Donald Trump has said he appreciated Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s willingness to sign a minerals deal with the United States and come to the negotiating table to bring a lasting peace in Ukraine closer.

“Earlier today, I received an important letter from President Zelenskyy of Ukraine,” the US president said in a speech to Congress after last week’s disastrous meeting at the White House. Quoting from the letter, Trump said Zelenskyy told him that “Ukraine is ready to come to the negotiating table as soon as possible to bring lasting peace closer. Nobody wants peace more than the Ukrainians.”

“My team and I stand ready to work under President Trump’s strong leadership to get a peace that lasts,” Trump quoted Zelenskyy as writing. “We do really value how much America has done to help Ukraine maintain its sovereignty and independence.”

Trump also said he had been in “serious discussions with Russia” and claimed he had “received strong signals that they are ready for peace”.

“Wouldn’t that be beautiful?” he said. “It’s time to stop this madness. It’s time to halt the killing. It’s time to end this senseless war. If you want to end wars you have to talk to both sides.”

The comments marked a slight softening of Trump’s language on Ukraine in the wake of the Oval Office clash, after which he ordered a pause on all US military aid to Ukraine.

Trump was expected to further outline his plans for Ukraine and Russia in the speech to Congress, but did not reveal any more details.

In the same speech Trump said that he would take control of Greenland “one way or another”, adding that the US was ready to accept the people of the Danish territory, during a speech that escalated the rhetoric surrounding his territorial ambitions in the western hemisphere.

He defended recent foreign policy moves including the introduction of new tariffs against Mexico and Canada that the Canadian prime minister, Justin Trudeau, had called a “very dumb thing to do”.

Trump claimed that the US would be “reclaiming” the Panama canal, “and we’ve already started doing it”.

The US president said the US needed Greenland, which is controlled by Denmark, for “national security and even international security”, adding: “I think we’re going to get it – one way or the other, we’re going to get it.”

“I also have a message tonight for the incredible people of Greenland,” he said during his speech, as both the vice-president, JD Vance, and the house speaker, Mike Johnson, smiled behind him. “We strongly support your right to determine your own future. And if you choose, we welcome you into the United States of America.”

“We will keep you safe,” he said. “We will make you rich.”

On the Panama canal, he reacted positively to news that a China-headquartered company had sold two ports near the canal to American-owned BlackRock. Trump had claimed the ports could be used to exert Chinese control over the canal, and recounted that the canal was “built by Americans for Americans, not for others. But others could use it.”

“We didn’t give it to China; we gave it to Panama, and we’re taking it back,” he said during the speech.

He also gave a backhanded compliment to his secretary of state, Marco Rubio, who recently travelled to Panama during a Latin American tour that was largely focused on migration and efforts to regain control over the canal.

“We have Marco Rubio in charge,” Trump said with relish. “Good luck, Marco. Now we know who to blame if anything goes wrong.”

Donald Trump has said he appreciated Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s willingness to sign a minerals deal with the United States and come to the negotiating table to bring a lasting peace in Ukraine closer.

“Earlier today, I received an important letter from President Zelenskyy of Ukraine,” the US president said in a speech to Congress after last week’s disastrous meeting at the White House. Quoting from the letter, Trump said Zelenskyy told him that “Ukraine is ready to come to the negotiating table as soon as possible to bring lasting peace closer. Nobody wants peace more than the Ukrainians.”

“My team and I stand ready to work under President Trump’s strong leadership to get a peace that lasts,” Trump quoted Zelenskyy as writing. “We do really value how much America has done to help Ukraine maintain its sovereignty and independence.”

Trump also said he had been in “serious discussions with Russia” and claimed he had “received strong signals that they are ready for peace”.

“Wouldn’t that be beautiful?” he said. “It’s time to stop this madness. It’s time to halt the killing. It’s time to end this senseless war. If you want to end wars you have to talk to both sides.”

The comments marked a slight softening of Trump’s language on Ukraine in the wake of the Oval Office clash, after which he ordered a pause on all US military aid to Ukraine.

Trump was expected to further outline his plans for Ukraine and Russia in the speech to Congress, but did not reveal any more details.

In the same speech Trump said that he would take control of Greenland “one way or another”, adding that the US was ready to accept the people of the Danish territory, during a speech that escalated the rhetoric surrounding his territorial ambitions in the western hemisphere.

He defended recent foreign policy moves including the introduction of new tariffs against Mexico and Canada that the Canadian prime minister, Justin Trudeau, had called a “very dumb thing to do”.

Trump claimed that the US would be “reclaiming” the Panama canal, “and we’ve already started doing it”.

The US president said the US needed Greenland, which is controlled by Denmark, for “national security and even international security”, adding: “I think we’re going to get it – one way or the other, we’re going to get it.”

“I also have a message tonight for the incredible people of Greenland,” he said during his speech, as both the vice-president, JD Vance, and the house speaker, Mike Johnson, smiled behind him. “We strongly support your right to determine your own future. And if you choose, we welcome you into the United States of America.”

“We will keep you safe,” he said. “We will make you rich.”

On the Panama canal, he reacted positively to news that a China-headquartered company had sold two ports near the canal to American-owned BlackRock. Trump had claimed the ports could be used to exert Chinese control over the canal, and recounted that the canal was “built by Americans for Americans, not for others. But others could use it.”

“We didn’t give it to China; we gave it to Panama, and we’re taking it back,” he said during the speech.

He also gave a backhanded compliment to his secretary of state, Marco Rubio, who recently travelled to Panama during a Latin American tour that was largely focused on migration and efforts to regain control over the canal.

“We have Marco Rubio in charge,” Trump said with relish. “Good luck, Marco. Now we know who to blame if anything goes wrong.”

Financial speculators are investing in a growing number of lawsuits against governments over environmental laws and other regulations that affect profits, often generating lucrative awards, the Guardian has found.

For a long time, litigation finance thrived primarily in the realm of car crashes and employment claims. “Had an accident that wasn’t your fault?” was the industry’s billboard catchphrase, offering to finance lawsuits in exchange for a cut of any payout.

Now, however, the sector has found a far larger playground: financing massive arbitration lawsuits launched by companies against governments, where claims can stretch to tens of billions of dollars.

These cases come under a little-known area of international law called investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS), which allows corporations to sue countries for actions that hurt their profits.

With litigation funders facing no risk of a counterclaim, and potential awards that now average more than $200m (£160m), legal experts warn that the system has become a “gambler’s nirvana” for hedge funds and specialist financiers.

Within the sector, the debate is growing: advocates for third-party funding say it increases access to justice but critics, including arbitrators who rule on cases, are raising concerns that the growth of third-party funding is fuelling expensive and potentially frivolous cases at enormous cost to the public.

A Guardian investigation, which analysed more than 1,400 cases launched against governments, found that ISDS cases have become far more common and lucrative. More than $120bn of public money was awarded to firms through ISDS courts, including at least $84bn to fossil fuel companies and $7.8bn awarded to mining companies.

The true figures are likely to be far higher as companies often do not disclose the size of payouts they receive. The Guardian found that in 31% of cases where a payout or settlement was made, the size of the award was not disclosed.

These cases have become an increasingly popular investment class for hedge funds and other investors, who back the legal action financially in exchange for a share of the final award. The Guardian identified at least 75 ISDS cases backed by third parties, although this too is likely to be a substantial underestimate: many treaties include no obligation to disclose third-party funding of cases, and the largest dispute-resolution body only began demanding disclosure in 2022.

Half of all third-party funded cases were launched by investors from the US, Britain or Canada, and more than 50% were cases relating to fossil fuels or mining. More than three-quarters of cases were against developing countries, according to Guardian analysis of data provided by Jus Mundi, a legal intelligence platform with access to the largest international law and arbitration database.

Examples of third-party funded cases include the Bermudan company South American Silver, whose subsidiary acquired mining concessions in an area of Bolivia mainly inhabited by Indigenous communities. In 2010, the company was accused of polluting sacred spaces and threatening community members, and the Bolivian government revoked the concessions. The government had to pay the mining company $18.7m in compensation.

In another case, the Mexican government is being sued by a Canadian mining company, Silver Bull, for $408m in damages after it failed to disband a blockade of local protesting miners. The case is expected to start in October.

This year, Burford Capital – the world’s largest litigation-finance company – is backing a case against Greenland for the impact of a uranium mining ban that a mining company argues in effect ended its development of one of the world’s largest rare earth mineral deposits. If Greenland loses the case, it faces either allowing the mining to go ahead or paying as much as $11.5bn in compensation.

Concerns are increasingly being raised by those who work within the ISDS system, including arbitrators who adjudicate cases.

Muthucumaraswamy Sornarajah, an international lawyer and ISDS arbitrator, believes third-party funding has made ISDS into “big business”. He said it was likely that there were more claims being brought, because the risk of losing the claim “vanishes” for the claimant: “So it would mean that the respondent states – most of which are developing countries – would have to face the cost of defending potentially frivolous claims that are brought with third-party funding.”

Sornarajah said the combination of ballooning legal fees and third-party funding meant “the extent of the business, or profits, that can be made as a result of ISDS is quite massive”.

Internationally, the litigation finance industry is booming, worth $17.5bn in 2024. Supporters of third-party funding typically argue that their participation makes the justice system more accessible.

Christopher Bogart, chief executive and co-founder of Burford Capital, the largest provider of litigation finance in the world, said third-party funding played an important role in providing access to justice by supporting litigants that otherwise would not be able to afford legal action. Burford Capital was the only third-party finance firm that would speak to the Guardian. The company said that as of September 2024, 93% of concluded cases generated a return for clients.

“Legal finance provides a vetting function and weeds out meritless cases: we only get paid when our clients win their cases – if the cases we fund lose, we lose 100% of our money,” the company said in a statement.

Bogart added: “I don’t think ISDS is any more high potential or lucrative than lots of other areas of litigation.”

But critics warn that the rise of third-party cases is driving the growth of speculative cases. Lisa Sachs, director of the Columbia Center on Sustainable Investment, said: “Third-party funding enables, or even encourages, investors to pursue claims off investors’ balance sheets, removing a key deterrent to bringing weak or speculative claims.

“The litigation funders seek out and invest in cases as an opportunity to generate a return on their investments, at times partnering with law firms who have a financial interest in bringing more claims as well. This dynamic incentivises more arbitration, regardless of broader public interest or the legitimacy of the claims.”

However, Burford said: “We would go out of business if we chose bad or frivolous cases and business necessity requires us to be highly selective in our investments and to back winning cases. We enable businesses that wouldn’t otherwise be able to seek justice.”

Currently, arbitrators cannot financially penalise third-party funders by forcing them to cover a government’s legal costs. But some think that should change. Commenting on the case of Teinver v Argentina, one of the arbitrators, Kamal Hossain, said in a dissenting opinion that “the creation of a ‘gambler’s Nirvana’ by allowing third-party funders to use investor-state dispute settlements as a means of financial speculation, without any possibility of making costs awards against those funders, is deeply problematic.”

“The current inability of tribunals to make cost awards against third-party funders is a real and serious issue, and has attracted the concern of arbitrators in previous cases,” he said. “Their involvement may add to the costs of the proceedings. For that reason, as a matter of principle, a tribunal should be able to make a costs order against a third-party funder.”

In a recent dissenting opinion on the Odyssey Marine Exploration case against Mexico, Prof Philippe Sands, one of the arbitrators, highlighted the “jaw-dropping” costs that the claimant had racked up, which amounted to more than $21m, half of which was covered by third-party funding. The investors’ costs were about 10 times that of the government in defending the claim.

In a subsequent lecture, Sands raised the broader issue of third-party finance in the ISDS world, echoing concerns about how costly the system has become. “The arrangements may be said to assist in delivering a flowering of sorts: more fees for the lawyers, more cases for the arbitrators and a deeper, wider and more lucrative trough into which all of our snouts may be dipped,” he said.

Find more age of extinction coverage here, and follow the biodiversity reporters Phoebe Weston and Patrick Greenfield in the Guardian app for more nature coverage

A PhD student who charmed women so he could drug, video and attack them has been convicted of raping 10 women in London and China, with police fearing he may have 50 more victims.

Zhenhao Zou, 28, was convicted by a jury at Inner London crown court on Wednesday, after more than 18 hours of deliberations.

One senior police source said the extent of his violence against women could be the worst seen in Britain, with detectives still examining mountains of evidence that may show he carried out many more attacks.

Zou was convicted of raping three women in London and seven in China, between 2019 and 2024. He filmed most of his rapes, and the videos provided key evidence leading to him being convicted and facing years in jail.

Most of his victims, who in the videos are unconscious or stupefied because of the drugs he gave them, are as yet unidentified. He ignored their pleas to stop his attacks as they lost consciousness after being drugged, videos played in court showed.

Detectives have recovered more videos and believe they show he committed a further 50 attacks. They believe half of the rapes took place in Britain – almost certainly in London – with his victims being young women of Chinese heritage.

Zou told the jury he was a user of extreme pornography who was aroused most by watching videos of sex with unconscious women, as well as by rape role play.

In all, Zou was convicted of 11 rapes, on 10 women, as well as one count of false imprisonment.

He was also found guilty of 10 counts of possessing extreme pornography, three counts of voyeurism, and three counts of committing an offence, namely having butanediol, to commit rape. In all, he was found guilty of 28 counts.

He was acquitted of seven counts, including of having MDMA, ketamine and alprazolam so that he could commit rape, and two counts of possessing an extreme pornographic image.

Zou is now the subject of what is believed to be the biggest rape investigation in Britain. The Metropolitan police appealed for anyone who fears they may have been a victim of the seemingly charming well-off student to contact them.

In court, Zou, who was studying engineering at University College London, bragged of having “five new sexual partners every month”.

The Met commander Kevin Southworth said Zou was “predatory and cowardly” and one of the worst offenders the police had investigated in recent times. The effect of the date rape drugs could mean victims may not know Zou attacked them.

Southworth said: “This man may well turn out to be one of the most prolific sexual offenders we have ever seen in this country.”

About 50 videos believed to contain more attacks have been examined, as well as 1,660 hours of footage in Mandarin, and 9m social media messages. “Some women may not know they were victims,” said Southworth.

Victims gave harrowing accounts of their ordeal.

The prosecutor, Catherine Farrelly KC, said Zou appeared respectable and a gentleman, but the reality was different. “He was a wolf in sheep’s clothing and every woman’s nightmare,” she said.

“He was a man who was sexually excited by having sex with a sleeping woman … and sexually excited by the idea of rape. He is a serial rapist, he is a predator. He would use drink or drugs to incapacitate women.”

During one video, a woman said: “I really don’t want … I beg you, don’t do this …” and Zou replied: “Don’t push me, it’s pointless … The sound insulation here is very good.”

His tactic was to invite women to his home in Woburn Place, central London, or a flat in south London, for drinks or to study. He met them socially or via dating apps.

One victim went to Zou’s home for drinks, which were drugged, and later felt tired. Zou had sex with her. She told police: “I can’t fight back, I have no strength,” and was raped while unconscious, the court heard. Video of the incident shot by a camera on a bedside table confirmed her account.

The woman’s speech was slurred, and she complained of feeling unwell and wanting to go home, later telling Zou not to restrain her. She screamed and tried to get up from the bed on several occasions, with the defendant pushing her back down.

The first woman went to the Met on 18 November 2023. Zou was not arrested, and two days later flew to China. He was arrested on his return to the UK in January 2024.

The jury was told that searches of Zou’s London home had found drugs including MDMA, butanediol, ketamine and alprazolam.

Police also found a trove of designer clothing with some still having the tags on, as well as a box believed to contain “souvenirs” of his victims.

Zou gave evidence during the trial across five days, changing his evidence as he went along.

In a police interview, he claimed he had one date rape drug for use as a moisturiser for dry skin, but then changed his story before the jury to claim he used it to get high when he went out clubbing. In fact, it was used to carry out his attacks.

Zou said he was “in the habit” of filming himself having sex. He first came to Britain to study in 2017 at Queen’s University Belfast. Two years later he started studying at UCL.

The jury was given a majority direction for four remaining counts about whether drugs Zou is alleged to have had were used to help him rape his victims. But after further deliberations, he was found not guilty.

He will be sentenced on 19 June.

Donald Trump has said he appreciated Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s willingness to sign a minerals deal with the United States and come to the negotiating table to bring a lasting peace in Ukraine closer.

“Earlier today, I received an important letter from President Zelenskyy of Ukraine,” the US president said in a speech to Congress after last week’s disastrous meeting at the White House. Quoting from the letter, Trump said Zelenskyy told him that “Ukraine is ready to come to the negotiating table as soon as possible to bring lasting peace closer. Nobody wants peace more than the Ukrainians.”

“My team and I stand ready to work under President Trump’s strong leadership to get a peace that lasts,” Trump quoted Zelenskyy as writing. “We do really value how much America has done to help Ukraine maintain its sovereignty and independence.”

Trump also said he had been in “serious discussions with Russia” and claimed he had “received strong signals that they are ready for peace”.

“Wouldn’t that be beautiful?” he said. “It’s time to stop this madness. It’s time to halt the killing. It’s time to end this senseless war. If you want to end wars you have to talk to both sides.”

The comments marked a slight softening of Trump’s language on Ukraine in the wake of the Oval Office clash, after which he ordered a pause on all US military aid to Ukraine.

Trump was expected to further outline his plans for Ukraine and Russia in the speech to Congress, but did not reveal any more details.

In the same speech Trump said that he would take control of Greenland “one way or another”, adding that the US was ready to accept the people of the Danish territory, during a speech that escalated the rhetoric surrounding his territorial ambitions in the western hemisphere.

He defended recent foreign policy moves including the introduction of new tariffs against Mexico and Canada that the Canadian prime minister, Justin Trudeau, had called a “very dumb thing to do”.

Trump claimed that the US would be “reclaiming” the Panama canal, “and we’ve already started doing it”.

The US president said the US needed Greenland, which is controlled by Denmark, for “national security and even international security”, adding: “I think we’re going to get it – one way or the other, we’re going to get it.”

“I also have a message tonight for the incredible people of Greenland,” he said during his speech, as both the vice-president, JD Vance, and the house speaker, Mike Johnson, smiled behind him. “We strongly support your right to determine your own future. And if you choose, we welcome you into the United States of America.”

“We will keep you safe,” he said. “We will make you rich.”

On the Panama canal, he reacted positively to news that a China-headquartered company had sold two ports near the canal to American-owned BlackRock. Trump had claimed the ports could be used to exert Chinese control over the canal, and recounted that the canal was “built by Americans for Americans, not for others. But others could use it.”

“We didn’t give it to China; we gave it to Panama, and we’re taking it back,” he said during the speech.

He also gave a backhanded compliment to his secretary of state, Marco Rubio, who recently travelled to Panama during a Latin American tour that was largely focused on migration and efforts to regain control over the canal.

“We have Marco Rubio in charge,” Trump said with relish. “Good luck, Marco. Now we know who to blame if anything goes wrong.”

A British citizen captured while fighting alongside the Ukrainian army has been sentenced in Russia to 19 years in prison on charges of terrorism and “mercenary activities”.

James Scott Rhys Anderson, 22, from Banbury, Oxfordshire, was captured by Russian forces last November while fighting on Ukraine’s side during its cross-border offensive in Russia’s Kursk region.

Russian investigators accused Anderson of illegally crossing the border into Russia while armed and carrying out “criminal acts against civilians”, causing “significant harm to property” and “destabilising the activities of the authorities”.

The trial took place behind closed doors at a military court in Kursk. Anderson will serve 15 years of his sentence in a high-security penal colony.

The court’s press service said Anderson pleaded guilty, and it published a photograph of Anderson in handcuffs and locked in a cage of the kind in which defendants in Russian court cases are placed.

While British nationals have previously been captured in Russian-occupied eastern Ukraine, Anderson is the first known foreign fighter to be captured and sentenced on Russian territory.

Russia traditionally treats foreigners fighting with the Ukrainian army as mercenaries and says they are not subject to standard protections offered to prisoners of war – protections that Russia regularly violates in any case.

In a video interrogation released on pro-Kremlin Telegram channels after his capture last year, Anderson said he had served as a signalman in the British army for four years before joining Ukraine’s International Legion to fight against Russia.

Anderson’s family later confirmed he was formerly a soldier in the British army’s Royal Signals Corps.

Since Volodymyr Zelenskyy issued a call in February 2022 for foreigners to join the fight against Russia, thousands of people from around the world have travelled to Ukraine. Many have joined units such as the International Legion, known as the most selective of the foreign groups and operating as part of a military unit within the Ukrainian ground forces.

The Foreign Office has not yet commented on Anderson’s sentencing. In November the foreign secretary, David Lammy, said the government would provide Anderson with “all the support that we can”.

Anderson’s father previously told British media that he feared his son would be tortured in captivity and that he had begged him not to go to Ukraine. “He wanted to go out there because he thought he was doing what was right,” Anderson told the Daily Mail. “I’m hoping he’ll be used as a bargaining chip,” he added.

One person who spent time with Anderson in Ukraine described him to the Guardian as a “very giggly, positive, funny and energetic person who loves to hang out with his boys … He is observant and is a really fun and comfortable person to be around.”

In the summer of 2022, two Britons captured while fighting in Mariupol as members of Ukraine’s marines were sentenced to death after a show trial in a court in Russian-occupied eastern Ukraine. The men were later released as part of a prisoner swap between Russia and Ukraine that was brokered by Saudi Arabia.

Russia has previously sentenced a 72-year-old American to nearly seven years in prison on charges of fighting as a mercenary in Ukraine.

A British citizen captured while fighting alongside the Ukrainian army has been sentenced in Russia to 19 years in prison on charges of terrorism and “mercenary activities”.

James Scott Rhys Anderson, 22, from Banbury, Oxfordshire, was captured by Russian forces last November while fighting on Ukraine’s side during its cross-border offensive in Russia’s Kursk region.

Russian investigators accused Anderson of illegally crossing the border into Russia while armed and carrying out “criminal acts against civilians”, causing “significant harm to property” and “destabilising the activities of the authorities”.

The trial took place behind closed doors at a military court in Kursk. Anderson will serve 15 years of his sentence in a high-security penal colony.

The court’s press service said Anderson pleaded guilty, and it published a photograph of Anderson in handcuffs and locked in a cage of the kind in which defendants in Russian court cases are placed.

While British nationals have previously been captured in Russian-occupied eastern Ukraine, Anderson is the first known foreign fighter to be captured and sentenced on Russian territory.

Russia traditionally treats foreigners fighting with the Ukrainian army as mercenaries and says they are not subject to standard protections offered to prisoners of war – protections that Russia regularly violates in any case.

In a video interrogation released on pro-Kremlin Telegram channels after his capture last year, Anderson said he had served as a signalman in the British army for four years before joining Ukraine’s International Legion to fight against Russia.

Anderson’s family later confirmed he was formerly a soldier in the British army’s Royal Signals Corps.

Since Volodymyr Zelenskyy issued a call in February 2022 for foreigners to join the fight against Russia, thousands of people from around the world have travelled to Ukraine. Many have joined units such as the International Legion, known as the most selective of the foreign groups and operating as part of a military unit within the Ukrainian ground forces.

The Foreign Office has not yet commented on Anderson’s sentencing. In November the foreign secretary, David Lammy, said the government would provide Anderson with “all the support that we can”.

Anderson’s father previously told British media that he feared his son would be tortured in captivity and that he had begged him not to go to Ukraine. “He wanted to go out there because he thought he was doing what was right,” Anderson told the Daily Mail. “I’m hoping he’ll be used as a bargaining chip,” he added.

One person who spent time with Anderson in Ukraine described him to the Guardian as a “very giggly, positive, funny and energetic person who loves to hang out with his boys … He is observant and is a really fun and comfortable person to be around.”

In the summer of 2022, two Britons captured while fighting in Mariupol as members of Ukraine’s marines were sentenced to death after a show trial in a court in Russian-occupied eastern Ukraine. The men were later released as part of a prisoner swap between Russia and Ukraine that was brokered by Saudi Arabia.

Russia has previously sentenced a 72-year-old American to nearly seven years in prison on charges of fighting as a mercenary in Ukraine.

Donald Trump is weighing plans to water down sweeping US tariffs on goods from Canada and Mexico, according to a senior official, one day after an economic strike on the US’s two biggest trading partners sparked warnings of price increases and disruption.

The US president extended his aggressive trade strategy at midnight on Tuesday by targeting the country’s two closest neighbors with duties of 25%.

US retail giants predicted that prices were “highly likely” to start rising on store shelves almost immediately, raising questions about Trump’s promises to “make America affordable again” after years of heightened inflation.

Howard Lutnick, the US commerce secretary, indicated on Wednesday that the president could rescind some tariffs as part of a deal with Canada and Mexico.

“What he is thinking about is which sections of the market that can maybe – maybe he’ll consider giving them relief,” Lutnick told Bloomberg. While some products would still face a 25% tariff under the deal, “it could well be autos, it could be others as well” that get relief, he suggested.

During Trump’s joint address to Congress on Tuesday evening, he acknowledged that tariffs would cause “a little disturbance, but we’re OK with that”.

He blamed cost of living challenges on his predecessor, Joe Biden, from whom he claimed to have inherited “an economic catastrophe and an inflation nightmare”.

The US economy has, in fact, remained resilient in recent years, and inflation has fallen dramatically from its peak – at the highest level in a generation – three years ago.

“Among my very highest priorities is to rescue our economy and get dramatic and immediate relief to working families,” said Trump. “As president, I am fighting every day to reverse this damage and make America affordable again.”

Trump is expected to speak on Wednesday with Justin Trudeau, the Canadian prime minister. “Even though you’re a very smart guy, this is a very dumb thing to do,” Trudeau told Trump publicly after the US imposed tariffs this week.

Trump had initially pledged to target Canada and Mexico with tariffs on his first day back in office. Upon his return, however, he said he was considering imposing the tariffs at the start of February. Last month, he offered Canada and Mexico a one-month delay at the 11th hour.

Trump and his allies claim that higher tariffs on US imports from across the world will help “Make America great again”, by enabling it to obtain political and economic concessions from allies and rivals on the global stage.

But businesses, both inside the US and worldwide, have warned of widespread disruption if the Trump administration pushes ahead with this strategy.

Since winning November’s presidential election, the president has focused on China, Canada and Mexico, threatening the three markets with steep duties on their exports unless they reduced the “unacceptable” levels of illegal drugs crossing into the US.

A Guatemalan anti-corruption prosecutor forced into exile after being pursued by the country’s conservative elite has said that leaving the country was the only way to save her life but was only “a little bit less than death”.

Virginia Laparra, 45, spent two years in prison for allegedly abusing her position after she reported her suspicion that a judge had leaked sensitive details from a sealed corruption case to a colleague in 2017.

The judge, Lesther Castellanos, was sanctioned, but then, with the backing of an extreme rightwing genocide denial group, the Foundation Against Terrorism, filed a joint criminal complaint against Laparra.

She was imprisoned ahead of trial in February 2022 and sentenced to four years in jail in December of the same year for her accusation against Castellanos.

In January last year, she was released under house arrest but in July was jailed for five years for another charge relating to her work.

Facing the prospect of going back to prison and further charges, Laparra left her two daughters behind to seek asylum across the border in Mexico.

In an interview with the Guardian in London after receiving the Alliance for Lawyers at Risk’s Sir Henry Brooke award honouring human rights defenders, Laparra said: “Nobody goes into exile voluntarily. Exile is the only thing left when nothing else has worked, it’s the only thing you’ve got left to defend your life and your freedom.

“Exile is just little bit different, a little bit less than death. [Your persecutors] take everything from you, take away your family, your children, your parents, your house, your way of life, your friends.’

Laparra headed a special prosecutor’s office working alongside the International Commission Against Impunity in Guatemala (Cicig), a UN anti-corruption mission that was controversially expelled in September 2019 by the then president, Jimmy Morales. Widespread reprisals followed against those who had worked with Cicig.

When Laparra was taken taken into preventive detention, she said it was as “if I were the worst drugs trafficker in Guatemala. When we drove out of the underground parking in my building there were soldiers, the police, hooded, with heavy weapons on both sides of the street. It was like in a film.”

She spent her first five months in solitary confinement in a windowless 2.5 sq meter cell in a high security jail in Guatemala City, 200 miles away from her Quetzaltenango home, and allowed out for only one hour a day.

“Usually, the male prisoners in that place were only in solitary for two or three days, they can’t really deal with much more,” she said. “That’s what I had to suffer.”

She also endured bleeding to the womb in prison but waited months for treatment. Laparra eventually had a hysterectomy and four subsequent operations, during which she said police surrounded “the hospital, the gynaecology area, the operation room, and I had on each side of my bed a member of the police”.

She was later transferred to Matamoros prison, another notorious facility where drug traffickers and gang leaders are held, after she angered the authorities by speaking to a journalist. “My idea was that at least if I’m going to die [in jail], let’s make sure the world knows what happened,” said Laparra.

She considered pleading guilty in the hope that she might be released as both her sentences were commutable, which in Guatemala usually means no jail time is served, but her daughters told her: “Don’t do that, you’ve been here too long to give up now.”

When things reached their lowest ebb, Laparra said she decided to kill herself before remembering the promise she made to her daughters each time they visited – that she would be there the next time they came.

After her release on house arrest last year, she received an award from Guatemala’s current progressive president, Bernardo Arévalo, a surprise victor in the 2023 election. But Laparra believes the award only inflamed the pursuit of her by the public prosecutor’s office led by the attorney general, María Consuelo Porras, who had also tried to stop Arévalo from taking office.

Porras, who has pursued many other anti-corruption prosecutors and judges, also forced into exile her predecessor as attorney general and has been sanctioned by the US for corruption and the Council of the European Union for undermining democracy.

The Fund for Global Human Rights, which nominated Laparra for the Sir Henry Brooke award, and Amnesty International, which named her as a prisoner of conscience in 2022, said they were “deeply concerned about the systematic pattern of criminalisation imposed by the Guatemalan judiciary and the public prosecutor’s office against former judges, prosecutors, human rights defenders and journalists who have worked tirelessly for years to fight impunity and corruption in the country”.

Laparra says she feels proud to have received the award but adds that her persecutors reacted to the news with anger online. “I thought that it wasn’t possible to keep hate burning for so long,” she said. “Surely, two years in prison would have been enough for them, I thought, but it wasn’t.”

Canada and the US offered to resettle 48 ethnic Uyghurs held in detention in Thailand over the past decade, sources have said, but Bangkok took no action for fear of upsetting China, where most of them were covertly deported last week.

Thailand has defended the deportation, which came despite calls from United Nations human rights experts, saying that it acted in accordance with laws and human rights obligations.

Human rights groups accuse China of widespread abuses of Uyghurs, a mainly Muslim ethnic minority numbering about 10 million in its north-western region of Xinjiang. Beijing denies any abuses.

The Thai deputy prime minister Phumtham Wechayachai said on Monday that no country made any concrete offer to resettle the 48 Uyghurs.

“We waited for more than 10 years, and I have spoken to many major countries, but no one told me for certain,” he told reporters.

Phumtham was out of government from 2006 until mid-2023.

The US offered to resettle the 48 Uyghurs, an official from the US state department said.

“The United States has worked with Thailand for years to avoid this situation, including by consistently and repeatedly offering to resettle the Uyghurs in other countries, including, at one point, the United States,” the US official said, asking not to be named.

Canada also offered asylum to the detained Uyghurs, said four sources, including diplomats and people with direct knowledge. Two of these sources said another offer came from Australia.

These proposals, which the sources said were not taken forward by Thailand over fears of a falling-out with China, have not been previously reported.

All the sources declined to be named because of the sensitivity of the matter. Thailand’s foreign ministry did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

China’s foreign ministry said that the repatriation was carried out in accordance with Chinese, Thai and international law. “The repatriated were Chinese nationals who are illegal migrants,” it said. “The legitimate rights of the relevant people are fully protected.”

A spokesperson for Canada’s immigration ministry said they would not comment on individual cases.

The Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade referred to a statement by the foreign minister, Penny Wong, who said on Friday the country “strongly disagrees” with Thailand’s decision.

Besides the 40 Uyghurs deported last week, five are in a Thai prison due to a continuing criminal case, according to local officials. Reuters could not immediately confirm the whereabouts of the other three people.

Pisan Manawapat, a Thai ambassador to Canada and the US between 2013 and 2017 and a senator before he retired in 2024, said that at least three countries had approached Thailand with proposals to resettle the Uyghurs, but declined to name them.

“We didn’t want to upset China,” Pisan said, without providing further details. “So we did not make the decision at the political level to go through with this.”

China is Thailand’s biggest trade partner and the two countries have close business ties.

Phumtham said Thailand made the decision to deport the group to China last week after reassurances from Beijing that Thai officials would be allow to monitor the Uyghurs’ wellbeing in the country following their return.

UN human rights experts had said the group would be at risk of torture, ill-treatment and “irreparable harm” if returned to China, and their deportation has drawn widespread condemnation.

Following the deportation, the UN’s refugee agency said in a statement that it was repeatedly denied access to the group by Thai authorities.

A source said the UN refugee agency’s lack of access to the Uyghurs meant they could not be processed as asylum seekers, stalling their potential resettlement and leaving them stuck in detention.