iran approved a parliamentary bill calling for an end to the country’s co-operation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), meaning it is no longer committed to allowing nuclear inspectors into its sites.

Iran’s health ministry said 610 people were killed during the 12 days of air attacks, while Israeli authorities said 28 were killed in Israel.

The US became directly involved last weekend, striking facilities in Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan, before Trump sought to rapidly mediate a ceasefire between Israel and Iran, which has held since.

UN nuclear watchdog chief Rafael Grossi said on Wednesday that there was a chance Tehran had moved much of its highly enriched uranium elsewhere as it came under attack.

Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough may not be a household name, but the so-called referee of the Senate has found herself at the centre of a firestorm after she objected to several parts of US President Donald Trump’s mega-sized tax bill.

The 1,000-page document, which he’s dubbed the “big beautiful bill”, would slash spending and extend tax cuts.

But Ms MacDonough has said that certain provisions violate Senate rules, throwing billions of dollars of cuts into doubt.

Her findings have also made it difficult for Congress to pass the bill by 4 July – a deadline set by the president himself.

Now, some Republicans are calling for the Senate to ignore her recommendations – going against long-standing tradition – or to fire her.

Earlier this month, the House of Representatives narrowly passed a massive spending bill that included cuts to low-income health insurance programme Medicaid, reforms to the food assistance programme SNAP, and a measure to end taxes on tips and overtime pay.

That version then went to the Senate, where both Republicans and Democrats wanted adjustments made.

The US Senate has spent recent weeks debating changes and writing a new version of the bill.

• A look at the key items in Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill’
• ‘Our food doesn’t even last the month’ – Americans brace for Trump’s welfare cuts

Legislators are now racing against the clock to deliver the bill to Trump’s desk by 4 July.

Republicans maintain a majority in both the House and the Senate, which should make it easy to pass legislation. But leadership in both chambers has struggled to get consensus on a number of provisions – particularly on social programs like Medicaid – from competing factions within the party.

The Senate parliamentarian’s job is to decide whether a bill complies with budget rules.

Ms MacDonough – the first woman to hold the role – has held the position since 2012. Before that, she spent 25 years as a Senate staffer and worked for the Justice Department.

While she was appointed by former Democratic Senator Harry Reid, she has served Senates controlled by both Republicans and Democrats.

In 2021, multiple Democratic legislators called on the Senate to overrule Ms MacDonough when she said a minimum wage increase could not be included in a policy bill at the time.

People serving as the Senate parliamentarian have been fired before, too.

In 2001, the Senate majority leader at the time fired then Senate parliamentarian, Robert Dove, after one of Dove’s rulings on a bill infuriated Republicans.

Several of the provisions Republican senators have proposed violate the Byrd Rule, she said, which is a 1985 rule the Senate adopted that says “extraneous” provisions cannot be tacked onto “reconciliation” bills.

The budget bill is a reconciliation bill, which means it does not need a 60-vote supermajority to pass the Senate. Reconciliation bills tell the government how to spend money, not how to issue policy, the Byrd rule says.

Because of these rules, Republicans can avoid a Democratic filibuster on the bill and pass it with a simple majority.

But as Ms MacDonough has examined the text she has found a number of places where the reconciliation bill tries to change policy.

Among the provisions Ms MacDonough has ruled against is a plan that would cap states’ ability to collect more federal Medicaid funding through healthcare provider taxes and a measure that would have made it harder to enforce contempt findings against the Trump administration.

And more rulings could come as she continues to examine the large bill.

Some Republicans, like Alabama Senator Tommy Tuberville, are not pleased with her rulings and have gone as far as calling for her to be fired.

“President Trump’s landslide victory was a MANDATE from 77 million Americans,” he wrote on X on Thursday. “The One Big Beautiful Bill delivers on that mandate. The Parliamentarian is trying to UNDERMINE the President’s mandate and should be fired.”

Kansas Senator Roger Marshall urged his party to pass a resolution to term limit the parliamentarian.

He noted in a social media post that the Senate parliamentarian was fired during reconciliation in 2001: “It’s 2025 during reconciliation & we need to again fire the Senate Parliamentarian.”

Texas Senator John Cornyn said Republicans should not let “an unelected Senate staffer” stop the party from passing the bill.

Such a move by Republicans could set a precedent for Democrats, however, whose past legislative priorities also have been thwarted by the parliamentarian’s rulings. When the party held the majority in 2022, they came two votes from scrapping the filibuster rule in order to pass voting rights legislation – and overriding or dismissing the parliamentarian would be a different means to achieve a similar procedural objective.

But Senate Republican Leader John Thune, of South Dakota, does not seem to agree with calls to oust her.

Thune, who is the chief spokesperson for the party in the chamber, told reporters on Capitol Hill on Thursday he would not overrule Ms MacDonough.

Instead, he described the senate referee’s rulings as “speed bumps”, and said his party had other options to reach Republican-promised budget cuts, namely rewriting the bill.

Thune had previously said a vote on the bill was expected on Friday, though it remains unclear if Republicans can agree on a bill to move to the floor for a vote by then.

Once the bill passes the Senate, it goes back to the House for approval. Some Republicans in the House have already indicated their displeasure with the Senate’s edits to the bill.

After the bill passes both houses, then it can go to Trump’s desk.

Karoline Leavitt, White House Press Secretary, said the Trump administration is sticking by the 4 July deadline.

“This is part of the process, this is part of the inner workings of the United States Senate, but the president is adamant about seeing this bill on his desk here at the White House by Independence Day,” she said referring to the parliamentarian’s rulings.

The government has confirmed it will make major concessions to rebels in its own party over its planned benefits reforms.

Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall told Labour MPs that claimants of the Personal Independence Payment (Pip) will continue to receive what they currently get, as will recipients of the health element of Universal Credit. Instead, planned cuts will only hit future claimants.

The government made the climbdown after facing the prospect of defeat in the Commons if it failed to accommodate the demands of more than 100 backbenchers.

Stephen Kinnock, the minister for care, said it had been “a positive and constructive process” with “a clear agreement” reached.

• Follow updates on this story
• Chris Mason: This is the most awkward of Labour’s U-turn hat-trick

He told BBC Breakfast that the government had struck “the right balance” between protecting the vulnerable and reforming a “broken system”, and said he was confident the reforms would now pass in Parliament.

But while the rebels told the BBC their colleagues are happy with the concessions – meaning the bill is now likely to pass – some Labour MPs have said they will still vote against the proposals.

The government originally hoped to save £5bn a year by 2030 with its Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill – which would change who could qualify for certain disability and sickness benefits – aiming to slow the rise in claimants.

Working-age health-related benefits are estimated to cost an extra £30bn by 2029 without reforms.

But the government faced growing discontent from around 120 of its own MPs over the changes, who criticised proposals such as a requirement for Pip claimants to prove they need a higher degree of assistance with tasks such as preparing and eating food, communicating, washing and getting dressed.

Sir Keir Starmer spent Thursday making calls to shore up support among Labour MPs who backed an amendment to stop the government’s flagship welfare bill, ahead of a Commons vote on Tuesday.

Sir Keir earlier told the Commons he wanted to “see reform implemented with Labour values and fairness”.

As well as changing who will be affected by the cuts, ministers are also expected to fast-track a £1bn support plan originally scheduled for 2029.

Dame Meg Hillier, who led the effort to block changes to disability benefits, said she would now support the government’s welfare bill as “it is a good step forward”.

There had been a “big change since last week”, she said, which would “ensure the most vulnerable people are protected”.

Dame Meg said that she was pleased that the changes would mean “involving disabled people themselves in the future design” of benefits.

But Nadia Whittome, Labour MP for Nottingham East, said she would still be voting against the bill unless disabled people received further protections – and that she would be “far from the only one”.

“All of the MPs I’ve spoken to who signed the recent amendment – across the party, not just on the left – are sticking to their position because we understand that we’re answerable to our constituents,” she told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.

Peter Lamb, Labour MP for Crawley, has also indicated he will not support the revised bill.

Asked several times on BBC Breakfast whether the row was over, Anna Dixon, chair of the all-party parliamentary group on carers and welfare cuts, said it was “very difficult” to say because the process had been “all quite rushed”.

Tuesday’s vote is the first opportunity for MPs to support or reject the bill.

If it clears this hurdle, it will then face a few hours’ examination by all MPs the following week – rather than days or weeks in front of a committee.

Chancellor Rachel Reeves had factored the welfare cuts into her Spring Statement – designed to help meet her economic plans – but it is now unclear how the fresh changes will affect these.

Working-age health-related benefit spending has increased from £36bn to £52bn between 2019 and 2024, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) think tank.

It is expected to double to £66bn by 2029 without changes to the system.

This is now the third government U-turn in a month – a major blow to the prime minister’s authority.

It follows on from Sir Keir reversing cuts to winter fuel payments and ordering a grooming gangs inquiry he initially resisted.

One of the main co-ordinators behind the welfare amendment, who did not wish to be named, told the BBC the winter fuel decision had emboldened many of the rebels this time.

They told the BBC that MPs “all voted for winter fuel [cuts] and have taken so much grief in our constituencies, so colleagues think: why should I take that on again?”

The Tories described the concessions understood to have been offered to Labour rebels as “the latest in a growing list of screeching U-turns” from the government.

Shadow chancellor Mel Stride said: “Under pressure from his own MPs, Starmer has made another completely unfunded spending commitment.”

One of the rebels, Alex Sobel, the MP for Leeds Central and Headingley, also told BBC Newsnight he was concerned the changes could create a “two-tier” system – a concern echoed by other Labour backbenchers.

Challenged on this, Kinnock said ministers were reforming a “complex system” in a “staggered way”.

It is understood that plans for the amendment began when Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall offered a partial olive branch to rebels by expanding the transition period for anyone losing Pip from four to 13 weeks.

A No 10 spokesperson said: “This package will preserve the social security system for those who need it by putting it on a sustainable footing, provide dignity for those unable to work, supports those who can and reduce anxiety for those currently in the system.”

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

Most people are inclined to shoo flies away from food, and the thought of maggots in your bins is enough to make anyone’s stomach turn.

But a handful of city councils have embraced maggots – more formally known as fly larvae – and their taste for rotting food.

In Vilnius, capital of the Baltic state of Lithuania, fly larvae have officially been given the job of processing the 2,700 tonnes of food waste the city’s 607,000 residents put out for collection each year, alongside that of the six neighbouring councils.

Energesman, the waste management company that began relieving Vilnius of its food waste earlier this year, doesn’t actually charge the city for this service.

That is saving the city up to €2m (£1.7m; $2.3m) per year, based on a target of processing 12,000 tonnes in 2026 says the company’s chief executive, Algirda Blazgys.

Energesman has rolled out new orange food waste bags to residents, alongside an influencer marketing campaign to encourage more Vilniečiai to separate their food waste, as the 2,700 tonnes collected is only a fraction of the 40,000 tonnes of household waste the city is thought to generate.

Last year it become mandatory for councils to collect food waste, so the city needs to find ways to deal with it.

Energesman, meanwhile, has plans to turn the fattened fly larvae into a new income stream.

It houses around six million flies in a special zone within its Vilnius plant, who mate around every six hours, according to CEO Algirdas Blazgys.

A female fly can lay around 500 eggs in her average 21-day lifespan, so Mr Blazgys and his team are dealing with more than three million larvae a month, who can consume more than 11 tonnes of food waste in the first, hungriest days of their lives.

It’s the huge appetites of these tiny creatures that make them such excellent candidates for food waste processing. This study shows a swarm of them demolishing a 16 inch pizza in just two hours.

The trick is to cull them before they transform into mature flies. That way the protein rich fly larvae can be converted into protein products for use in animal feed or industrial use, for example as an ingredient in paint, glue, lamp shades and furniture covers.

Also, their manure, known as frass, can be used as fertiliser.

Energesman has already set up supply trials with partners in the paint, glue and furniture industries, but Mr Blazgys acknowledges it’s proving more complicated than he anticipated.

The sample paint produced using Energesman-reared fly larvae didn’t quite come out in the right colour, but the lamp shades created look promising.

He also has university partnerships in place to supply fly larvae for research purposes and for feeding bacteria. And of course, the larvae are in demand from the local fishing industry to use as bait.

But EU health and safety regulations mean fly larvae fed with kitchen waste can’t be used in edible insect products for human consumption, as there could be cross contamination from meat and fish scraps.

“We came up with some crazy ideas, then we started looking for other people that could also come with some crazy ideas about what we could do,” says Mr Blazgys.

“As it’s still very new, some people are still looking to see if we’re going to fail, so they don’t want to brag about it yet. But I think we’re going to come up with something good.”

While there are numerous cases around the world of fly larvae being used in food waste management, and being harvested as a protein ingredient, it’s largely on a commercial basis, for example, a private contract between a hotel or apartment building owner and a fly larvae rearer.

In Kenya, Project Mila is a social enterprise using fly larvae to tackle Mombasa’s mounting food waste problem, while also supplying frass as fertiliser to local farmers.

Yet there are just a handful of city councils that have adopted this way of processing food waste.

Goterra in Australia has used fly larvae to help Sydney get through its food waste, as part of a limited trial which began this year.

For the past three years, Goterra has also been working with three townships that are part of the neighbouring Queanbeyan-Palerang Regional Council, recycling around 10 tonnes of food waste.

Whether we will see UK councils start shipping in millions of flies, so their larvae can munch through the 6.4 million tonnes of household food waste produced here yearly, is only a matter of time.

That’s the optimistic view of Larry Kotch. He’s the CEO and co-founder of insect waste management company Flybox, which he says operates more insect waste processing sites than any other company in the UK, working largely with private food manufacturers and supermarkets.

Flybox is also a founding member of the Insect Bioconversion Association, an industry body representing companies in the space.

UK councils are interested, Mr Kotch believes, especially because weekly household food waste collections will become mandatory in England from March 2026.

Around 148 of England’s 317 local authorities still don’t offer this, according to the Local Authority Recycling Advisory Committee.

But regulations set by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) are currently barring councils from using fly larvae to process food waste.

If regulation could move in line with science, Mr Kotch argues that “the UK could see its first council-contracted insect plant within two years”.

“Unfortunately, with government it’s always safer to say no… Everyone we’ve spoken to in UK councils are very excited about insect protein and would much rather work with insect farms than alternative technologies.”

DEFRA confirmed to the BBC that the Animal By-Product Regulations restrict insects from being used to process organic waste streams.

It says there are currently no plans to review these regulations. “Our waste management regulations play a crucial role in protecting UK biosecurity and reducing the risk of disease,” the spokesperson said.

The current alternative for sending food waste to landfill is anaerobic digestion (AD), a breakdown process which creates biogas.

However, Mr Kotch says current AD plants aren’t enough to cope with the anticipated influx of household food waste.

“Globally, over 1.3 billion tonnes of food is wasted every year. We believe up to 40% of that could be upcycled using insect waste management. And not only does it avoid disposal costs and methane emissions, but it also produces valuable protein and organic fertiliser,” says Mr Kotch.

Dame Anna Wintour is stepping back as editor-in-chief of American Vogue after 37 years.

The British-born fashion magnate, 75, is leaving the role she has held longer than any other editor, but will retain senior positions at its publisher.

Dame Anna will continue as Vogue’s global editorial director, as well as chief content officer for its parent company Conde Nast.

She was made a dame by the late Queen Elizabeth II for services to fashion and journalism in 2017, and was made Companion of Honour by King Charles earlier this year.

Dame Anna announced to staff on Thursday that a new role, head of editorial content, would be introduced at American Vogue.

According to an account published by the company, Dame Anna told staff she wanted to help “the next generation of impassioned editors storm the field with their own ideas” as she announced her departure from the editor-in-chief role.

She said she would continue with many of her responsibilities, and that “it goes without saying that I plan to remain Vogue’s tennis and theatre editor in perpetuity”.

Raised in London, Dame Anna was the editor of British Vogue before she took the helm at its US sister publication in 1988.

She is credited with giving American Vogue a new lease of life, turning it into one of the world’s top fashion publications and was credited with overhauling its output, including featuring less well-known models and mixing inexpensive clothes with couture.

Over her long career, Dame Anna has become one of the most recognisable and influential figures in the fashion industry.

Outside of her work with Vogue, she has also organised the Met Gala, a New York fundraiser which attracts high-profile celebrities, since 1995.

She is known for her trademark bob and dark glasses. Last December, she told the BBC’s culture editor Katie Razzall the signature shades were a “prop”, and “they help me see and they help me not see”.

Dame Anna’s tenure as editor-in-chief of US Vogue is also widely rumoured to have inspired the tyrannical but revered character of Miranda Priestly in the Devil Wears Prada – a novel by a former assistant of Wintour, Lauren Weisberger.

Earlier this year, King Charles asked Dame Anna whether she would stop working – to which she said she replied “firmly no”.

Get our flagship newsletter with all the headlines you need to start the day. Sign up here.

By the time polls closed at 10pm on 4 July 2024, the Labour Party knew they were likely to return to government – even if they could not quite bring themselves to believe it.

For Sir Keir Starmer, reminiscing 10 months later in an interview with me, it was an “incredible moment”. Instantly, he said, he was “conscious of the sense of responsibility”. And yes, he confessed, a little annoyed that his landslide victory was not quite as big as Sir Tony Blair’s had been in 1997.

“I’m hugely competitive,” the prime minister said. “Whether it’s on the football pitch, whether it is in politics or any other aspect of life.”

Sir Keir watched the exit poll with a small group of advisers as well as his wife, Victoria, and his two teenaged children. Even in that moment of unsurpassable accomplishment, this deeply private prime minister was caught between the jubilation of his aides and the more complex reaction of his children, who knew their lives were about to change forever.

Looking back, the prime minister said, he would tell himself: “Don’t watch it with your family – because it did have a big impact on my family, and I could see that in my children.”

It’s important to remember how sunny the mood in the Labour Party was at that moment – because the weather then turned stormy with remarkable speed.

As the prime minister marks a year in office next week – which he will spend grappling with crises at home and abroad – British politics finds itself at an inflection point, where none of the old rules can be taken for granted.

So, why exactly was Sir Keir’s political honeymoon so short-lived? And can he turn things around?

Many members of the new cabinet had never been to Downing Street until they walked up to the famous black door on 5 July to be appointed. Why would they have been? The 14 turbulent years of opposition for the Labour Party meant that few had any experience of government.

This was a deficiency of which Sir Keir and his team were acutely aware.

As the leader of the opposition, he had spent significant time in ‘Privy Council’ – that’s to say, confidential, meetings with civil servants to understand what was happening in Ukraine and the Middle East.

He also sought knowledge from the White House. Jake Sullivan, then US President Joe Biden’s National Security Adviser, told me that he spoke to the future prime minister “every couple of months” to help him “make sense of what was happening”.

“I shared with him our perspective on events in the Middle East, as well as in Ukraine and in other parts of the world,” says Sullivan. “I thought he asked trenchant, focused, sharp questions. I thought he was on point.

“I thought he got to the heart of the matter, the larger issue of where all of these things were going and what was driving them. I was impressed with him.”

Domestic preparations were not as smooth. For some, especially on the left of the Labour Party, this government’s difficulties began with an over-cautious election campaign.

Sharon Graham, the general secretary of the trade union Unite, told me that “everyday people [were] looking for change with a big C. They were not looking for managerialism”.

It’s a criticism with which Pat McFadden, a senior cabinet minister, having run the campaign, is wearily familiar. “We had tried other strategies to varying degrees in 2015, 2017, 2019, many other campaigns previously – and they’d lost.

“I had one job. To win.”

Having made his name as a prominent member of Jeremy Corbyn’s shadow cabinet, Sir Keir won the party leadership in 2020 offering Labour members a kind of Corbynism without Corbyn.

But before long he broke decisively with his predecessor.

In the campaign this meant not a long list of promises, but a careful approach. Reassurance was the order of the day: at the campaign’s heart, a focus on what Labour wouldn’t do: no increase in income tax, national insurance or VAT.

Yet a big part of preparing for government was not just the question of what this government would do, but how it would drive the government system.

For that, Sir Keir turned to Sue Gray.

Having led the Partygate investigation into Boris Johnson, Gray was already unusually high-profile for an impartial civil servant. Her close colleagues were stunned when in 2023 she agreed to take up a party political role as Sir Keir’s chief of staff.

“It was a source of enormous controversy within the civil service,” says Simon Case, who until a few months ago as cabinet secretary was head of the civil service.

Sue Gray’s task was to use her decades of experience of the Whitehall machine to bring order to Sir Keir’s longstanding team.

She started work in September 2023, and the grumblings about her work began to reach me weeks, or perhaps even days, later. Those in the team she joined had expected her to bring organisational clarity.

Tensions came when she involved herself in political questions too.

Gray also deliberately re-prioritised the voices of elected politicians in the shadow cabinet over unelected advisers.

Questions about what exactly her role should be were never quite resolved, in part because Rishi Sunak called the general election sooner than Labour had expected.

Gray spent the campaign in a separate office from the main team, working with a small group on plans for the early days in government. Yet those back in Labour HQ fretted that, from what little they gleaned, that work was inadequate.

A few days before the election those rumours reached me. I WhatsApped a confidant of Sir Keir to ask what they had heard of the preparation for government.

“Don’t ask,” came the reply. “I am too worried to discuss it.”

What is unquestionable is that any prime minister would have struggled with the backdrop Sir Keir inherited.

Simon Case described to me how, on 5 July just after Sir Keir had made his first speech on the steps of No 10, he had thwacked a sleepless new prime minister with “the heavy mallet of reality”.

“I don’t think there are many incoming prime ministers who’d faced such challenging circumstances,” he said, referring to both the country’s economic situation and wars around the world.

The King’s Speech on 17 July unveiled a substantial programme, making good on manifesto promises: rail nationalisation, planning reform, clean energy investment. But those hoping for a rabbit out of the hat, a defining surprise, were disappointed.

In so many crucial areas — social care, child poverty, industrial strategy — the government’s instinct was to launch reviews and consultations, rather than to declare a decisive direction.

As cabinet secretary, Case could see what was happening — or not happening — across the whole of government. “There were some elements where not enough thinking had been done,” he said.

“There were areas where, sitting in the centre of government, early in a new regime, the prime minister and his team, including me as his sort of core team, knew what we wanted to do, but we weren’t communicating that effectively across all of government.”

Not just communication within government: for us journalists there were days in that early period where it was utterly unclear what this new government wanted its story to be.

That made those early announcements, which did come, stand out even more: none more so than Chancellor Rachel Reeves’s announcement on 29 July that she would means-test the winter fuel payment.

It came in a speech primarily about the government’s parlous economic inheritance. That is not what it is remembered for.

Some in government admit that they expected a positive response to Reeves’s radical frankness about what the government could and could not afford to do. Yet it sat in isolation – a symbol of this new government’s economic priorities, with the Budget still three months away.

Louise Haigh, then the transport secretary, remembered: “It came so early and it hung on its own as such a defining policy for so long that in so many voters’ minds now, that is the first thing they think about when they think about this Labour government and what it wants to do and the kinds of decisions it wants to make.”

The policy lasted precisely one winter. Sir Keir and his chancellor have argued in recent weeks that they were able to change course because of a stabilising economy.

McFadden was more direct about the U-turn. “If I’m being honest, I think the reaction to it since the decision was announced was probably stronger than we thought,” he admits.

At the same time the chancellor stood up to announce the winter fuel cuts, news was unfolding of a horrific attack in Southport.

Misinformation about who had carried out the attack fuelled the first mass riots in this country since 2011, when Sir Keir had been the director of public prosecutions. Given the nature of the crisis, the prime minister was well placed to respond.

“As a first crisis, it was dealing with a bit of the machinery of government that he instinctively understood – policing, courts, prisons,” Case says.

Sir Keir’s response was practical and pragmatic — making the judicial system flow faster meant that by mid-August at least 200 rioters had already been sentenced, most jailed with an average term of two years.

But in a way that was not quite clear at the time, the riots spawned what has become one of the defining attacks on the prime minister from the right: that of ‘two-tier Keir’.

The idea that some rioters were treated more harshly than other kinds of protesters had been morphed over time into a broader accusation about who and what the prime minister stood for.

Sir Keir had cancelled his family holiday to deal with the riots. Exhausted, he ended the summer dealing with questions about his personal integrity in what became known as ‘freebiegate’.

Most of the gifts for which he was being criticised – clothing, glasses, concert tickets – had been accepted before the election but Sir Keir was prime minister now. Case told me there was a “naivety” about the greater scrutiny that came with leading the country.

Perhaps more than that, there was a naivety in No 10 about how Sir Keir was seen. Here was a man elected in large part because of a crisis of trust in politics. He had presented himself as different.

Telling voters that he had followed the rules was to miss the point — they thought the rules themselves were bust.

By the winter of 2024, the sense of a government failing to get a grip of itself or a handle on the public mood, had grown. A chorus of off-the-record criticism, much of it strikingly personal, threatened to overwhelm the government.

There were personal ambitions and tensions at play, but more and more insiders – some of them fans of Gray initially – were telling me that the way in which Sir Keir’s chief of staff was running government was structurally flawed, with the system simply not working properly.

Gray announced in early October that she had resigned because she risked becoming a “distraction”. In reality, Sir Keir had sacked her after some of his closest aides warned him he risked a mutiny if he did not.

Sue Gray was approached both for an interview and for her response to her critics but declined.

To the end she retained some supporters in the cabinet including Louise Haigh. “I felt desperately sorry for her,” she says.

“It was just a really, really cruel way to treat someone who’d already been so traduced by the Tories – and then [was] traduced by our side as well.”

Sir Keir appointed Gray. He empowered Gray. And he dispensed with Gray. This was the prime minister correcting his own mistakes – an episode which came at a high political price.

Yet on the world stage the prime minister continued to thrive, winning praise across political divides in the UK and abroad.

Jake Sullivan, Biden’s adviser, was impressed by Sir Keir’s handling of US President Donald Trump, describing the Oval Office meeting where the prime minister brandished an invitation from the King as “the best I’ve seen in terms of a leader in these early weeks going to sit down with the current president”.

It’s an irony that it is Sir Keir, who made his reputation trying to thwart Brexit, who has found for the UK its most defined diplomatic role of the post-Brexit era — close to the US, closer than before to Europe, at the fore of the pro-Ukraine alliance, striking trade deals with India and others.

And it has provided him with something more elusive too: a story — a narrative of a confident, pragmatic leader stepping up on the world stage, acting as a bridge between other countries in fraught times.

The risk, brought into sharp relief during the Israel-Iran conflict in recent days, is that Trump is too unpredictable for such a role to be a stable one.

The international arena has sharpened Sir Keir’s choices domestically as well. Even while making welfare cuts that have displeased so many in his party, the prime minister has a clearer and more joined-up argument about prioritising security in all its forms: through work, through economic prudence, through defence of the realm.

And yet, for plenty of voters Sir Keir has found definition to his government’s direction too late. Labour’s poor performance last month in the local elections plus defeat at the Runcorn and Helsby by-election were a blow to Sir Keir and his team.

It’s far from unheard of for a governing party to lose a by-election, but to lose it to Reform UK on the same night that Nigel Farage’s party hoovered up councils across England made this a distinctively new political moment.

Two days afterwards, Paul Ovenden, Sir Keir’s strategy director, circulated a memo to Downing Street aides, which I’ve obtained.

It called for a “relentless focus on the new centre ground in British politics”.

The crucial swing voters, Ovenden wrote, “are the middle-age, working class, economically squeezed voters that we persuaded in the 2024 election campaign. Many of them voted for us in 2024 thinking we would fix the cost of living, fix the NHS, and reduce migration… we need to become more ruthless in pursuing those outcomes”.

For more than 100 of Starmer’s own MPs, including many of those elected for the first time in that landslide a year ago, the main priority was ruthlessly dismantling the government’s welfare reforms – plunging the prime minister as he approaches his first anniversary into his gravest political crisis yet.

The stakes were beyond high. For the prime minister to have backed down to avoid defeat on this so soon after the winter fuel reversal raises questions about his ability to get his way on plenty else besides.

So, if this first year has done anything, it has clarified the stakes.

This is not just a prime minister and a Labour Party hoping to win a second term. They are trying to prove to a tetchy and volatile country that not only do they get their frustration with politics, but that they can fix it too. None of that will be possible when profound policy disagreements are on public display.