Hegseth said troops had ‘duty’ to refuse Trump’s illegal orders in resurfaced interview

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said U.S. troops have a “duty” to refuse illegal orders from President Donald Trump in a series of 2016 interviews, which have resurfaced.

Speaking on ”Fox and Friends” in March 2016, Hegseth criticized the president’s demands that military officials should ignore the rules of war to achieve their goals.

“You’re not just gonna follow that order if it’s unlawful,” Hegseth said on “Fox and Friends” at the time.

Later that month, he told ”Fox Business” that “the military’s not gonna follow illegal orders.”

The resurfaced interview arrives weeks after Hegseth announced the Pentagon would be investigating Democratic Senator Mark Kelly for participating in a video in which he encouraged active service members to ignore any order that defies the U.S. Constitution.

Kelly and other Democrats made the video in response to the Trump administration’s recent lethal attacks on alleged drug boats in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific.

One of those attacks from September is currently generating controversy, as reports allege the administration launched multiple strikes on a boat despite there being shipwrecked survivors.

Nurse Sandie Peggie wins harassment claim against NHS Fife

A nurse who objected to sharing a female changing room with a transgender doctor has won a claim for harassment in her employment tribunal case against NHS Fife, but other allegations of discrimination were dismissed.

Sandie Peggie was suspended by NHS Fife after complaining about having to share a changing room with Dr Beth Upton at Victoria Hospital in Kirkcaldy on Christmas Eve 2023.

She was placed on special leave after Dr Beth Upton, a transgender medic, made an allegation of bullying and harassment, and cited concerns about patient care.

Ms Peggie had lodged a claim against NHS Fife and Dr Upton, citing the Equality Act 2010, including sexual harassment, harassment related to a protected belief, indirect discrimination, and victimisation.

The employment tribunal hearings took place in Dundee before Judge Sandy Kemp earlier this year.

On Monday in a written judgment, the harassment claim was upheld but allegations of discrimination, indirect discrimination and victimisation were dismissed.

Ms Peggie welcomed the decision and said the past two years had been “agonising”, while her solicitor praised her as “tenacious and courageous”.

The tribunal found that NHS Fife had harassed Mrs Peggie by failing to revoke the grant of permission to Dr Upton on an interim basis after Mrs Peggie complained, for the period until different work rotas took effect so that they would not work together and said that, as a result, Dr Upton was in the changing room when the claimant was present on two occasions.

It also found that the board had harassed Ms Peggie by taking an unreasonable length of time to investigate the allegation, and by making reference to patient care allegations against her on March 28 2024; and giving an instruction to her not to discuss the case, until a further message a little over two weeks later which confirmed that that applied only to the investigation.

The judgment dismissed the claim made against Dr Upton, who was named as a respondent in the case.

Ms Peggie said: “I am beyond relieved and delighted that the tribunal has found that my employer Fife Health Board harassed me after I complained about having to share a female-only changing room with a male colleague.

“The last two years have been agonising for me and my family. I will have much more to say in the coming days once I’ve been able to properly consider the lengthy judgment and discuss it with my legal team.

“For now, I am looking forward to spending a quiet few days with my family.

“I’m so grateful to my incredible legal team, Naomi Cunningham lead counsel; Dr Charlotte Elves, junior counsel; and my solicitor, Margaret Gribbon. There are many others I would like to thank and will do so in the coming days.”

Ms Gribbon added: “The tribunal’s finding that Fife Health Board harassed Sandie Peggie is a huge win for a tenacious and courageous woman standing up for her sex-based rights.

“This has been an extraordinarily lengthy and complex legal case. After hearing evidence for over a month from some 21 witnesses and considering just under 3,000 pages of productions, the tribunal has today delivered a 318-page judgment.

“Due to the length of the judgment and the fact the legal team only received it this morning at 10am, we will not be in a position to make substantive comments on it today and will do so later this week.”

A spokesperson for NHS Fife said: “NHS Fife recognises that this has been a complex and lengthy process and acknowledges the careful consideration of Judge Kemp and the tribunal panel.

“The employment tribunal unanimously dismissed all of the claimant’s allegations against Dr Upton and all of the allegations against the board, apart from four specific aspects of the harassment complaint.

“We will now take time to work through the detail of the judgment alongside our legal team to understand fully what it means for the organisation.

“We want to recognise how difficult this tribunal has been for everyone directly and indirectly involved.

“Our focus now is to ensure that NHS Fife remains a supportive and inclusive environment for all employees and our patients and to deliver health and care to the population of Fife.”

The tribunal judgment said it disagreed with the findings of an internal investigation, and that Ms Peggie had likely “harassed” Dr Upton during the changing room incident.

It said that Ms Peggie’s actions in the changing room indicated “she did not feel a sense of threat from the presence of a male”, but that her concerns “had been brushed off rather than adequately considered” by her employers.

The judgment said there was no evidence of a “conspiracy” against Ms Peggie, or that Dr Upton had deleted phone notes as alleged.

It also found there was no “group disadvantage” to female staff, as it calculated that around 6% of female workers shared Ms Peggie’s views, and that “on the contrary, several of them supported the second respondent doing so”.

However it said that the internal investigation “should have been conducted far more quickly”.

The judgment said that language used by Ms Peggie in the changing room “were entirely reasonably found intrusive and highly offensive (to Dr Upton). They went beyond a simple expression of belief and the concern the claimant felt”.

It added: “We appreciate that our conclusion that what the claimant did amounted to harassment and that is not the outcome of the first respondent’s disciplinary hearing which held that there had not been sufficient evidence to uphold the complaint made.”

However it also said that there was a “stark contrast to the materially higher level support given to the second respondent after the Christmas Eve incident”, and that Ms Peggie “required to have raised her concerns with the first respondent as the decision-maker rather than with the colleague to whom it had been granted” regarding shared use of the changing rooms.

Maya Forstater, chief executive of sex-based rights charity Sex Matters, which supported Ms Peggie, said: “We are pleased that Sandie Peggie has won her claim of harassment against NHS Fife, and that the hospital trust was criticised for its terrible handling of the complaint against her.

“Overall we are disappointed in the tribunal’s approach, which sought to reach a spurious ‘balance’ between a woman’s right to undress with privacy and dignity, and the right of an employee with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment not to be discriminated against.”

Scottish Conservative shadow equalities minister Tess White MSP said: “NHS Fife shamefully tried to silence a nurse who stood up for women’s rights, then squandered a fortune of taxpayers’ money defending their harassment of her.

“The health board have serious questions to answer – and so does John Swinney and Neil Gray, who backed the discredited management team at every turn.”

Rapper Ghetts pleads guilty to causing death by dangerous driving

Rapper Ghetts has pleaded guilty to causing the death of a Nepali student in a hit-and-run collision.

The award-winning grime artist, whose real name is Justin Clarke-Samuel, failed to stop after his BMW hit 20-year-old Yubin Tamang in north-east London.

Clarke-Samuel, who appeared at the Old Bailey via videolink from Pentonville Prison, pleaded guilty to causing Mr Tamang’s death by dangerous driving on 18 October, 2025.

The 41-year-old also pleaded guilty to a charge of dangerous driving when he was at the wheel of a BMW M5 in Tavistock Place and other London roads in Camden, Islington and Hackney on the same day.

Judge Mark Lucraft KC told Clarke-Samuel “the only sentence to be passed is a custodial sentence” but the length of his jail term has yet to be determined.

He is due to be sentenced at the Old Bailey on February 12.

Clarke-Samuel, who is in custody, was disqualified from driving with immediate effect but the length of the ban has yet to be fixed.

He also faces two charges which are set to be dealt with at his next court appearance.

This includes a charge of causing death by careless driving when over the limit for alcohol.

It is alleged he was over the prescribed limit as he drove with 119 microgrammes of alcohol in 100 millilitres of breath on October 18, the charge states.

Clarke-Samuel also faces a further dangerous driving charge.

It is alleged he dangerously drove a BMW M5 on Worcester Crescent and other roads in Redbridge, east London, on the same day.

Mr Tamang was an only child and his parents had sent him to the UK to receive an education.

Ghetts is a rapper and songwriter who has collaborated on tracks with Skepta, Stormzy and Ed Sheeran, and performed at Glastonbury multiple times including in 2024.

He won best male act at the 2021 Mobo Awards and received the Mobo pioneer award in 2024.

The sad truth about Richard Osman and the books you should buy instead

In this season of lists, choosing Christmas presents in a favourite bookshop must rank high on any catalogue of winter’s secret pleasures.

A few weeks ago – reviewing Stephen King’s classic On Writing – when Christmas was still a remote suspicion of tinsel, I reported on the imminent opening of my friend Chloe’s new bookshop on a high street in Hardy’s Wessex. Today’s good news is that, midway between Bath and Salisbury, Fox & King is now open and ready for the first great challenge of any bookseller’s year: the Christmas Books Campaign, that annual offensive, with terrible losses in the No Man’s Land of British literary culture, where a gruesome roster of wannabe bestsellers are bestowed on aunts, nephews and stray in-laws.

Every year, the statistics repeat the same old story. Thirty per cent of new titles sold per annum in the UK will be traded in this “golden quarter” – October to December. A lucky handful of mega-winners will be matched by desolate platoons of losers – the many new titles that fail to pass muster. Amid the carnage, does this indicate a wider book bonanza? Yes and no.

First, we need to submit any Christmas list to some ageless criteria. In 1886, writing in the Pall Mall Gazette, the young Oscar Wilde declared: “Books today may be conveniently divided into three classes.” There were, he decided, “books to read” and “books to re-read”. No argument there. Finally, in an era that “has no time to think”, there were, he said, “books not to read at all”.

His response to this brutal taxonomy was Wildean, pure and simple: “Whosoever will select ‘the Worst 100 Books’ and publish a list of them, will confer on the rising generation a real and lasting benefit.”

The book market is never pure and rarely simple. Who knows what Oscar would have made of 2025? Never mind our having “no time to think”, our politics is broken, society’s enraged by social media; what’s more, there’s a wrecked economy, a ruined planet and a horribly monetised culture.

Browse these Christmas shelves at leisure, and read the runes. 2025 has not been a bumper year – far from it: there might be a case for saying that books are perhaps a mirror to an impending decline.

The sorry emblem of these times is The Impossible Treasure, the latest volume in nice Richard Osman’s Thursday Murder Club series. This year’s likely Christmas bestseller – a lazy gift for any gran, cousin, or misfit – is prolix, preposterous and pointless. No matter; like all its competitors, Fox & King has already romped through its preliminary order, and will be queueing up for more. Booksellers must dance to the reader’s tune.

Another creative dialogue taking place within the literary marketplace will be the way in which some writers are shaped by their audience. Crime/Thrillers is a mighty engine within successful bookshops today. With a beady eye on their audience, some very accomplished contemporary writers – John Banville, Kate Atkinson, JK Rowling (writing as Robert Galbraith) – have subordinated their pens to this genre, possibly because it seems to offer some obscure consolations.

When life makes no sense, with a disrupted world in flux, it’s reassuring to read about a time and place in which crimes are solved. In this cosy world whose titles often, inexplicably, have either a “bookshop” or a “swimming club” in the title, Rachel McLean and Tom Hindle (A Kller in Paradise; or Murder on Lake Garda) are household gods.

Another winning genre is the mash-up of memoir and nature-writing like the now classic H is for Hawk (2014). It is no surprise that Katherine May’s Wintering, and Raising Hare by Chloe Dalton are still churning rich seasonal sales.

The bookshop market remains capricious. Nothing new there; that’s part of its charm. A generation back, in the fabled Eighties, one sure-fire Christmas choice would be the Booker Prize shortlist (six novels in search of new readers). The news from Fox & King is that this international literary prize, and also the Baillie Gifford Prize (formerly the Samuel Johnson), no longer excite much popular interest. This tide of indifference is echoed by the perfunctory coverage of Booker in the national press, at least in comparison to the fever surrounding, in recent memory, Midnight’s Children (1980) and The English Patient (1992).

Out in bookish Wessex – as good a straw poll as any – David Szalay’s Flesh has sold just one copy since taking Booker’s laurels. Similarly, with the Baillie Gifford, Helen Garner’s How to End a Story (Orion, £30) remains unsold. A better bet would be Frances Wilson’s exceptional Electric Spark: The enigma of Muriel Spark (Bloomsbury, £25).

Popular but pricey middlebrow hardbacks always enjoy steady pre-Christmas sales. Two top-selling titles, Lyse Doucet’s The Finest Hotel in Kabul (Hutchinson, £25) and Andrew Graham-Dixon’s Vermeer (Allen Lane, £30) compete this year with Mother Mary Comes To Me (Penguin) by Arundhati Roy. But all of these will be outsold by Middle England’s darling, Rory Stewart. His Middleland (Jonathan Cape £20) has become the ageing baby-boomer’s comfort read.

Finally, there’s always the cult book, driven by word of mouth, such as The Covenant of Water by Abraham Verghese, even if, on my reading, his Cutting for Stone is superior. Also at Christmas, there are those titles – in the department of “no accounting for taste” – such as Always Remember: The Boy, The Mole, the Fox and the Horse and The Storm by Charles Mackesy. Published last year, this is still being bought by adults and children alike, as an inexplicable but harmless phenomenon. For a savage, cast-iron classic, why not try the Cambridge University Press-annotated edition of Gulliver’s Travels?

Such lists have their own addiction, but they are never the last word. A good list can – indeed must – challenge its own existence. Let’s agree that if 2025 has been a below-average year for new titles, a good bookshop can still fulfil that hankering, after Wilde, for “the great re-read”. I’ve never believed in “instant classics”, but here’s a Top Three of Must Reads – Well-Kept Secrets, or Golden Perennials – you’d hope to find in a good high-street bookshop:

1. Marilynne Robinson: Housekeeping

2. Jilly Cooper: Rivals

3. Elizabeth Taylor: Mrs Palfrey at the Claremont

Happy Christmas!

Joey Barton sentenced for posting grossly offensive social media messages

Former footballer Joey Barton has avoided jail after sending six grossly offensive social media posts.

In November, the ex-Premier League player, 43, was convicted of six counts of sending a grossly offensive electronic communication with intent to cause distress or anxiety.

A jury at Liverpool Crown Court found Barton had “crossed the line between free speech and a crime” with six posts he made on X (formerly Twitter) about broadcaster Jeremy Vine and TV football pundits Lucy Ward and Eni Aluko.

Following a televised FA Cup tie between Crystal Palace and Everton in January 2024, Barton likened Ward and Aluko in a post on X to the “Fred and Rose West of football commentary”.

He went on to superimpose the faces of the two women onto a photograph of the serial murderers.

Barton had also tweeted that Aluko was in the “Joseph Stalin/Pol Pot category” as she had “murdered hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of football fans’ ears”.

Jurors found him not guilty on the Stalin/Pol Pot comparison, and also the commentary analogy with the Wests, but ruled the superimposed image was grossly offensive.

He was also convicted of a post in relation to Aluko in which he wrote: “Only there to tick boxes. DEI is a load of s***. Affirmative action. All off the back of the BLM/George Floyd nonsense”.

In a statement after Barton’s conviction, Aluko said: “Social media is a cesspit where too many people feel they can say things to others they wouldn’t dream of saying in real life under the guise of freedom of speech.

“This is a reminder that actions online do not come without consequences.

“The messages directed at me, Lucy Ward and Jeremy Vine by Joey Barton were deeply distressing and had a real damaging impact on my life and career. I am glad that justice has been served.”

Barton repeatedly referred to Vine as “bike nonce” and asked him: “Have you been on Epstein Island? Are you going to be on these flight logs? Might as well own up now because I’d phone the police if I saw you near a primary school on ya bike.”

He was convicted over the Epstein post and a tweet in which he said: “Oh @the JeremyVine Did you Rolf-aroo and Schofield go out on a tandem bike ride? You big bike nonce ya”.

Barton was also found guilty of other tweets in relation to Vine in which he referred to him as “bike nonce” and said: “If you see this fella by a primary school call 999,” and “Beware Man with Camera on his helmets cruising past primary schools. Call the Cops if spotted”.

He was cleared of guilt over three remaining tweets referring to Vine. At Liverpool Crown Court on Monday, Barton was handed a sentence of six months in custody, suspended for 18 months.

Sentencing, the honorary recorder of Liverpool, Judge Andrew Menary KC, told Barton: “Robust debate, satire, mockery and even crude language may fall within permissible free speech. But when posts deliberately target individuals with vilifying comparisons to serial killers or false insinuations of paedophilia, designed to humiliate and distress, they forfeit their protection.

“As the jury concluded, your offences exemplify behaviour that is beyond this limit – amounting to a sustained campaign of online abuse that was not mere commentary but targeted, extreme and deliberately harmful.”

The judge also spoke about the impact of Barton’s words on his victims as he sentenced the one-time England international.

He said: “Ms Aluko, an England international capped 104 times, an experienced broadcaster, and a senior football executive, describes your posts as misogynistic and racist abuse that unleashed a torrent of hatred towards her.

“She experienced fear, disgust, and profound distress, cancelling engagements, hiring security, and fearing for her family’s safety, with lasting harm to her professional confidence. She is clear that your attacks were at least partly racially motivated, targeting her as a Black woman and inviting others to echo that hostility.

“Ms Ward, a pioneer in women’s football with more than 25 years’ experience as a player, mentor and commentator, describes acute humiliation, emotional harm, and professional undermining. Your dismissal of her expertise as ‘tokenistic’ and your comparison of her to Rose West caused psychological injury, loss of work and a heightened sense of vulnerability for her and her family.

“She questions why her gender should be used to diminish her achievements and highlights the wider harm that such conduct inflicts on women working in sport.

“Mr Vine’s statement details the terror of being falsely labelled a paedophile to millions, fearing for his and his family’s safety, and enduring reputational harm from your sustained insinuations.

“He recounts months of disturbed sleep, an inability to enjoy his work or social interactions, and a pervasive fear that your statements had contaminated his reputation among people he had not yet met, forcing him into the humiliating position of feeling he needed to ‘correct’ what others might now believe about him. The psychological toll was accompanied by a significant financial one: the huge cost of pursuing civil proceedings simply to stop these defamatory allegations.”

Simon Csoka KC, defending, said a pre-sentence report had detailed how Barton had shown a “substantial amount of insight into his behaviour and a substantial amount of contrition”.

“The defendant now understands how powerful and damaging words are,” he said.

“He fully understands the restraining orders are there for a good reason. He also understands that they will serve as a constant reminder to him of going too far on social media.”

Character references were provided to the court for the father of four by his wife, mother, grandmother and sister, which “paint a very different picture of Mr Barton”, said his barrister.

Judge Menary noted that Barton had told the author of the pre-sentence report he had taken steps to “moderate” his online behaviour.

He told the defendant: “In light of the steps you have taken, I am persuaded that there is some prospect of rehabilitation, that an immediate custodial sentence is not required to protect either the public or the victims, and that a suspended sentence order may itself operate as a deterrent against any future offending.”

Barton must also complete 200 hours of unpaid work in the community and pay prosecution costs of £23,419. Two-year restraining orders were issued against each of his victims, which includes publishing any reference to them on any social media platform or broadcast medium.

Barton, from Huyton, Merseyside, played for several clubs, including Manchester City, Newcastle United and Queens Park Rangers, across his career. He was also capped once by England.

He went on to manage Fleetwood Town and Bristol Rovers after retiring from playing. He is now a podcaster with 2.7 million followers on X.

Winter Warning: Flu is not just a bad cold

As winter sets in and viruses circulate more easily in our homes, workplaces and public spaces, the NHS is encouraging people aged 18 to 64 with long-term health conditions to get their flu vaccine. Many don’t realise they’re eligible, or that their condition puts them at greater risk of serious complications if they catch flu.

Flu is not a bad cold. It’s a contagious respiratory virus that can cause high fever, body aches and exhaustion lasting for weeks. But for people with certain long-term conditions, it can also trigger severe complications such as pneumonia, bronchitis or organ failure.

The statistics are stark. Those with respiratory diseases like severe asthma or COPD are seven times more likely to die if they catch the flu. People with diabetes are six times more likely, and those with heart disease are 11 times more likely. For anyone with a weakened immune system, the risk rises even higher.

In 2022–23 alone, more than 49,000 people were hospitalised with flu, and 2,000 were admitted to intensive care in England. The majority of severe cases involved people with underlying conditions, many of whom thought flu “wasn’t a big deal.”

Many people with long-term health conditions manage them well and may not think of themselves as vulnerable. But flu can place a sudden strain on the body and make existing conditions harder to control. Someone with severe asthma, for example, may experience severe attacks; those with diabetes can find their blood sugar levels become unstable; and for people with heart or kidney disease, flu can significantly increase the risk of hospitalisation.

Because flu viruses change from year to year, immunity from previous infections or vaccines doesn’t last, so getting vaccinated annually is the best way to stay protected.

Flu vaccines are available free of charge for eligible people at most GP practices and participating pharmacies, and booking takes just a few minutes. You can book online at nhs.uk/book-flu, through your GP surgery, on the NHS APP or by visiting your local pharmacy directly.

The vaccine cannot give you the flu, and side effects are generally mild: a sore arm or slight fatigue for a day or two. What it can do is reduce your risk of getting the flu and, if you do catch it, make your symptoms milder and recovery faster. Studies show that people with eligible conditions are nearly half as likely to be hospitalised with flu if they’ve been vaccinated.

Vaccination doesn’t just protect the individual, either; it helps protect everyone. When fewer people catch and spread the virus, it reduces pressure on hospitals and helps shield those who are most vulnerable, such as older relatives, pregnant women and people with weakened immune systems.

In a busy winter full of colds, coughs and competing priorities, booking a flu jab can easily slip down the list. But for millions of people living with long-term health conditions, it could be the difference between a short recovery at home and a serious illness requiring hospital treatment.

Getting vaccinated is quick, safe and effective, and one of the simplest ways to protect your health this winter.

Check if you’re eligible and book your NHS flu vaccine today here

Hundreds of Girlguiding volunteers threaten to quit over trans ban

Hundreds of Girlguiding volunteers have threatened to quit the organisation if its recent ban on trans girls is not reversed.  

It follows Tuesday’s announcement that Girlguiding, which has around 300,000 UK members across its Rainbows, Brownies, Guides and Rangers groups, will now only allow those recorded female at birth to join. 

Volunteers say they were not consulted on the decision, which they believe contradicts the organisation’s core values.

Amanda Jane Heather, who is leading a petition that already has more than 200 signatures, said: “We cannot, in good conscience, uphold a policy that contradicts established safeguarding research, the lived experience of our members, and the inclusive ethos we were trained to deliver.

“Volunteers are taking this step not out of frustration alone, but out of deep concern.”

The volunteers are yet to receive a response from Girlguiding acknowledging their intent to resign. 

“Many of us who have signed the letter of intent to resign are long-standing volunteers who believe Girlguiding’s strength has always come from its inclusivity, compassion, and commitment to helping all girls grow in confidence. 

“The recent decision to exclude transgender girls represents, for many of us, a fundamental departure from those values,” Ms Heather said. 

While the decision to restrict new membership was put in place on Tuesday, there are no immediate changes for current members, with more information expected to be shared this week.  

The policy change came nearly eight months after the Supreme Court’s ruling on biological sex, which Girlguiding said meant “many organisations across the country have been facing complex decisions about what it means for girls and women and for the wider communities affected”.

The organisation said the “difficult decision” had been made after “detailed considerations, expert legal advice and input from senior members, young members”, its council and board of trustees.

A joint statement released last week by Girlguiding chairwoman of trustees, Denise Wilson, its chief executive Felicity Oswald and its chief guide Tracy Foster said: “Girlguiding believes strongly in inclusion, and we will continue to support young people and adults in marginalised groups. Over the next few months, we will explore potential ways to champion this value. A new task force will look at ways to do this, in partnership with members.

“While Girlguiding may feel a little different going forward, our core aims and principles will always endure and we remain committed to treating everyone with dignity and respect, particularly those from marginalised groups that have felt the biggest impact of this decision.”

But Ms Heather said many of the volunteers felt blindsided by the announcement. 

“The scale of the response reflects the level of distress the decision has caused. Many volunteers feel that this policy was implemented without meaningful consultation, without adequate justification, and without any clear evidence that trans inclusion has ever posed a safeguarding risk in Girlguiding.

“On the contrary, the evidence we do have, from Girlguiding’s own history of inclusive practice, as well as national and international youth-sector research, shows that trans inclusion strengthens wellbeing and safety within groups.”

Tammy Hymas, policy lead for TransActual, said: “It’s awful that an organisation, which would happily be inclusive and has been for many years, is being forced to exclude young trans girls by adults with bigotry and institutional power. There is no problem being solved here, only harm being done.”

The Independent has contacted Girlguiding for comment.

Chernobyl ‘unable to stop radiation leak after Russian strike’

The protective shield at the Chernobyl power plant can no longer contain radioactive material due to damage caused by a drone strike earlier this year, the UN’s nuclear watchdog has warned.

In February, the plant was damaged by a drone armed with a warhead, which pierced the outer shell, helping prevent radiation leaks from Chernobyl’s reactor Number Four. Ukraine said Russia was behind the attack, but the Kremlin denied responsibility.

Rafael Grossi, the director of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), said an inspection last week found that the structure had “lost its primary safety functions, including the confinement capability”. No permanent damage has been done to the load-bearing structures or monitoring systems.

Although repairs have been carried out, the site requires a “comprehensive restoration” in order to “prevent further degradation and ensure long-term nuclear safety”, Mr Grossi said.

In February, the drone punched a hole in the structure of the outer shell and briefly started a fire around the reactor, which was destroyed in 1986 when the plant exploded and sent radiation across Europe. It remains the world’s worst nuclear accident, killing 31 people.

Radiation levels at the shuttered plant in the Kyiv region have not increased, the IAEA said, as the drone strike did not breach the plant’s inner containment shell.

The shield was built in 2016 to prevent the release of radioactive material into the atmosphere due to the Chernobyl disaster. The plant’s last working reactor was closed in 2000.

In the first weeks of its February 2022 invasion, Russian forces occupied the plant and the surrounding area – which lies around 130km north of Kyiv – before withdrawing from northern Ukraine in late March.

Russian forces have been accused by Ukraine and its European allies of playing fast and loose around key nuclear sites, including both Chernobyl and Zaporizhzhia, which is the largest nuclear power plant in Europe. It has been occupied by Russia since 2022.

Speaking on Saturday at the Reagan National Defense Forum, Donald Trump’s outgoing Ukraine envoy, Keith Kellogg, said efforts to end the war depended on the two outstanding issues of the Donbas and the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant.

The Zaporizhzhia plant, which is not in service, needs reliable power to cool its six shutdown reactors and spent fuel, to avoid any catastrophic nuclear incidents.