Donald Trump’s decision to impose new tariffs on all goods entering the US is a “major blow to the world economy”, European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen has said.

Her comments echo those of a number of other countries, including China, which has expressed its opposition to the move and has warned it will take “resolute countermeasures” against the US.

Their words of warning come after the US president announced a universal 10% tariff on all imports into the US from 5 April. Around 60 countries will also be hit with steeper tariffs from 9 April.

Trump said the measures were payback for unfair trade policies, adding that he had been “very kind” in his decisions.

Trump has said the tariffs will be used to boost US manufacturing, saying on Wednesday that the move would “make America wealthy again”.

Giving a statement on Thursday morning, von der Leyen said the new tax imports will see “uncertainty spiral”, causing “dire” consequences “for millions of people around the globe”.

She emphasised the impact on the most vulnerable countries, pointing out that some of those nations are now subject to some of the highest US tariffs.

The EC chief vowed Europe would take a unified approach and warned that the European Union – which will be subject to a 20% tariff – is preparing countermeasures in case negotiations fail.

“If you take on one of us, you take on all of us”, she said.

Italy’s Giorgia Meloni, a Trump ally, said the decision was “wrong” but that she would work towards a deal with the US to “prevent a trade war”.

Her Spanish counterpart Pedro Sánchez said Spain would “continue to be committed to an open world”, while in Ireland, Taoiseach Micheál Martin said Trump’s decision was “deeply regrettable” and benefitted “no-one”.

In France, President Emmanuel Macron will meet representatives from business sectors hit by the new taxes at the Élysée Palace on Thursday, the French presidency said.

• At a glance: What president’s new taxes mean for EU, China and others
• Full story: Trump charges high tariffs on ‘worst offenders’ globally
• Canada: No additional US tariffs for Canada, but no relief either
• Analysis: Trump’s tariffs are a longtime goal fulfilled – and his biggest gamble yet
• Explainer: What are tariffs, and why is Trump using them?

Outside the EU, China – one of the countries deemed the “worst offenders” by the US president – was hit with a 34% tariff on goods, on top of an existing 20% levy, bringing total duties to at least 54%.

The ministry of commerce urged the US to “immediately cancel” the tariffs, adding that China would “resolutely take countermeasures to safeguard its own rights and interests.”

Taiwan, which is set to face a 32% tariff for exports to the US, called the move “highly unreasonable”.

Premier Cho Jung-tai also said it would make “serious representations” to the US.

South Korean acting President Han Duck-soo said the global trade war “has become a reality” and his government would be looking at ways to “overcome the trade crisis” after the East Asian country was hit with a 25% rate.

Japan said its 24% levy was “extremely regrettable” and could violate World Trade Organization and US-Japan agreements, while Thailand said it would negotiate its 36% tariff.

Economic officials in Israel, which had scrapped all tariffs on American imports ahead of the announcement, were said to be in “complete shock” over its 17% tariff, local media reported.

“We were sure that the decision to completely cancel tariffs on imports from the US would prevent this move”, an official told local media.

White House officials said its levies were reciprocal to countries, such as China, which it said charge higher tariffs on US goods, impose “non-tariff” barriers to US trade or have otherwise acted in ways the government feels undermine American economic goals.

Leaders from countries subject to the 10% baseline rate have also reacted to Trump’s measures, with Australia’s Anthony Albanese saying Americans would end up paying the biggest price for what he called “unjustified tariffs”.

His government will not impose reciprocal measures, he said, adding: “We will not join a race to the bottom that leads to higher prices and slower growth”.

A Downing Street source told the BBC that the UK’s lower tariff “vindicates” the government’s recent efforts towards a trade deal with the US.

Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds said the government remained “fully focused on negotiating an economic deal with the US that strengthens our existing fair and balanced trading relationship”.

In Latin America, its biggest economy, Brazil, approved a law in congress on Wednesday – the Economic Reciprocity Law – to counter the 10% tariff imposed by Trump.

The foreign ministry said it would evaluate “all possible actions to ensure reciprocity in bilateral trade, including resorting to the World Trade Organization”.

Shortly after Trump’s announcement, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent warned countries not to “retaliate” and “sit back, take it in”.

“Because if you retaliate, there will be escalation”, he told Fox News.

Noticeably, the US’s two biggest trade partners, Canada and Mexico, were not mentioned in Wednesday’s announcements.

The White House said it would deal with both countries according to previous executive orders, which imposed 25% tariffs on the two nations as part of efforts to address fentanyl and border issues.

Regardless, Canada will still be impacted by the tariffs, Prime Minister Mark Carney said. Measures such as the 25% tariff on automobiles starting at midnight on Thursday would “directly affect millions of Canadians”, he added.

He vowed to “fight these tariffs with counter measures”, adding that the US levies would “fundamentally change the global trading system.”

US President Donald Trump announced a sweeping new set of tariffs on Wednesday, arguing that they would allow the United States to economically flourish.

These new import taxes, which Trump imposed via executive order, are expected to send economic shockwaves around the world.

But the US president believes they are necessary to address trading imbalances and to protect American jobs and manufacturing.

Here are the basic elements of the plan.

• Live updates: Reaction to Trump’s tariffs announcement

In a background call before Trump’s speech, a senior White House official told reporters that the president would impose a “baseline” tariff on all imports to the US.

That rate is set at 10% and will go into effect on 5 April.

It is the companies that bring the foreign goods into the US that have to pay the tax to the government, although this could have knock-on effects to consumers.

Some countries will only face the base rate. These include:

• United Kingdom
• Singapore
• Brazil
• Australia
• New Zealand
• Turkey
• Colombia
• Argentina
• El Salvador
• United Arab Emirates
• Saudi Arabia

White House officials also said that they would impose what they describe as specific reciprocal tariffs on roughly 60 of the “worst offenders”.

These will go into effect on 9 April.

Trump’s officials say these countries charge higher tariffs on US goods, impose “non-tariff” barriers to US trade or have otherwise acted in ways they feel undermine American economic goals.

The key trading partners subject to these customised tariff rates include:

• European Union: 20%
• China: 54%
• Vietnam: 46%
• Thailand: 36%
• Japan: 24%
• Cambodia: 49%
• South Africa: 30%
• Taiwan: 32%

The 10% baseline rate does not apply to Canada and Mexico, since they have already been targeted during Trump’s presidency.

The White House said it would deal with both countries using a framework set out in Trump’s previous executive orders, which imposed tariffs on both countries as part of the administration’s efforts to address the entry of fentanyl to the US and border issues.

Trump previously set those tariffs at 25% on all goods entering from both countries, before announcing some exemptions and delays.

In addition, the president confirmed the beginning of a new American “25% tariff on all foreign made-automobiles”.

This tariff went into effect almost immediately, at midnight local time.

Donald Trump’s politics have shifted considerably over his decades in the public sphere. But one thing he has been consistent on, since the 1980s, is his belief that tariffs are an effective means of boosting the US economy.

Now, he’s staking his presidency on his being right.

At his Rose Garden event at the White House, surrounded by friends, conservative politicians and cabinet secretaries, Trump announced sweeping new tariffs on a broad range of countries – allies, competitors and adversaries alike.

In a speech that was equal parts celebration and self-congratulation, regularly punctuated by applause from the crowd, the president recalled his longtime support of tariffs, as well as his early criticism of free trade agreements like Nafta and the World Trade Organization.

The president acknowledged that he will face pushback in the coming days from “globalists” and “special interests”, but he urged Americans to trust his instincts.

“Never forget, every prediction our opponents made about trade for the last 30 years has been proven totally wrong,” he said.

• Live updates: Reaction to Trump’s tariffs announcement
• At a glance: What president’s new taxes mean for EU, China and others
• The full story: Trump charges high tariffs on ‘worst offenders’ globally
• Canada: No additional US tariffs for Canada, but no relief either
• Explainer: What are tariffs, and why is Trump using them?

Now, in a second term in which he is surrounded by like-minded advisers and is the dominant force in a Republican Party that controls both chambers of Congress, Trump is in a position to turn his vision of a new America-focused trade policy into reality. These policies, he said, had made the United States into a wealthy nation more than a century ago and would again.

“For years, hard working American citizens were forced to sit on the sidelines as other nations got rich and powerful, much of it at our expense,” he said. “With today’s action, we are finally going to be able to make America great again – greater than ever before.”

It is still an enormous risk for this president to take.

Economists of all stripes warn that these massive tariffs – 53% on China, 20% on the European Union and South Korea, with a 10% baseline on all nations – will be passed along to American consumers, raising prices and threatening a global recession.

Ken Roggoff, the former chief economist at the International Monetary Fund, predicted that the chances of the US, the world’s largest economy, falling into recession had risen to 50% on the back of this announcement.

“He just dropped a nuclear bomb on the global trading system,” Mr Roggoff told the BBC World Service, adding that the consequences for this level of taxes on imports into the US “is just mind-boggling”.

Trump’s move also risks escalating a trade war with other countries and alienating allies that America has otherwise tried to strengthen ties with. The US, for instance, sees Japan and South Korea as a bulwark against Chinese expansionist ambitions. But those three countries recently announced that they would work together to respond to America’s trade policies.

If Trump is successful, however, he would fundamentally reshape a global economic order that America had originally helped to construct from the ashes of World War 2. He promises that this will rebuild American manufacturing, create new sources of revenue, and make America more self-reliant and insulated from the kind of global supply chain shocks that wreaked havoc on the US during the Covid pandemic.

It’s a tall order – and one that many believe to be highly unrealistic. But for a president who seems fixated on cementing his legacy, whether through ending wars, renaming geographic locations, acquiring new territory or dismantling federal programmes and its workforce, this is the biggest, most consequential prize to be won.

It would be, he styled, America’s “liberation day”.

What appears clear, however, is that Wednesday’s announcement, if he follows through, is almost certain to mark a historic change. The question is whether it will be a legacy of achievement or one of notoriety.

Trump’s speech was triumphant – one that belied the potentially high costs his moves would impose on the American economy and on his own political standing.

But, he said, it was worth it – even if, at the very end of his remarks, a small shadow of presidential doubt may have peaked through the bravado.

“It’s going to be a day that – hopefully – you’re going to look back in years to come and you’re going to say, you know, he was right.”

President Donald Trump has announced new import taxes on all goods entering the US, in the biggest upheaval of the international trade order since the aftermath of World War Two.

His plan sets a baseline tariff of 10% on all imports, consistent with his proposal during last year’s White House campaign.

Items from about 60 trade partners that the White House described as the “worst offenders”, including the European Union and China, face higher rates – payback for unfair trade policies, Trump said.

Analysts said the trade war escalation was likely to lead to higher prices for Americans and slower growth in the US, while some countries around the world could be plunged into recession.

But in Wednesday’s announcement at the White House, Trump said the measures were necessary because countries were taking advantage of the US by imposing high tariffs and other trade barriers.

Declaring a national emergency, the Republican president said the US had for more than five decades been “looted, pillaged, raped and plundered by nations near and far, both friend and foe alike”.

“It’s our declaration of economic independence,” Trump said in the Rose Garden against a backdrop of US flags.

The White House said the US would start charging the 10% tariffs on 5 April, with the higher duties for certain nations starting on 9 April.

• Live updates and reaction to Trump tariffs
• What are tariffs and why is Trump using them?

“Today we are standing up for the American worker and we are finally putting America first,” Trump said, calling it “one of the most important days, in my opinion, in American history”.

His decision stunned many analysts.

“He just dropped a nuclear bomb on the global trading system,” Ken Rogoff, former chief economist at the International Monetary Fund, told the BBC.

Tariffs are taxes on imports. On the campaign trail last year, Trump said he would use them to boost manufacturing, promising a new age of US prosperity.

The import taxes could raise $2.2tn (£1.7tn) of revenue by 2034, according to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office.

He spent weeks previewing Wednesday’s announcement, which followed other orders raising tariffs on imports from China, foreign cars, steel and aluminium and 25% on some goods from Mexico and Canada.

For now, the White House said the latest changes would not change anything for Mexico and Canada, two of America’s closest trading partners.

But other allies will face new tariffs, including 10% for the UK and 20% for the European Union, said Trump.

The measure introduces a new 34% tariff on goods from China, on top of an existing 20% levy, bringing total duties to at least 54%.

The tariff rate will be 24% on goods from Japan, and 26% from India.

Some of the highest duties will hit exports from countries that have seen a rush of investment in recent years, as firms shifted supply chains away from China following tariffs in Trump’s first term.

Goods from Vietnam and Cambodia will be hit with 46% and 49% respectively.

Higher levies will also fall on much smaller nations, with products from the southern African country of Lesotho facing 50%.

• Here’s how Trump’s tariffs on China, EU and more will work
• Six things that could get more expensive for Americans

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent warned other countries not to hit back.

“My advice to every country right now is, do not retaliate,” Bessent told Fox News.

“Sit back, take it in, let’s see how it goes. Because if you retaliate, there will be escalation,” he said. “If you don’t retaliate, this is the high watermark.”

Later however, China’s commerce ministry said it “firmly” opposed the US’s new tariffs and will take “resolute countermeasures to safeguard its rights and interests”.

European Commission head Ursula von der Leyen also said she was preparing to take further steps against the US in the event that negotiations failed.

The new duties will affect trillions of dollars in trade, likely setting the stage for higher prices in the US on clothing, European wine, bicycles, toys and thousands of other items.

Olu Sonola, head of US economic research at the Fitch Ratings agency, said the measures would bring the US tariff rate to what was in place in 1910.

“Many countries will likely end up in a recession,” he said.

The US stock market was closed for trading by the time that Trump made his announcement, which he billed as “Liberation Day”.

But shares in the Asia-Pacific region opened lower on Thursday morning.

Japan’s benchmark stock index, the Nikkei 225, was down by 4% in early trading. Australia’s ASX 200 was around 2% lower.

Wedbush Securities analyst Dan Ives described the tariffs as “worse than the worst case” that investors had anticipated.

But he said he believed there would be negotiations and exemptions.

Trump has described his measures as “reciprocal” – intending them as a retaliation for other countries’ policies that he says fuel high trade imbalances.

These include high tariffs, as well as Value Added Tax (VAT) or regulations that bar foods with traces of certain chemicals.

Trump also reinstated plans to end tax-free treatment for small packages from China as of May, a move that would hurt Amazon rivals such as Shein and Temu.

He confirmed that a 25% tax on imports of all foreign-made cars, which he announced last week, would begin from midnight.

And he repeated his intention to hit specific items that were exempt from Wednesday’s action, such as copper and pharmaceuticals, with separate tariffs.

Driving into Mandalay, the massive scale of the destruction from last Friday’s earthquake revealed itself bit by bit.

In nearly every street we turned into, especially in the northern and central parts of the city, at least one building had completely collapsed, reduced to a pile of rubble. Some streets had multiple structures which had come down.

Almost every building we saw had cracks running through at least one of its walls, unsafe to step into. At the main city hospital they’re having to treat patients outdoors.

Myanmar’s military government has said it’s not allowing foreign journalists into the country after the quake, so we went in undercover. We had to operate carefully, because the country is riddled with informers and secret police who spy on their own people for the ruling military junta.

What we witnessed was a people who had very little help coming their way in the face of this massive disaster.

“I have hope that he’s alive, even if it’s a small chance,” said Nan Sin Hein, 41, who’s been waiting on the street opposite a collapsed five-storey building, day and night for five days.

Her 21 year-old-son Sai Han Pha is a construction worker, renovating the interiors of the building, which used to be a hotel and was being turned into an office space.

“If they can rescue him today, there’s a chance he’ll survive,” she says.

When the 7.7 magnitude earthquake struck, the bottom of the building sank into the ground, its top lurching at an angle over the street, looking like it could tip over at any minute.

Sai Han Pha and four other workers were trapped inside.

When we visited, rescue efforts had not even begun at the building and there was no sign they would start soon. There just isn’t enough help available on the ground – and the reason for that is the political situation in the country.

Even before the earthquake Myanmar was in turmoil – locked in a civil war that has displaced an estimated 3.5 million people. Its military has continued operations against armed insurgent groups despite the disaster.

This means that security forces are too stretched to put their full might behind relief and rescue operations. Except in some key locations, we didn’t see them in large numbers in Mandalay.

The military junta has put out a rare appeal for international aid, but its uneasy relations with many foreign countries, including the UK and the US, has meant that while these countries have pledged aid, help in the form of manpower on the ground is currently only from countries like India, China and Russia, among a few others.

And so far those rescue efforts appear to be focused on structures where masses of people are feared trapped – the high-rise Sky Villa condominium complex which was home to hundreds of people, and U Hla Thein Buddhist academy where scores of monks were taking an examination when the earthquake struck.

Neeraj Singh, who is leading the Indian disaster response team working at the Buddhist academy, said the structure had collapsed like a “pancake” – one layer on top of another.

“It’s the most difficult collapse pattern and the chances of finding survivors are very low. But we are still hopeful and trying our best,” he told the BBC.

Working under the sweltering sun, in nearly 40C, rescuers use metal drills and cutters to break the concrete slabs into smaller pieces. It’s slow and extremely demanding work. When a crane lifts up the concrete pieces, the stench of decaying bodies, already quite strong, becomes overwhelming.

The rescuers spot four to five bodies, but it still takes a couple of hours to pull the first one out.

Sitting on mats under a makeshift tent in the compound of the academy are families of the students. Their faces are weary and despondent. As soon as they hear a body has been recovered, they crowd around the ambulance it is placed in.

Others gather around a rescuer who shows them a photo of the body on his mobile phone.

Agonising moments pass as the families try to see if the dead man is a loved one.

But the body is so disfigured, the task is impossible. It is sent to a morgue where forensic tests will have to be conducted to confirm the identity.

Among the families is the father of 29-year-old U Thuzana. He has no hope that his son survived. “Knowing my son ended up like this, I’m inconsolable, I’m filled with grief,” U Hla Aung said, his face crumpling into a sob.

Many of Mandalay’s historical sites have also suffered significant damage, including the Mandalay Palace and the Maha Muni Pagoda, but we could not get in to see the extent of the damage.

Access to everything – collapse sites, victims and their families – was not easy because of the oppressive environment created by the military junta, with people often fearful of speaking to journalists.

Close to the pagoda, we saw Buddhist funeral rituals being held on the street outside a destroyed house. It was the home of U Hla Aung Khaing and his wife Daw Mamarhtay, both in their sixties.

“I lived with them but was out when the earthquake struck. That’s why I survived. Both my parents are gone in a single moment,” their son told us.

Their bodies were extricated not by trained rescuers, but by locals who used rudimentary equipment. It took two days to pull out the couple, who were found with their arms around each other.

Myanmar’s military government says 2,886 people have died so far, but so many collapse sites have still not even been reached by the authorities, that that count is unlikely to be accurate. We may never find out what the real death toll of the earthquake was.

Parks and open spaces in Mandalay have turned into makeshift camps, as have the banks of the moat that runs around the palace. All over the city we saw people laying out mats and mattresses outside their homes as evening approached, preferring to sleep outdoors.

Mandalay is a city living in terror, and with good reason. Nearly every night since Friday there have been big aftershocks. We woke up to an aftershock of magnitude 5 in the middle of the night.

But tens of thousands are sleeping outdoors because they have no home to return to.

“I don’t know what to think anymore. My heart still trembles when I think of that moment when the earthquake struck,” said Daw Khin Saw Myint, 72, who we met while she was waiting in a queue for water, with her little granddaughter by her side. “We ran out, but my house is gone. I’m living under a tree. Come and see.”

She works as a washerwoman and says her son suffers from a disability which doesn’t allow him to work.

“Where will I live now? I am in so much trouble. I’m living next to a rubbish dump. Some people have given me rice and a few clothes. We ran out in these clothes we are wearing.

“We don’t have anyone to rescue us. Please help us,” she said, tears rolling down her cheeks.

Another elderly woman chimes in, eyes tearing up, “No one has distributed food yet today. So we haven’t eaten.”

Most of the vehicles we saw pulling up to distribute supplies were small vans with limited stocks – donations from individuals or small local organisations. It’s nowhere near enough for the number of people in need, leading to a scramble to grab whatever relief is available.

Parts of Mandalay’s main hospital are also damaged, and so in an already difficult situation, rows and rows of beds are laid out in the hospital compound for patients.

Shwe Gy Thun Phyo, 14, has suffered from a brain injury, and has bloodshot eyes. She’s conscious but unresponsive. Her father tries to make her as comfortable as possible.

There were very few doctors and nurses around to cope with the demand for treatment, which means families are stepping in to do what medical staff should.

Zar Zar has a distended belly because of a serious abdominal injury. Her daughter sits behind her, holding her up, and fans her, to give her some relief from the heat.

We couldn’t spend a lot of time at the hospital for fear of being apprehended by the police or military.

As the window to find survivors of the earthquake narrows, increasingly those being brought into the hospital are the dead.

Nan Sin Hein, who is waiting outside the collapsed building where her son was trapped, was initially stoical, but she now looks like she is preparing to face what seems like the most likely outcome.

“I’m heartbroken. My son loved me and his little sisters. He struggled to support us,” she says.

“I am just hoping to see my son’s face, even if he is dead. I want to see his body. I want them to do everything they can to find his body.”

“I’m the only survivor who saw what happened to my colleagues,” Munther Abed says, scrolling through pictures of his fellow paramedics on his phone.

He survived the Israeli attack that killed 15 emergency workers in Gaza by diving to the floor in the back of his ambulance, as his two colleagues in the front were shot in the early hours of 23 March.

“We left the headquarters roughly at dawn,” he told one of the BBC’s trusted freelance journalists working in Gaza, explaining how the response team from the Palestinian Red Crescent, Gaza’s Civil Defence agency and the UN agency for Palestinian refugees (Unrwa) gathered on the edge of the southern city of Rafah after receiving reports of gunfire and wounded people.

“Roughly by 04:30, all Civil Defence vehicles were in place. At 04:40 the first two vehicles went out. At 04:50, the last vehicle arrived. At around 05:00, the agency [UN] car was shot at directly in the street,” he says.

The Israeli military says its forces opened fire because the vehicles were moving suspiciously towards soldiers without prior co-ordination and with their lights off. It also claimed that nine Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad operatives were killed in the incident.

Munther challenges that account.

“During day and at night, it’s the same thing. External and internal lights are on. Everything tells you it’s an ambulance vehicle that belongs to the Palestinian Red Crescent. All lights were on until the vehicle came under direct fire,” he says.

After that, he adds, he was pulled from the wreckage by Israeli soldiers, arrested and blindfolded. He claimed he was interrogated over 15 hours, before being released.

The BBC has put his claims to the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), but it is yet to respond.

“The IDF did not randomly attack an ambulance,” Israel’s Foreign Minister Gideon Saar claimed, when questioned at a news conference, echoing the IDF’s statements.

“Several uncoordinated vehicles were identified advancing suspiciously toward IDF troops without headlights or emergency signals. IDF troops then opened fire at the suspected vehicles.”

He added: “Following an initial assessment, it was determined that the forces had eliminated a Hamas military terrorist, Mohammed Amin Ibrahim Shubaki, who took part in the October 7 massacre, along with eight other terrorists from Hamas and the Islamic Jihad.”

Shubaki’s name is not on the list of the 15 dead emergency workers – eight of whom were Palestinian Red Crescent medics, six were Civil Defence first responders, and one was an Unrwa staff member.

Israel has not accounted for the whereabouts of Shubaki’s body or offered any evidence of the direct threat the emergency workers posed.

Munther rejects Israel’s claim that Hamas may have used the ambulances as cover.

“That’s utterly untrue. All crews are civilian,” he says.

“We don’t belong to any militant group. Our main duty is to offer ambulance services and save people’s lives. No more, no less”.

Gaza’s paramedics carried their own colleagues to their funerals earlier this week. There was an outcry of grief along with calls for accountability. One bereaved father told the BBC that his son was killed “in cold blood”.

International agencies could only access the area to retrieve their bodies a week after the attack. They were found buried in sand alongside the wrecked ambulances, fire truck and UN vehicle.

Sam Rose, acting director of Unrwa’s Gaza office, says: “What we know is that fifteen people lost their lives, that they were buried in shallow graves in a sand berm in the middle of the road, treated with complete indignity and what would appear to be an infringement of international humanitarian law.

“But it’s only if we have an investigation, a full and complete investigation, that we’ll be able to get to the bottom of it.”

Israel is yet to commit to an investigation. According to the UN, at least 1,060 healthcare workers have been killed since the start of the conflict.

“Certainly all ambulance workers, all medics, all humanitarian workers inside Gaza right now feel increasingly insecure, increasingly fragile,” Mr Rose says.

One paramedic is still unaccounted for following the 23 March incident.

“They were not just colleagues but friends”, Munther says, nervously running prayer beads through his fingers. “We used to eat, drink, laugh and have jokes together… I consider them my second family.”

“I will expose the crimes committed by the occupation [Israel] against my colleagues. If I was not the only survivor, who could have told the world what they did to our colleagues, and who would have told their story?”

Tesla sales have plummeted to their lowest level in three years after a backlash against its boss Elon Musk.

The electric car maker delivered almost 337,000 electric vehicles in the first three months of 2025, a 13% drop from a year ago.

Tesla shares tumbled in early trading on Wednesday after the release of the low sales numbers.

The cars face increasing competition from Chinese firm BYD, but experts believe Musk’s controversial role in the Trump administration has had an effect too.

The firm has blamed the sales drop on the transition to a new version of its most popular car.

However some analysts have pointed the finger at Musk himself.

“These numbers suck,” early Tesla investor Ross Gerber of Gerber Kawasaki Wealth and Investment Management wrote on X.

“The brand is broken and may not be fixable”, added Mr Gerber, who was once a Musk supporter but has recently called for the board to remove the billionaire as CEO.

There have been protests and boycotts around the world prompted by Musk’s outspoken and controversial political involvement.

He has been heading up President Donald Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) initiative to cut federal spending and slash the government workforce.

On Wednesday, Politico reported that Trump had told his inner circle Musk would be stepping back from the administration in the coming weeks.

Shortly after the report was published, Tesla’s share price turned positive.

The White House shot down the report as “garbage”. Because he is considered a special government employee, Musk by law can only serve 130 days in the administration this year, which would put his departure closer to June.

The Tesla boss is the world’s richest man and contributed more than a quarter of a billion dollars to help Trump get elected in November.

In recent weeks, he poured millions into a Wisconsin Supreme Court race, supporting former Republican attorney general Brad Schimel who was soundly defeated on Tuesday.

The backlash against Mr Musk has included “Tesla Takedown” protests at Tesla dealerships across the US and in Europe.

Tesla vehicles have also been vandalised, and Trump has said his administration would charge people who deface Teslas with “domestic terrorism.”

Musk’s stewardship of his businesses, including Tesla, has been called into question.

In an recent interview, he admitted he was running his enterprises “with great difficulty,” adding: “Frankly, I can’t believe I’m here doing this.”

Tesla shares have lost more than a quarter of their value since the beginning of this year, as of 13:51 EDT (18:51 BST) on Wednesday.

“We are not going to look at these numbers with rose colored glasses… they were a disaster on every metric,” Wedbush analyst Dan Ives said in a note on Wednesday.

“The more political [Musk] gets with DOGE the more the brand suffers, there is no debate.”

Tesla did not respond to the BBC’s request for comment, but said in a filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission that the numbers released on Wednesday “represent only two measures” of the company’s performance and “should not be relied on as an indicator of quarterly financial results.”

Those results will be made public on April 22 in a full earnings report for the quarter. They will “depend on a variety of factors, including average selling price, cost of sales, foreign exchange movements and others”, Tesla said.

It also noted that it had temporarily suspended production of its Model Y sport utility vehicles in January.

Following the release of Wednesday’s report, Randi Weingarten, president of American Federation of Teachers, one of the most powerful labour unions in the US, wrote to dozens of public pension funds about the state of Tesla, saying the company’s latest sales numbers were “shaping up to be abysmal”.

She urged them to take close looks at their Tesla holdings and at what their money managers are doing to “safeguard retirement assets”.

“These declines seem in part to be driven by Musk spending his time pursuing political activities, some of which appear to be in conflict with Tesla’s brand and business interests, rather than managing Tesla,” Weingarten wrote.

The comptroller for New York City has already announced he is seeking to sue Tesla on behalf of the city’s massive pension systems, saying on Tuesday they had lost more than $300m in three months from the company’s plummeting stock price.

“Elon Musk is so distracted that he’s driving Tesla off a financial cliff,” said Comptroller Brad Lander in a statement.

The UK’s Disasters Emergency Committee (DEC) is launching an appeal to help the thousands of people injured and displaced as a result of last week’s powerful earthquake which struck Myanmar and the wider region.

Made up of 15 UK aid agencies, including the British Red Cross, Oxfam and Save the Children, the DEC is asking the British public for donations before the monsoon season arrives in two months.

More than 2,800 people have died and more than 4,500 have been injured, according to the leaders of Myanmar’s military government, with figures expected to rise.

The charities say shelter, medicine, food, water and cash support is “urgently needed”.

Baroness Chapman, minister for development, said public donations to the DEC appeal would be matched pound-for-pound by the government, up to the value of £5m.

DEC’s chief executive Saleh Saeed said the situation was “ever more critical.”

“Funds are urgently needed to help families access life-saving humanitarian aid following this catastrophe,” he said.

Multiple international aid agencies and foreign governments have dispatched personnel and supplies to quake-hit regions.

• Inside Mandalay: BBC visits makeshift hospital treating earthquake victims in Myanmar

Myanmar was already facing a severe humanitarian crisis before the 7.7 magnitude earthquake due to the ongoing civil war there, with the DEC estimating a third of the population is in need of aid.

The country has been gripped by violence amid the conflict between the junta – which seized power in a 2021 coup – and ethnic militias and resistance forces across the country.

On Wednesday, Myanmar’s military government announced a temporary ceasefire lasting until 22 April, saying it was aimed at expediting relief and reconstruction efforts.

Rebel groups had already unilaterally declared a ceasefire to support relief efforts earlier this week, but the military had refused to do the same until Wednesday’s announcement.

Aid workers have come under attack in Myanmar. On Tuesday night, the army opened fire at a Chinese Red Cross convoy carrying earthquake relief supplies.

Nine of the charity’s vehicles came under attack. The UN and some charities have accused the military junta of blocking access.

The US Geological Survey’s modelling estimates Myanmar’s death toll could exceed 10,000, while the cost in damages to infrastructure could surpass the country’s annual economic output.

Roads, water services and buildings including hospitals have been destroyed, especially in Mandalay, the hard-hit city near the epicentre.

In Thailand, at least 21 people have died.

The Red Cross has also issued an urgent appeal for $100m (£77m), while the UN is seeking $8m in donations for its response.

“People urgently require medical care, clean drinking water, tents, food, and other basic necessities,” the International Rescue Committee (IRC) said on Monday.

The DEC brings together 15 leading UK aid charities to provide and deliver aid to ensure successful appeals.

The appeal will be broadcast on the BBC and other media outlets throughout Thursday.

Australia has been hit with a tariff of at least 10% on all exports to the US, as Donald Trump announced his new sweeping global trade regime.

Trump cited “trade barriers” such as Australia’s biosecurity laws – singling out a ban on the import of US beef – as the reason for what he called a “reciprocal tariff”.

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese called the measure “totally unwarranted”, but said the nation would not introduce its own tariffs – also known as import taxes – in return.

The 10% dealt to Australia was the “baseline” measure, with the most severe tariffs – of up 49% – hitting countries like China, Malaysia, Vietnam and Cambodia.

“President Trump referred to reciprocal tariffs. A reciprocal tariff would be zero, not 10%,” Albanese said at a press conference on Thursday.

“The administration’s tariffs have no basis in logic and they go against the basis of our two nation’s partnership. This is not the act of a friend,” he added.

Trump’s new trade policy has hit the start of Australia’s closely battled election campaign, where the cost of living will be a key voting issue.

Opposition leader Peter Dutton said the tariffs were a “bad day” for Australia and would be a “significant impost” on jobs across the nation.

He also said the new tariffs were a reflection on Albanese’s relationship with Trump – who the prime minister had unsuccessfully been trying to organise a phone call with ahead of the decision.

“I just don’t think the prime minister has the strength or the ability to stand up to a situation that is unacceptable to us,” Dutton said.

The new measures come only weeks after President Trump imposed 25% tariffs on Australian steel and aluminium imports.

However, the prime minister said Australia would not be retaliating on US goods.

“We will not join a race to the bottom that leads to higher prices and slower growth,” he said.

But he warned the tariffs would have consequences for how Australians see ties with the US, and that the country would resort to formal “dispute resolution mechanisms” contained in its free trade agreement with the US if necessary.

During his “Liberation Day” speech, Trump pointed to Australia’s ban on fresh beef from the US – which was introduced in 2003, after cases of mad cow disease, an infectious neurological illness, were discovered in North America.

“They’re wonderful people and wonderful everything, but they ban American beef,” he said.

“They don’t want it because they don’t want it to affect their farmers.”

“I don’t blame them, but we’re doing the same thing right now,” Trump added.

The tariffs have also drawn an angry response from Australia’s National Farmers’ Federation (NFF), who expressed “profound disappointment”.

“This decision is a disappointing step backward for our nations and for the global economy,” NFF President David Jochinke said.

The NFF said the US’s decision created “unnecessary uncertainty”, but vowed to work closely with the federal government to seek a resolution.

Along with its biosecurity rules, Australia’s subsidised medicines scheme and laws requiring foreign tech companies to pay local media for news had drawn the US’s ire in recent tariff discussions.

Albanese earlier this week said those issues were non-negotiable: “I continue to stand up for Australia and have said very clearly we won’t compromise and negotiate on our PBS [Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme], on our biosecurity, on our media bargaining code.”

The US is one of Australia’s most important trading relationships, raking fifth for exports. China, however, dwarfs all of Australia’s other trade partners – in 2023-24, A$212.7bn (£102.2bn, $133.4) was exported to the Asian superpower.

In comparison, last year, Australia exported $37.5bn in goods and services to the US. Business services were the biggest sector at $6.2bn, followed by intellectual property charges and beef. In the same year, Australia imported $88.2bn in goods and services from the US.

It’s 10am, and in a little over two hours, Wayne Hawkins will be dead.

The sun is shining on the bungalow where the 80-year-old lives in San Diego, California with his wife of more than five decades, Stella.

I knock on the door and meet his children – Emily, 48, and Ashley, 44 – who have spent the last two weeks at their father’s side.

Wayne sits in a reclining chair where he spends most of his days. Terminally ill, he is too weak to leave the house.

He has invited BBC News to witness his death under California’s assisted dying laws – because if MPs in London vote to legalise the practice in England and Wales, it will allow some terminally ill people here to die in a similar way.

Half an hour after arriving at Wayne’s house, I watch him swallow three anti-nausea tablets, designed to minimise the risk of him vomiting the lethal medication he plans to take shortly.

Are you sure this day is your last, I ask him? “I’m all in,” he replies. “I was determined and decided weeks ago – I’ve had no trepidation since then.”

His family ask for one last photo, which I take. As usual, Stella and Wayne are holding hands.

Shortly after, Dr Donnie Moore arrives. He has got to know the family over the past few weeks, visiting them on several occasions alongside running his own end-of-life clinic. Under California law, he is what is known as the attending physician who must confirm, in addition to a second doctor, that Wayne is eligible for aid in dying.

Dr Moore’s role is part physician, part counsellor in this situation, one he has been in for 150 assisted deaths before.

On a top shelf in Wayne’s bedroom sits a brown glass bottle containing a fine white powder – a mixture of five drugs, sedatives and painkillers, delivered to the house the previous day. The dosage of drugs inside is hundreds of times higher than those used in regular healthcare and is “guaranteed” to be fatal, Dr Moore explains. Unlike California, the proposed law at Westminster would require a doctor to bring any such medication with them.

When Wayne signals he is ready, the doctor mixes the meds with cherry and pineapple juice to soften the bitter taste – and he hands this pink liquid to Wayne.

No one, not even the doctor, knows how long it will take him to die after taking the lethal drugs. Dr Moore explains to me that, in his experience, death usually occurs between 30 minutes and two hours of ingestion, but on one occasion it took 17 hours.

This is the story of how and why Wayne chose to die. And why others have decided not to follow the same course.

We first met the couple a few weeks earlier, when Wayne explained why he was going ahead with the decision to have an assisted death – a controversial measure in other parts of the world.

“Some days the pain is almost more than I can handle,” he said. “I just don’t see any merit to dying slow and painfully, hooked up with stuff – intubation, feeding tubes,” he told me. “I want none of it.”

Wayne said he had watched two relatives die “miserable”, “heinous” deaths from heart failure.

“I hate hospitals, they are miserable. I will die in the street first.”

Wayne met Stella in 1969; the couple married four years later. He told us it was something of an arranged marriage, as his mother kept inviting Stella for dinner until eventually the penny dropped that he should take her out.

They lived for many years in Arcata, northern California, surrounded by sweeping forests of redwood trees, where Wayne worked as a landscape architect, while Stella was a primary school teacher. They spent their holidays hiking and camping with their children.

Now Wayne is terminally ill with heart failure, which has already brought him close to death. He has myriad other health issues including prostate cancer, liver failure and sepsis which brings him serious spinal pain.

He has less than six months to live, qualifying him for an assisted death in California. His request to die has been approved by two doctors and the lethal medication is self-administered.

It was during our first meeting that he asked the BBC to return to observe his final day, saying he wanted terminally ill adults in the UK to have the same right to an assisted death as him.

“Britain is pretty good with freedoms and this is just another one,” he said. “People should be able to choose the time of their death as long as they meet the rules like six months to live or less.”

Stella, 78, supports his decision. “I’ve known him for over 50 years. He’s a very independent man. He’s always known what he wants to do and he’s always fixed things. That’s how he’s operating now. If this is his choice, I definitely agree, and I’ve seen him really suffer with the illness he’s got. I don’t want that for him.”

Wayne would also qualify under the proposed new assisted dying law in England and Wales. The measures return to the House of Commons later this month, when all MPs will have a chance to debate and vote on changes to the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill.

The proposed legislation, tabled by Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, says that anyone who wants to end their life must have the mental capacity to make the choice, that they must be expected to die within six months, and must make two separate declarations – witnessed and signed – about their wish to die. They must satisfy two independent doctors that they are eligible.

MPs in Westminster voted in favour of assisted dying in principle last November but remain bitterly divided on the issue. If they ultimately decide to approve the bill, it could become law within the next year and come into practice within the next four years.

There are also divisions here in California, where assisted dying was introduced in 2016. Michelle and Mike Carter, both 72 and married for 43 years, are each being treated for cancer – Mike has prostate cancer that has spread to his lymph nodes, and Michelle’s advanced terminal ovarian cancer has spread throughout much of her body.

“I held my mother’s hand when she passed; I held my father’s hand when he passed,” Michelle told me. “I believe there’s freedom of choice however for me, I choose palliative care… I have God and I have good medicine.”

Michelle’s physician, palliative care specialist Dr Vincent Nguyen, argued that assisted dying laws in the US state lead to “silent coercion” whereby vulnerable people think their only option is to die. “Instead of ending people’s lives, let’s put programmes together to care for people,” he said. “Let them know that they’re loved, they’re wanted and they’re worthy.”

He said the law meant that doctors have gone from being seen as healers to killers, while the message from the healthcare system was that “you are better off dead, because you’re expensive and your death is cheaper for us”.

Some disability campaigners say assisted dying makes them feel unsafe. Ingrid Tischer, who has muscular dystrophy and chronic respiratory failure, told me: “The message that it sends to people with disabilities in California is that you deserve suicide assistance rather than suicide prevention when you voice a desire to end your life.

“What does that say about who we are as a culture?”

Critics often say that once assisted dying is legalised, over time the safeguards around such laws get eroded as part of a “slippery slope” towards more relaxed criteria. In California, there was initially a mandatory 15-day cooling off period between patients making a first and second request for aid in dying. That has been reduced to 48 hours because many patients were dying during the waiting period. It’s thought the approval process envisaged in Westminster would take around a month.

Outside Wayne’s house on the morning of his death, a solitary bird begins its loud and elaborate song. “There’s that mockingbird out there,” Wayne tells Stella, as smiles flicker across their faces.

Wayne hates the bird because it keeps him awake at night, Stella jokes, hand in hand with him to one side of his chair. Emily and Ashley are next to Stella.

Dr Moore, seated on Wayne’s other side, hands him the pink liquid which he swallows without hesitation. “Goodnight,” he says to his family – a typical touch of humour from a man who told us he was determined to die on his terms. It’s 11.47am.

After two minutes, Wayne says he is getting sleepy. Dr Moore asks him to imagine he is walking in a vast sea of flowers with a soft breeze on his skin, which seems appropriate for a patient who has spent much of his life among nature.

After three minutes Wayne enters a deep sleep from which he will never wake. On a few occasions he lifts his head to take a deep breath without opening his eyes, at one point beginning to snore softly.

Dr Moore tells the family this is “the deepest sleep imaginable” and reassures Emily there is no chance her dad will wake up and ask, “did it work?”

“Oh that would be just like him,” Stella says with a laugh.

The family start to reminisce about hiking holidays and driving around in a large van they converted to become a camper. “Me and dad insulated it and put a bed in the back,” says Ashley.

On the walls are photos of Emily and Ashley as small children next to huge carved Halloween pumpkins.

Dr Moore is still stroking Wayne’s hand and occasionally checking his pulse. For a man who Emily says was “always walking, always outdoors, always active”, these are the final moments of life’s journey, spent surrounded by those who mean most to him.

At 12.22pm Dr Moore says, “I think he’s passed… He’s at peace now.”

Outside, the mockingbird has fallen silent. “No more pain,” says Stella, embracing her children in her arms.

I step outside to give the family some space, and reflect on what we have just seen and filmed.

I have been covering medical ethics for the BBC for more than 20 years. In 2006, I was present just outside an apartment in Zurich where Dr Anne Turner, a retired doctor, died with the help of the group Dignitas – but California was the first time I had been an eyewitness to an assisted death.

This isn’t just a story about one man’s death in California – it’s about what could become a reality here in England and Wales for those who qualify for an assisted death and choose to die this way.

Whether you’re for or against the proposed new Westminster law, the death of a loved one is a deeply personal and emotional time for a family. Each death leaves an imprint, as will Wayne’s.

Myanmar’s junta chief Min Aung Hlaing will travel to Thailand for a regional summit as his country reels from an earthquake that killed thousands and left cities in ruins.

The earthquake in central Myanmar last Friday killed 3,085 people and injured 4,715, the junta has said. Hundreds more are missing and the toll is expected to rise.

A spokesman for the Myanmar army said Min Aung Hlaing is scheduled to fly to Bangkok on Thursday, on the eve of a summit that will gather leaders of the seven countries that border the Bay of Bengal.

His attendance will be unusual as sanctioned leaders are typically barred from these events.

Host Thailand, where the earthquake was felt and killed 21 people, has proposed that the leaders issue a joint statement on the disaster. Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Nepal, Sri Lanka are also part of the summit.

Countries around the world have sent aid and rescue teams to Myanmar since the quake, but poor infrastructure and an ongoing civil war has complicated relief efforts.

The junta announced a temporary ceasefire late on Wednesday to expedite these efforts, after earlier rejecting proposals from armed ethnic rebel groups.

Before this, the military had continued its airstrikes in rebel-held areas, including those badly hit by the earthquake.

On Tuesday night, troops opened fire at a Chinese Red Cross convoy carrying relief supplies. The junta said the troops fired after the convoy refused to stop despite being signalled to do so.

Myanmar has been gripped by a bloody civil war since the military seized power in 2021, which led to the rise of an armed resistance that has been fighting alongside armed ethnic groups, some of which have been fighting the military for decades.

Years of violence have crippled the economy, supercharged inflation, and plunged the country into a humanitarian crisis.

Now, the earthquake has worsened the crisis. Humanitarian groups have urged the junta to lift any remaining obstructions to aid.

The UN has also urged the global community to ramp up aid before the monsoon season hits in about a month.

An Indian court is due to hear a lawsuit filed by Elon Musk’s social media company X, accusing Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government of misusing the law to censor content on its platform.

Last month, X sued the government saying a new website – Sahyog – launched by the federal home ministry last year, was being used to expand its censorship powers and take down content.

X argued the portal gave government officials wide-ranging powers to issue blocking orders that were “in violation” of India’s digital laws. It said it could not be compelled to join Sahyog, which it called a “censorship portal”.

The Indian government has said that the portal is necessary to tackle harmful online content.

Other American technology giants such as Amazon, Google and Meta have agreed to be on Sahyog.

Sahyog describes itself as a portal developed to automate the process of sending government notices to content intermediaries like X and Facebook.

The lawsuit filed in the southern state of Karnataka came after the federal railway ministry ordered X to remove “hundreds of posts”.

These included videos of a crush in Delhi in which 18 people died as they were making their way to the world’s largest religious gathering, the Kumbh Mela.

In its petition, X argues that the portal and the orders issued through it fall outside the remit of the original law that allows the government to block content.

Under this law, senior officials have the power to issue takedown orders, but after following due procedure like giving notices, opportunities for hearings and allowing for a review of any decision.

But X says the government is bypassing these procedures to issue arbitrary content takedown orders through other legal provisions that have no safeguards.

As a result, “countless” government officials, including “tens of thousands of local police officers”, are “unilaterally and arbitrarily” issuing orders, X argues in its petition.

India’s federal IT and home ministries did not respond to the BBC’s request for comment.

In court, the government has argued that its actions are lawful. It said it was not sending blocking orders but only issuing “notices” to platforms against unlawful content.

The government also defended the Sahyog platform saying it was a “necessity” because of the “growing volume of unlawful and harmful content online”.

The case is of “vital importance” as the blocking mechanism of the Sahyog portal has resulted in “a wholesale increase in censorship”, said Apar Gupta of the digital rights organisation, Internet Freedom Foundation.

This is not the first time the Indian government and X are at loggerheads.

The Delhi police had raided the offices of X (then Twitter) in 2021, before Musk took over, after a tweet by a ruling party spokesperson was marked as “manipulated media”.

In 2022, the company had sued the Indian government against blocking orders, at least one of which pertained to a year-long protest by farmers against new laws brought in by the government. However, the court ruled against the company and imposed a fine of 5m rupees ($58,000; £45,000).

Under Musk’s leadership, X appealed against this decision, which is currently separately being heard in the Karnataka high court.

In 2023, India called X a “habitual non-compliant platform” during the appeal proceedings.

India is also reportedly investigating X’s chatbot Grok regarding its use of inappropriate language and “controversial responses” after it made politically sensitive comments to user prompts recently.

The timing of the lawsuit is interesting as it comes when Musk’s other companies Starlink and Tesla have just begun making inroads into India with their business plans.

Earlier in March, Starlink signed an agreement with two of India’s biggest telecoms firms to bring satellite internet to India and is awaiting government approval to start providing its services.

Tesla could finally be making its debut and has begun hiring for a dozen jobs in Delhi and Mumbai. It is also reportedly hunting for showrooms in both cities.

Musk also met Prime Minister Modi when he visited the White House last month.

His growing business interests in India and closeness with US President Donald Trump give him “ample leverage” with India, Michael Kugelman, director of the Wilson Centre’s South Asia Institute in Washington, told the BBC.

“This means he has a lot of leeway in terms of how he operates, including making a decision to sue the Indian government,” he added, saying the case might not hurt Musk’s business prospects in the country.

Outrage is a precious political currency and France’s far right has spent this week attempting, furiously and predictably, to capitalise on the perceived injustice of a court’s decision to block its totemic leader, Marine Le Pen, from standing in the 2027 presidential election.

The airwaves have been throbbing with indignation.

“Be outraged,” said one of Le Pen’s key deputies, on French television, in case anyone was in doubt as to what their reaction should be.

But it remains unclear whether Le Pen’s tough sentence will broaden support for her party, the National Rally (RN), or lead to greater fragmentation of the French far right. Either way, it has created a feverish mood among the nation’s politicians.

Le Pen and her allies have boldly declared that France’s institutions, and democracy itself, have been “executed”, are “dead”, or “violated”. The country’s justice system has been turned into a “political” hit squad, shamelessly intervening in a nation’s right to choose its own leaders. And Marine Le Pen has been widely portrayed, with something close to certainty, as France’s president-in-waiting, as the nation’s most popular politician, cruelly robbed of her near-inevitable procession towards the Élysée Palace.

“The system has released a nuclear bomb, and if it is using such a powerful weapon against us, it is obviously because we are about to win the elections,” Le Pen fumed at a news conference, comparing herself to the poisoned, imprisoned, and now dead Russian opposition politician Alexei Navalny.

As France assesses its latest political tremors, an uneven pushback has begun.

Nervous about the impact the judgement may have for the country’s frail coalition government, the Prime Minister François Bayrou has admitted to feeling “troubled” by Le Pen’s sentence and worried about a “shock” to public opinion.

But other centrist politicians have taken a firmer line, stressing the need for a clear gap between the justice system and politics.

An early opinion poll appears to show the French public taking a calm line, bursting – or at least deflating – the RN’s bubble of outrage. The poll, produced within hours of the court’s ruling, showed less than a third of the country – 31% – felt the decision to block Le Pen, immediately, from running for public office, was unjust.

Tellingly, that figure was less than the 37% of French people who recently expressed an interest in voting for her as president.

In other words, plenty of people who like her as a politician also think it reasonable that her crimes should disqualify her from running for office.

And remember, French presidential elections are still two years away – an eternity in the current political climate.

Emmanuel Macron is not entitled to stand for another term and no clear alternative to Le Pen, from the left or centre of French politics, has yet emerged. Le Pen’s share of the vote has consistently risen during her previous three failed bids for the top job but it is premature, at best, to consider her a shoo-in for 2027.

Anyone who followed the court case against her and her party colleagues in an impartial fashion would struggle to conclude that the verdicts in Le Pen’s case were unreasonable.

The evidence of a massive and coordinated project to defraud the European Parliament and its associated taxpayers included jaw-droppingly incriminating emails suggesting officials knew exactly what they were doing, and the illegality of their actions.

That the corruption was for the party, not for personal gain, surely changes nothing. Corruption is corruption. Besides, other parties have also been found guilty of similar offences.

Regarding the punishments handed out by the court, here it seems fair to argue that Le Pen and her party made a strategic blunder in their approach to the case.

Had they acknowledged the facts, and their errors, and cooperated in facilitating a swift trial rather than helping to drag the process out for almost a decade, the judges – as they’ve now made clear – might have taken their attitude towards the case into consideration when considering punishments.

“Neither during the investigation nor at the trial did [Le Pen] show any awareness of the need for probity as an elected official, nor of the ensuing responsibilities,” wrote the judges in a document explaining, often indignantly, why they’d delivered such a tough sentence.

They berated Le Pen for seeking to delay or avoid justice with “a defence system that disregards the uncovering of the truth”.

It is worth noting, here, the wider hypocrisy demonstrated by elites across France’s political spectrum who have recently been muttering their sympathy for Le Pen. It is nine years since MPs voted to toughen up the laws on corruption, introducing the very sanctions – on immediately banning criminals from public office – that were used by the judges in this case.

That toughening was welcomed by the public as an antidote to a judicial system stymied by an indulgent culture of successive appeals that enabled – and sometimes still enables – politicians to dodge accountability for decades.

Le Pen is now being gleefully taunted by her critics online with the many past instances in which she has called for stricter laws on corruption.

“When are we going to learn the lessons and effectively introduce lifelong ineligibility for those who have been convicted of acts committed while in office or during their term of office?” she asked in 2013.

Reasonable people can reasonably disagree about the court’s sentencing decisions in Le Pen’s case. But the notion – enthusiastically endorsed by populist and hard-right politicians across Europe and the US – that she is a victim of a conspiratorial political plot has clearly not convinced most French people.

At least not yet.

So where does this verdict – clearly a seismic moment in French politics – leave the National Rally and the wider far-right movement?

The short answer is that no one knows. There are so many variables involved – from the fate of Le Pen’s fast-tracked appeal, to the RN’s succession strategy, to the state of France’s precarious finances, to the broader political climate and the see-sawing appetite for populism both within France and globally – that predictions are an even more dubious game than usual.

The most immediate question – given the slow pace of the legal appeal that Le Pen has vowed to initiate – is whether the RN will seek prompt revenge in parliament by attempting to bring down the fragile coalition government of François Bayrou.

That could lead to new parliamentary elections this summer and the possibility that the RN could capitalise on its victim status to increase its lead in parliament and perhaps, even, to push the country towards a deadlock in which President Macron might – yet another “might” – feel obliged to step down.

One person who will now be facing extra scrutiny is Le Pen’s almost but not quite anointed successor, 29-year-old Jordan Bardella, who could be drafted in as a replacement presidential candidate if Le Pen’s own “narrow path” towards the Élysée remains blocked on appeal.

If social-media-savvy Bardella’s popularity among French youth is any indication of his prospects, he could well sweep to victory in 2027. He has found a way to tap into the frustrations of people angry about falling living standards and concerns about immigration.

But turning youthful support into actual votes is not always straightforward, and other, more experienced and mainstream figures on the right may well be sensing an opportunity too.

The Interior Minister, Bruno Retailleau, is widely seen to be emerging as a potential contender. Some even wonder if the provocative television personality, Cyril Hanouna, might become a serious political force on the right of French politics.

Meanwhile, Bardella, like the RN in general, has been on a highly disciplined mission to detoxify the party’s once overtly racist and antisemitic brand. In February, for instance, he abandoned plans to speak at America’s far-right CPAC event after Donald Trump’s former advisor Steve Bannon made a Nazi salute.

But this week’s events have revealed that the RN is enthusiastically committed to the distinctly Trump-ian and populist strategy of blaming its misfortunes on a “swamp” of unelected officials. Bardella, meanwhile, complained about the recent closure of two right-wing media channels alongside his party’s own legal struggles.

“There is an extremely serious drift today that does not reflect the idea we have of French democracy,” he said.

It’s the sort of language that goes down well with the RN’s core constituency, but its broader appeal may be limited in a country that remains, in many ways, deeply attached to its institutions.

To frame it another way, will French voters be more motivated by the belief that Le Pen was unfairly punished, or by concern that the judges involved have since been the victims of death threats and other insults?

As for Marine Le Pen, she has vowed that she will not be sidelined. But her destiny is not entirely in her own hands now. At the age of 56 she has become a familiar figure, fiery at times, but personally approachable, warm and, in political terms, profoundly influential and disciplined. So what next for her?

France has had one Le Pen or other (Marine’s father, Jean-Marie ran four times) on their presidential ballot paper since 1988. Always unsuccessfully.

History may well look back on this week as the moment Marine Le Pen’s fate was sealed, in one of three ways: as France’s first female and first far-right president, swept to power on a tide of outrage. As the four-time loser of a French presidential election, finally denied power by the taint of corruption. Or as someone whose soaring political career was brought to an early and shuddering halt by her own miscalculations over a serious embezzlement scandal.

The former president of Costa Rica, Oscar Arias, says his US visa has been revoked.

Arias, a Nobel laureate, said he was informed of the decision weeks after he had publicly criticised Donald Trump, comparing the behaviour of the US president to that of a Roman emperor.

The 84-year-old, who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his role in brokering an end to conflicts in Central America, said US authorities had given no explanation.

Arias hinted, however, that it may be due to his rapprochement with China during the time he was president from 2006 to 2010.

Speaking at a news conference in the Costa Rican capital, San José, Arias said he had “no idea” what the reason for the cancellation was.

He said he had received a “terse” email “of a few lines” from the US government informing him of the decision.

He added that he thought that it was not President Trump but the US State Department which had taken the decision.

While he said it would be conjecture on his part to speculate about the reason behind the visa revocation, he did point out that “I established diplomatic relations with China.

“That, of course, is known throughout the world,” he told journalists of his 2007 decision to cut ties with Taiwan and establish them with China instead.

The Trump administration has sought to oppose China’s influence in the Western hemisphere and has accused a number of Central American governments of cosying up to the Chinese government and Chinese companies.

• Read: Rubio demands Panama ‘reduce China influence’ over canal

However, it has been supportive of the current Costa Rican President, Rodrigo Chaves, praising his decision to exclude Chinese firms from participating in the development of 5G in Costa Rica.

But this perceived closeness between President Chaves and the US was criticised by Arias, who wrote a post on social media in February saying that “it has never been easy for a small country to disagree with the US government, less so when its president behaves like a Roman emperor, telling the rest of the world what to do”.

He added that “during my governments, Costa Rica never received orders from Washington as if we were a banana republic”.

Arias is not the only Costa Rican to have had his US visa revoked. Three members of the country’s national assembly who opposed President Chaves’s decree to exclude Chinese companies from participating in the development of 5G have also had theirs cancelled.

The Slovak cabinet has approved a plan to shoot around a quarter of the country’s brown bears, after a man was mauled to death while walking in a forest in Central Slovakia.

Prime Minister Robert Fico’s populist-nationalist government announced after a cabinet meeting that 350 out of an estimated population of 1,300 brown bears would be culled, citing the danger to humans after a spate of attacks.

“We can’t live in a country where people are afraid to go into the woods,” the prime minister told reporters afterwards.

A special state of emergency allowing bears to be shot has now been widened to 55 of Slovakia’s 79 districts, an area that now covers most of the country.

The government in Bratislava has already loosened legal protections allowing bears to be killed if they stray too close to human habitation. Some 93 had been shot by the end of 2024.

The plans to shoot even more were condemned by conservationists, who said the decision was in violation of international obligations and could be illegal.

“It’s absurd,” said Michal Wiezek, an ecologist and MEP for opposition party Progressive Slovakia.

“The Environment Ministry failed desperately to limit the number of bear attacks by the unprecedented culling of this protected species,” he told the BBC.

“To cover up their failure, the government has decided to cull even more bears,” he continued.

Wiezek argued that thousands of encounters a year passed without incident, and he hoped the European Commission would intervene.

Slovak police confirmed on Wednesday that a man found dead in forest near the town of Detva in Central Slovakia on Sunday night was killed by a bear. His wounds were consistent with an attack.

The 59-year-old man had been reported missing on Saturday after failing to return from a walk in the woods.

He was found with what authorities described as “devastating injuries to the head”. Evidence of a bear’s den was found nearby, a local NGO told Slovak newspaper Novy Cas.

Bears have become a political issue in Slovakia after a rising number of encounters, including fatal attacks.

In March 2024, a 31-year-old Belarusian woman fell into a ravine and died while being chased by a bear in northern Slovakia.

Several weeks later a large brown bear was captured on video running through the centre of the nearby town of Liptovsky Mikolas in broad daylight, bounding past cars and lunging at people on the pavement.

The authorities later claimed to have hunted down and killed the animal, although conservationists said later there was clear evidence they had shot a different bear.

Environment Minister Tomas Taraba said on Wednesday there were more than 1,300 bears in Slovakia, and that 800 was a “sufficient number”, as the population was growing.

However, experts say the population remains more or less stable at around 1,270 animals.

Bears are common across the Carpathian mountain range, which stretches in an arc from Romania through western Ukraine and on to Slovakia and Poland.

A federal judge has permanently dismissed the criminal case against New York City Mayor Eric Adams, weeks after the Trump administration directed prosecutors to drop the corruption charges.

The move led to the resignation of Manhattan’s top federal prosecutor who accused Adams of striking a deal with the Trump administration to dismiss his case in exchange for immigration enforcement.

The Manhattan judge dismissed the case “with prejudice”, which means the Department of Justice (DOJ) cannot refile the charges against Adams based on the same evidence.

Adams was charged with conspiracy, fraud, soliciting illegal campaign contributions, and bribery. He had denied any wrongdoing.

In an indictment last September, Adams was alleged to have accepted gifts totalling more than $100,000 (£75,000) from Turkish citizens in exchange for favours.

But in February, acting deputy attorney general Emil Bove, a Trump appointee, ordered New York prosecutors to drop the case against Adams. He argued the case “restricted” the mayor’s ability to address “illegal immigration and violent crime” – a key goal of the Trump administration.

Manhattan’s top federal prosecutor Danielle Sassoon and six other high-level Justice officials resigned over the order, saying there was no legal justification to dismiss Adams’ case.

Sassoon, in a letter to Bove’s boss, Attorney General Pam Bondi, alleged that the mayor’s team had offered “what amounted to a quid pro quo”, saying Adams would be able to help with administration policies “only if the indictment were dismissed”.

In a scathing 78-page ruling on Wednesday, US District Judge Dale Ho said he was unconvinced by the justice department’s logic that the case against Adams was preventing the mayor from enforcing the administration’s immigration actions.

“Everything here smacks of a bargain: dismissal of the Indictment in exchange for immigration policy concessions,” he said.

His decision to drop the case permanently, Judge Ho said, ensured that the administration could not use the indictment as “leverage” over Adams or the city of New York.

“Dismissing the case without prejudice would create the unavoidable perception that the mayor’s freedom depends on his ability to carry out the immigration enforcement priorities of the administration, and that he might be more beholden to the demands of the federal government than to the wishes of his own constituents,” the judge wrote.

Judge Ho noted that some people would “undoubtedly” find his ruling unsatisfying, wondering why “if DOJ’s ostensible reasons for dropping this case are so troubling, the Court does not simply deny the Motion to Dismiss altogether”.

But, he repeated, the court cannot order the justice department to continue prosecuting if it has decided to drop the case.

A DOJ spokesperson called the case “an example of political weaponization and a waste of resources”. “We are focused on arresting and prosecuting terrorists while returning the Department of Justice to its core mission of keeping Americans safe,” the spokesperson told CBS News, the BBC’s US partner.

Speaking to reporters on Wednesday after the case was dismissed, Adams said the case “should have never been brought and I did nothing wrong”.

The dismissal ruling comes less than three months before the 24 June New York City mayoral race primary. Polls suggest Adams is trailing behind several other Democratic candidates.

But he told reporters that he did plan to run for re-election.

“And you know what, I’m gonna win,” he said.

Israel’s prime minister has said it is expanding its Gaza offensive and establishing a new military corridor to put pressure on Hamas, as deadly Israeli strikes were reported across the Palestinian territory.

Benjamin Netanyahu said Israeli forces were “seizing the Morag Corridor” – a reference to a former Jewish settlement once located between the southern cities of Rafah and Khan Younis.

Earlier, his defence minister said troops would seize large areas for “security zones”.

Meanwhile, 19 Palestinians, including nine children, were killed in an air strike on a UN clinic-turned-shelter in the northern town of Jabalia, a local hospital said. Israel’s military said it targeted “Hamas terrorists”.

Strikes across Gaza on Tuesday night killed at least 20 people, according to hospitals.

The Hamas-run Civil Defence agency said its first responders recovered the bodies of 12 people, including women and children, from a home in Khan Younis.

Rida al-Jabbour said a neighbour and her three-month-old baby were among the dead.

“From the moment the strike occurred we have not been able to sit or sleep or anything,” she told Reuters news agency.

The Israeli military said it was looking into the reports.

There were also reports of extensive bombardment along the border with Egypt overnight.

The Civil Defence said the strike in Jabalia on Wednesday morning hit two rooms in a clinic run by the UN agency for Palestinian refugees (Unrwa) which was being used as a shelter.

Video verified by the BBC showed dozens of people and ambulances rushing to the building. Smoke was seen billowing from a wing where two floors appeared to have collapsed.

Unrwa’s commissioner-general, Philippe Lazzarini, wrote on X that the building was previously a health centre that it had been heavily damaged earlier in the war.

“Initial reports indicate the facility was sheltering over 700 people when it was hit,” he said, adding that a two-week-old baby was reportedly among the dead. “Displaced families stayed at the shelter after it was hit because they have nowhere else to go.”

Lazzarini said too many Unrwa premises had reportedly been used for fighting purposes by Palestinian armed groups or Israeli forces, and warned that the “total disregard of UN staff, premises or operations is a profound defiance of international law”.

The Israeli military said that it targeted Hamas operatives who were “hiding inside a command and control centre that was being used for co-ordinating terrorist activity and served as a central meeting point”.

It said “numerous steps were taken to mitigate the risk of harming civilians, including the use of aerial surveillance and additional intelligence”.

Hamas denied that its fighters had been using the building.

Fadel Ashour said he had been at the al-Ahli hospital in Gaza City when some of those wounded by the Jabalia strike were brought there for treatment.

“This shelter is home to many people, and every time the Israeli army bombs it, everyone inside is harmed,” he told BBC Arabic’s Gaza Lifeline programme.

On Wednesday evening, Israel’s prime minister said in a video statement that the IDF had “switched gears” overnight and was “seizing territory, striking the terrorists and destroying the infrastructure”.

“We are also doing something else: We are seizing the Morag Corridor. This will be the second Philadelphi, an additional Philadelphi Corridor,” Netanyahu added, referring to a strip of territory running along the Egyptian border that the Israeli military seized last May.

Dividing Gaza, he said, would increase pressure on Hamas “step by step” and force the group to hand over the 59 hostages it is still holding in Gaza, 24 of whom are believed to be alive.

“As long as they do not give them to us, the pressure will increase until they do.”

Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz had announced earlier that the military would be expanding its offensive to clear and “seize large areas that will be added to the security zones of the State of Israel”, without saying where they would be. He added that it would require a “large-scale” evacuation of Palestinians.

Katz also urged Gazans to act to remove Hamas and free remaining Israeli hostages, without suggesting how they should do so.

The Hostages and Missing Families Forum in Israel, which represents many hostages’ relatives, said they were “horrified to wake up” to the news of the expanded military operation. It urged the Israeli government to prioritise securing the release of all the hostages.

This week, Israel’s military has ordered an estimated 140,000 people in Rafah to leave their homes and issued new evacuation orders for parts of northern Gaza.

Israel has already significantly expanded a buffer zone around the edge of Gaza over the course of the war, and seized control of a corridor of land cutting through its centre, known as the Netzarim Corridor.

Israel launched its renewed Gaza offensive on 18 March, blaming Hamas for rejecting a new US proposal to extend the ceasefire and free the remaining hostages. Hamas, in turn, accused Israel of violating the original deal they had agreed to in January.

The humanitarian situation across Gaza has dramatically worsened in recent weeks, with Israel refusing to allow aid into the Gaza Strip since 2 March – the longest aid blockage since the war began.

Last month, the UN announced it was reducing its operations in Gaza, one day after eight Palestinian medics, six Civil Defence first responders and a UN staff member were killed by Israeli forces in southern Gaza.

The Israeli military launched a campaign to destroy Hamas in response to an unprecedented cross-border attack on 7 October 2023, in which about 1,200 people were killed and 251 were taken hostage.

At least 50,423 people have been killed in Gaza during the ensuing war, including 1,066 over the past two weeks, according to the Hamas-run health ministry.

Val Kilmer, who has died at the age of 65, was often underrated as an actor.

He had extraordinary range: excelling in comedies, westerns, crime dramas, musical biopics and action-adventures films alike.

And perhaps his best performance combined his skills as a stage actor with a fine singing voice, to bring to life 1960s-counterculture icon Jim Morrison, in Oliver Stone’s film The Doors.

Critic Roger Ebert wrote: “If there is an award for the most unsung leading man of his generation, Val Kilmer should get it.

“In movies as different as Real Genius, Top Gun, Top Secret!, he has shown a range of characters so convincing that it’s likely most people, even now, don’t realise they were looking at the same actor.”

• Top Gun and Batman actor dies aged 65
• Look back at Val Kilmer’s best-known roles

Val Edward Kilmer was born, on 31 December 1959, into a middle-class family in Los Angeles.

His parents were Christian Scientists, a movement to which Kilmer would adhere for the rest of his life.

He attended Chatsworth High School, in the San Fernando Valley, where future actor Kevin Spacey was among his classmates and where he developed a love of drama.

Kilmer’s ambition was to study at the Royal Academy of Dramatic Art (Rada), in London, but his application was rejected because, at 17, he was a year below the minimum entry age.

Instead, Kilmer became the then youngest pupil to enrol at the Julliard School, in New York, one of the world’s most prestigious drama conservatories.

A gifted student, Kilmer co-wrote and made his stage debut in How It All Began, a play based on the life of a German radical, at the Public Theatre.

But he recalled a tough regime.

“I had a mean teacher once, who kind of said, ‘How dare you think you can act Shakespeare? You don’t know how to walk across the room yet,’… and in a way, that’s true,” Kilmer said.

Minor parts, including in Henry IV Part 1 and As You Like It, preceded a meatier role as Alan Downie in the 1983 production of Slab Boys, with Sean Penn and Kevin Bacon.

Kilmer made his film debut in spy spoof Top Secret!, written by David Zucker, Jim Abrahams and Jerry Zucker. He played star Nick Rivers, sucked into an East German plot to reunify Germany.

The film proved Kilmer had a good voice and he later released an album under the name of his fictional character.

He also published a book of poetry, My Edens After Burns, some of which reflected on a relationship with a young Michelle Pfeiffer.

Two years later, Kilmer played Lt Tom “Iceman” Kazansky, Tom Cruise’s deadly fighter pilot rival in Top Gun.

A thrilling patriotic Cold War buddy movie, it cost just $15m (£12m) to make but took more than $350m at the box office.

Kilmer’s increased profile led to renewed press interest in his eventful private life.

He dated Daryl Hannah, Angelina Jolie and Cher. In 1988, he married Joanne Whalley, whom he had met when they appeared in the fantasy film Willow,

The couple had two children but divorced after eight years of marriage.

Despite his rising popularity in the cinema, Kilmer did not abandon the stage, playing Hamlet at the 1988 Colorado Shakespeare Festival, and then Giovanni in a New York production of ‘Tis Pity She’s a Whore.

But in the 1990s, he proved he could carry a major film as a lead actor.

Director Stone had long wanted to make a biopic of The Doors, focusing on the band’s singer, who had died of a drugs overdose in Paris in 1971.

A number of actors were considered, including John Travolta and Richard Gere, before Stone chose Kilmer because of his physical resemblance to Morrison and strong singing voice.

In his trademark single-minded approach, Kilmer lost weight and learned 50 Doors songs by heart, as well as spending time in a studio perfecting Morrison’s stage style.

And in his 1996 biography of Oliver Stone, James Riordan said the surviving Doors could not tell recordings of Kilmer singing their songs from Morrison’s original.

Kilmer also played Elvis Presley in Tony Scott’s True Romance, written by Quentin Tarantino, and sickly alcoholic gambler and dentist Doc Holliday in the 1993 film Tombstone – a retelling of the story of Wyatt Earp’s gunfight at the OK Corral, which some critics called his finest performance.

In 1995, Kilmer replaced Michael Keaton in the third of a trilogy of Batman films, Batman Forever.

But he later said he had been uncomfortable with the role and declined to play it in the follow-up, Batman and Robin.

Kilmer’s reputation for being difficult on set had reportedly exploded into open warfare with the director, Joel Schumacher, normally the most temperate of men, who called his leading man’s behaviour “difficult and childish”.

John Frankenheimer, who directed Kilmer in The Island of Dr Moreau, was even blunter.

“I don’t like Val Kilmer,” he said. “I don’t like his work ethic and I don’t want to be associated with him ever again.”

The actor responded: “When certain people criticise me for being demanding, I think that’s a cover for something they didn’t do well. I think they’re trying to protect themselves.

“I believe I’m challenging, not demanding, and I make no apologies for that,” he told the Orange County Register newspaper in 2003.

Kilmer remained much in demand and reportedly received $6m for his role as Simon Templar in the 1997 film The Saint – although, critics were not overwhelmed by the film or his performance.

In the early 2000s, there was no shortage of film appearances – but Kilmer’s cinema career had hit a plateau.

In 2004, he returned to the theatre, in a musical production of The Ten Commandments, in Los Angeles.

A year later, Kilmer starred in London’s West End, in Andrew Rattenbury’s adaptation of The Postman Always Rings Twice – as Frank Chambers, the drifter played by Jack Nicholson in the 1981 film.

And in 2006, he reunited with director Scott, for sci-fi film Deja Vu, which received a mixed response.

Kilmer also voiced Kitt – the futuristic car – in a pilot for television series Nightrider.

He spent years working on a one-man show, Citizen Twain, which examined the relationship between Christian Science founder Mary Baker Eddy and her long-term critic writer Mark Twain.

A 90-minute film was eventually released, directed by Kilmer.

In 2014, Kilmer was diagnosed with throat cancer.

Chemotherapy and radiation left him with a tube in his trachea and difficulty breathing.

As a Christian Scientist, Kilmer had mixed views about seeking medical interventions and at times ascribed physical improvements to the power of prayer rather than medicine. On occasion, he denied he had cancer at all.

In 2021, Kilmer made Val, a documentary about his life.

It delved into his darkest places and experiences, including his brother Wesley’s accidental drowning as a teenager and the breakdown of his marriage.

A year later, there was time for a final starring role.

Planned for a decade, Top Gun: Maverick reunited Kilmer and Cruise, updating their former rivalry in the post-Cold War era.

Kilmer’s cancer could not be hidden. Instead, it was written into his character’s story.

“It’s time to let go,” Iceman tells Maverick in one poignant scene.

Kilmer will be remembered as a complicated man and a fine but difficult actor.

He never embraced the kind of Hollywood party lifestyle his looks and fame might have brought him.

Instead, he tended to slip away to spend time with his children, on a ranch he owned in New Mexico.

“I don’t really have too much of a notion about success or popularity, ” Kilmer once said.

“I never cultivated fame, I never cultivated a persona, except possibly the desire to be regarded as an actor.”

In the immediate aftermath of an earthquake, there is a 72-hour “golden window” when those trapped under rubble are most likely to survive.

But in the 72 hours after a 7.7 magnitude quake struck Myanmar on Friday, rescue and relief workers seeking access to some of the worst-hit areas were blocked by military authorities, multiple aid and human rights groups told the BBC.

This was despite a rare plea for international humanitarian assistance by junta chief Min Aung Hlaing.

“I would like to invite any country, any organisation, or anyone in Myanmar to come and help,” he said in a speech shortly after the disaster, claiming he had “opened all ways for foreign aid”.

On the ground, things moved less freely.

“I’ve talked to a few people now that were part of the rescue efforts in both Sagaing and Mandalay, and they said that [the military] imposed a curfew… the roads were blocked, the checkpoints were really long, and there was a huge checking of goods and services going in and a lot of questioning,” John Quinley, director of international human rights group Fortify Rights, told the BBC.

“It could have just been a lot easier to allow those people in,” he added. “Obviously the Myanmar junta said it was for safety reasons, but I don’t believe that’s totally legitimate.”

Meanwhile, the golden window closed.

At the time of writing, more than 2,886 people in Myanmar are confirmed dead as a result of the earthquake.

On Tuesday night, an attack on an aid convoy further exacerbated concerns.

At 21:21, a convoy of nine Chinese Red Cross Society vehicles carrying earthquake relief supplies was attacked by the military, according to Ta’ang National Liberation Army (TNLA), a resistance group in Shan State.

The convoy was traveling toward Mandalay when it was fired upon by soldiers with machine guns, forcing it to turn back, the TNLA said in a Telegram post late on Tuesday.

A junta spokesperson later confirmed that soldiers had shot at the vehicles, saying they had not been notified that the convoy would be passing through and fired warning shots after it failed to stop.

But this is not the first time the junta has attacked aid workers, Mr Quinley said.

“They pick and choose when aid can go in, and if they can’t monitor it and they can’t use it how they want, they restrict it,” he said. “They definitely also, on top of that, actively target humanitarian workers.”

The junta, which began fighting a civil war with resistance forces in Myanmar after it seized control of the country in 2021, has a history of weaponising aid and humanitarian assistance: funnelling it towards areas that are under its control and restricting it in areas that are not.

The BBC assessed the power balance in more than 14,000 village groups as of mid-November last year, and found the military only has full control of 21% of Myanmar’s territory, nearly four years on from the start of the conflict.

In previous natural disasters, such as Cyclone Mocha in 2023 and Typhoon Yagi in 2024, which left hundreds dead, the military obstructed relief efforts in resistance-held areas by refusing to release supplies from customs, authorise travel for aid workers or relax restrictions on lifesaving assistance.

“It’s a worrying trend that happens in times of crisis, like the earthquake,” Mr Quinley said. “The junta is blocking any aid to what they see as groups that are aligned with the broader resistance.”

James Rodehaver, head of the Myanmar team at the Office for the UN’s High Commissioner for Human Rights, further suggested that the junta deprives Myanmar’s population of aid as a form of punishment.

“They do that because the local population, by and large, does not support them, so by depriving them of humanitarian aid, they are both punishing them but also cutting off their ability to support themselves and be resilient,” he told the BBC.

There are already signs the junta may be repeating this tactic in Sagaing.

Although central Myanmar, which includes the cities of Sagaing and Mandalay, is nominally run by the junta – meaning aid can only be delivered to the area with their co-operation – large parts of the broader Sagaing and Mandalay regions are considered resistance strongholds.

The likelihood that the junta might tactically deprive these areas of aid has prompted outcry from hundreds of human rights and civil society organisations, who have urged the international community to ensure relief efforts get to where they’re most needed, and aren’t channelled through the military government.

One such statement, signed by 265 civil society organisations and released on Sunday, notes that most of the worst-hit areas are under the effective control and administration of pro-democracy resistance groups.

“Myanmar’s history provides stark warnings about the dangers of channelling aid through the military junta,” it reads.

In Sagaing, the impact of aid shortfalls can already be seen in troubling ways, according to relief agencies.

They speak of shortages of food, water and fuel, while trucks carrying aid are stranded at military checkpoints around the city. Hundreds of residents, suddenly homeless, are sleeping outside on the street. Rescue volunteers who were forced to dig through the rubble with their bare hands have run out of body bags for those they couldn’t save.

Other community members seeking to respond to the earthquake are being forced to get authorisation from junta authorities by submitting lists of volunteers and items to be donated, local media reported.

This tactic – of bombarding responders with lengthy bureaucratic checklists and processes – is routinely deployed by the junta to restrict the activities of international aid organisations in Myanmar, humanitarian sources told the BBC.

According to a registration law imposed in 2023, such organisations must attain a registration certificate, and often sign a memorandum of understanding with relevant government ministries, to legally operate inside the country.

One source, who spoke to the BBC on condition of anonymity, said aid groups are often required to remove certain activities, areas or townships from their proposals, with no room for negotiation. Areas where the junta doesn’t have oversight or control over the aid work are typically those that are disallowed, they added.

Aid agencies have found ways to navigate the junta’s restriction, however: a lot of humanitarian assistance in Myanmar happens underground, via local groups that can bypass checkpoints and distribute aid without attracting the attention of the authorities.

Many financial transactions in humanitarian aid also happen outside of Myanmar’s banking system, so that actors can avoid scrutiny and potential investigation from the country’s central bank, a source told the BBC. In some cases, humanitarian organisations open bank accounts in Thailand so that they can privately receive aid funds, then carry the money over the border into Myanmar in cash.

Such covert methods take time, however, and could lead to potentially fatal delays of days or weeks.

Some aid workers are hopeful that, given the scale of Friday’s earthquake and the international appeal for assistance by Min Aung Hlaing, it may be easier to overcome barriers and provide aid more efficiently.

“In the past we have faced some challenges,” said Louise Gorton, an emergency specialist based in Unicef’s East Asia and Pacific Regional Office.

“The scale of this emergency, though, is significantly higher… I think there will be pressure on the regime to ensure unfettered and unimpeded humanitarian access – and we’ll continue to repeat the same need and find ways, sometimes low-key ways, to deliver aid.”

Cara Bragg, country manager for the Catholic Relief Services (CRS) team in Myanmar, said that while it’s too early to tell whether the junta will truly “open all ways for foreign aid”, her team is prepared to navigate the complex humanitarian situation to deliver assistance.

“It’s certainly a concern that they [the military] may direct the aid in specific places, and not based on need,” said Ms Bragg, who is based in Yangon.

“But as humanitarian actors CRS works under a humanitarian mandate, and will be very focused on getting aid to the places it needs to go – to the hardest-hit areas, regardless of who controls them.”

Early indications suggest that, despite Min Aung Hlaing’s plea to the international community, the embattled junta leader is unlikely to prioritise the unfettered flow of humanitarian aid.

Shortly after the earthquake, military jets launched a series of airstrikes on affected areas, killing more than 50 civilians, according to the National Unity Consultative Council (NUCC).

Then, on Tuesday, Min Aung Hlaing rejected ceasefire proposals that were put forward by resistance groups in a bid to facilitate aid. Military operations would continue as “necessary protective measures”, he said.

The junta changed its mind a day later, agreeing to a 20-day ceasefire to help relief efforts. But it remains to be seen whether the pause in hostilities will hold. The military stressed it would “respond accordingly” if rebels launched attacks.

For many onlookers, this seeming contradiction – of asking for aid with one hand while conducting military strikes with the other – chimes with Min Aung Hlaing’s history of duplicity.

John Quinley, from Fortify Rights, noted that the junta leader has “lied on numerous occasions” – and suggested that the recent appeal for foreign aid is more likely an appeal for international recognition.

Against that backdrop, Mr Quinley added, it’s critical to ensure earthquake relief gets to where it is most needed.

“I think as a human rights group we need to monitor: OK, [Min Aung Hlaing] allows aid in – but is it actually reaching people in need? Or is he weaponising the aid? Is he blocking the aid from getting to communities in need?” he said.

“I’m not hopeful when it comes to taking what Min Aung Hlaing says with any hint of truth.”

The US has been unable to meaningfully respond to the Myanmar earthquake due to the Trump administration’s decision to slash foreign aid, according to three former senior US officials.

One former US Agency for International Development (USAID) mission director for Myanmar told the BBC that “America has been on the sidelines” after the disaster.

“The US basically was not there for the rescue-window period,” said another official. All three suggested the deep cuts to aid probably cost lives.

A 7.7 magnitude earthquake struck on Friday, leaving at least 2,700 people dead, more than 4,500 injured and hundreds still missing, according to the country’s military. Those figures are expected to rise.

The former USAID officials said the agency mobilised Disaster Assistance Response Teams (Darts) from the US after previous major earthquakes. Comprised of highly trained rescuers, sniffer dogs and specialist equipment, the teams are immediately made ready then dispatched when the affected country requests them.

A typical deployment, like that sent to the Turkey-Syria earthquake in 2023, could comprise some 200 people – the majority of them rescue workers. US teams are often the biggest of all foreign assistance groups on the ground.

The US Department of State said on Monday a US team based in the region was on its way to Myanmar. It is believed to comprise three people who are advisers, not rescuers.

The state department also said it was donating $2m (£1.6m) to humanitarian assistance organisations to support earthquake-affected communities. This figure is significantly smaller than previous US government donations during disasters, according to the former officials.

President Donald Trump’s adviser Elon Musk is finalising the shutdown of USAID after weeks spent dismantling the agency and placing staff on administrative leave. Trump targeted foreign assistance on his first day in office, calling it an “industry” that was in many cases “antithetical to American values”.

• What is USAID and why is Trump poised to ‘close it down’?
• More than 80% of USAID programmes ‘officially ending’

On Friday, after the earthquake struck, the White House attempted to mobilise a Dart team, according to Andrew Natsios, who served as USAID administrator in George W Bush’s administration. But, he said, it couldn’t because key officials were on administrative leave.

“The problem is they fired most of the 500 people that make up the Bureau of Humanitarian Assistance, so obviously there are no people [from the bureau] to be on the Dart team to be sent – and the people have to be trained and be familiar with disaster relief operations,” he said.

Staff at the Bureau of Humanitarian Assistance received letters of termination the day the earthquake struck, said Chris Milligan, who served as USAID Mission Director in Myanmar from 2012 to 2016.

“The employees… were told to go home by one o’clock. Everyone was told. All employees in that building were told to go home at one o’clock, and then they were told later to come back,” said Mr Milligan.

“It shows the lack of management and the confusion that there was an earthquake earlier, and they didn’t have the foresight to say ‘Okay, let’s retain these people’.”

Two of the former USAID officials said the administration couldn’t deploy US search and rescue teams, sniffer dogs and specialist equipment to Myanmar because logistics contracts to transport them from Virginia and California had been cancelled as part of the cuts, led by Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (Doge).

“It is the first time that I can think of that the US has simply not responded meaningfully to a major disaster,” said Jeremy Konyndyk, who ran the USAID Office of US Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA) from 2013 to 2016.

He said for the last few decades, with every disaster on this scale, the US would be the largest and most capable team on the ground.

“You’ve got 75 to 100 people, the dogs and it’s a pretty substantial lift [which] you’ve got to get there, operating and excavating piles, within the first really four days.”

“The US basically was not there for the rescue window, period. And it’s too late,” said Mr Konyndyk.

It’s unlikely the agency could reactivate logistics contracts in time for a Dart team to Myanmar in time to save lives, he said. “If you wanted to issue new ones, the people who could issue new contracts and do the tenders for that, they’ve all been fired,” explained Mr Konyndak.

The US state department rejects the notion that the cuts have impacted disaster relief in Myanmar.

The department had partners it worked with “that may not require us to be physically present”, spokeswoman Tammy Bruce said on Monday.

“With the reform that the government is going through with the lead of President Trump… certain things won’t necessarily look the same. But the success in the work and our impact will still be there,” she said.

• ‘I feel guilty for not being in Myanmar – our people need us the most now’
• The man mourning 170 loved ones lost in Myanmar’s earthquake
• ‘We still have hope’: Searching for quake survivors in Mandalay
• Teacher captures aftermath of Myanmar earthquake

However, Mr Konyndyk described the claim as “fantasy land”.

“You can’t pull people out of a building virtually, you can’t excavate, you can’t do live rescues from a collapsed building without boots on the ground,” he said.

Chris Milligan, the former USAID mission director for Myanmar, said the rescue capacity available in the United States would double the capacity already on the ground in Myanmar.

“This is the new normal. This is what it looks like when the United States sits on the international sidelines, when the United States is a weaker international player, when it cedes the space to other global players like China,” said Mr Milligan.

The state department told the BBC it did not intend to deploy a Dart team to Myanmar, adding it was continuing many existing lifesaving programs and strategic investments that “strengthen our partners and our own country”.

A state department spokesperson said: “USAID has contracts in place with Urban Search and Rescue Teams to assist in responding to disasters.”

“[A] USAID team of humanitarian experts based in the region are traveling to Burma to assess additional needs,” the spokesperson continued.

“A Dart is essentially a coordination mechanism. We are able to coordinate with our partners for this specific response without a Dart. Every response is different,” added the spokesperson.

A British couple who face being deported from Australia after one of them was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis (MS) have said it is not fair the life they built could be taken away “any minute”.

Jessica Mathers was told the potential cost to health services of treating her condition meant her 2023 application for permanent residency alongside boyfriend Rob O’Leary was rejected.

The 30-year-old, a project manager and DJ from Macclesfield who has lived in Sydney since 2017, said the couple had been “living in a state of uncertainty” for years as they waited for an outcome of an appeal against the decision.

The Australian Department of Home Affairs said it cannot comment on individual cases.

Ms Mathers and Mr O’Leary, 31, from East London, met while backpacking in the country in 2017 and have lived there ever since.

He started a business in the carpentry and construction trade three years ago, and said the couple had “made the most of our lives here”.

But Ms Mathers’s diagnosis of the relapsing-remitting variant of MS in 2020 has led to a visa battle with authorities that could see the pair thrown out of the country.

Symptoms are typically mild for this form of MS, according to the NHS, but about half of cases can develop into a more progressive form of the disease.

She has received treatment in Australia under a reciprocal health agreement with the UK and said her condition had been “well managed” so far.

But the couple’s requests for permanent residency were rejected in 2023 due to the costs associated with her medical care.

Non-citizens entering Australia must meet certain health requirements, including not having “unduly increasing costs” for the country’s publicly-funded healthcare service Medicare.

The couple lodged an appeal with the Administrative Appeals Tribunal after the visa rejection in 2023, and have been waiting for the past two years for an outcome.

Mr O’Leary said they had offered to pay the medical costs themselves or take out private insurance, “but the law is black and white, and the refusal is based on that, it’s really hard for us”.

They have started an online petition to call for Australia’s Minister for Home Affairs to review their case and look into immigration policies that “unfairly target individuals with well-managed health conditions”.

Mr O’Leary said the couple were “not asking for special treatment” but a chance to continue “working hard to contribute to this country in meaningful ways”.

He said: “We’ve always paid tax, we’ve always worked, Jess has done heaps of charity work.”

Ms Mathers said the couple had been “stuck not knowing what to do” as they waited for the outcome of their appeal, which had made it difficult for her to find anything other than temporary work.

She said: “It’s held up our whole life, it’s really upsetting.

“We know that we could get a refusal from the tribunal and then get given 28 days to leave the country, at any minute.

“We’ve got so much opportunity in Australia, and to walk away from it would be so sad.”

One month since Israel closed all crossings to Gaza for goods, all UN-supported bakeries have closed, markets are empty of most fresh vegetables and hospitals are rationing painkillers and antibiotics.

It is the longest blockade yet of Israel’s nearly 18-month-long war against Hamas. This week, during the normally festive Muslim holiday of Eid al-Fitr, many Gazans say they have gone hungry.

“This was the worst ever Eid for us,” Um Ali Hamad, a displaced woman from Beit Lahia, told the BBC as she searched for food in Gaza City. “We can’t eat or drink. We couldn’t enjoy it. We’re exhausted.”

“We can no longer find things to eat like tomatoes, sugar or oil. They’re not available. I can barely find one meal a day. Now, there are no charity food handouts.”

“I only have one grandchild; he was born during the war. He’s three months old and we can’t find milk or nappies for him.”

Israel said it was imposing a ban on goods entering Gaza on 2 March due to Hamas’s refusal to extend the first phase of the January ceasefire deal and release more hostages.

Hamas has continued to demand a move to the second phase of the original agreement, which would see the remaining living hostages it holds being released and a full end to the war.

A two-month long truce, which started on 19 January, saw the return of 33 Israeli hostages – eight of them dead – in exchange for about 1,900 Palestinian prisoners and a big surge in humanitarian aid entering the devastated territory.

Aid agencies are now calling for world powers to force Israel to allow essential goods into Gaza – including food, medicines, hygiene products and fuel – pointing to the country’s obligations under international humanitarian law.

They say they are making tough decisions about how to manage their dwindling stocks in the territory. Fuel, for example, is needed for vehicles to move aid, bakeries, hospital generators, wells and water desalination plants.

The NGO ActionAid called the month-long Israeli ban on aid entering Gaza “appalling” and warned a “new cycle of starvation and thirst” loomed.

On Tuesday, the UN dismissed as “ridiculous”, an Israeli assertion that there was enough food in Gaza to last its roughly two million residents for a long time.

“We are at the tail end of our supplies,” UN spokesperson Stephane Dujarric said.

Cogat, the Israeli military body that controls crossings, says that during the recent ceasefire some 25,200 lorries entered Gaza carrying nearly 450,000 tonnes of aid.

“That’s nearly a third of the total trucks that entered Gaza during the entire war, in just over a month,” Cogat wrote in a post on X. “There is enough food for a long period of time, if Hamas lets the civilians have it.”

Israeli officials accuse Hamas of hoarding supplies for itself. However, Dujarric said the UN had kept “a very good chain of custody on all the aid it’s delivered”.

Shutters are down, ovens off and the shelves empty at a bakery in Gaza City – one of 25 that worked with the UN’s World Food Programme (WFP) across the strip. With shortages of fuel and flour, a sign says it is closed “until further notice”.

“Closing the bakery is a catastrophe because bread is the most important staple for us,” said a grandfather, Abu Alaa Jaffar, looking on despairingly.

“Without it, people don’t know how to deal with the situation. There will be starvation much worse than we saw before.”

He and other passersby told the BBC that a 25kg (55lb) bag of flour had gone up as much as 10-fold and could now fetch 500 shekels ($135; £104) on the black market.

For months, Israel has prevented commercial goods from entering Gaza – saying that this trade benefited Hamas – and local food production has stopped almost completely because of the war.

While many food kitchens supported by international NGOs have recently stopped working as their supplies have run out, the WFP expects to continue distributing hot meals for a maximum of two weeks.

It says it will hand out its last food parcels within two days. As a “last resort” once all other food is exhausted, it has emergency stocks of fortified nutritional biscuits for 415,000 people.

Meanwhile, the UN agency for Palestinian refugees (UNRWA), the biggest aid agency operating in Gaza, says it has only a few days’ worth of food left to give out.

“We’re seeing a very quick depletion of what we have in our warehouses,” said communications director Tamara al-Rifai. “Everyone is rationing everything because it’s not clear whether and when there is an end in sight.”

“What’s extremely striking to us is how fast the positive impact of the ceasefire – if I can use the word ‘positive’, namely being able to bring food and other supplies – is how fast that impact has evaporated in four weeks.”

Israel resumed the war in Gaza on 18 March. Its renewed air and ground operations have once again made it difficult for aid workers to move around and have led to hundreds of casualties, overwhelming hospitals.

The UN’s World Health Organisation (WHO) says over half of the hospitals receiving trauma cases are now virtually full.

Devices to stabilise broken bones have run out, while anaesthesia, antibiotics and fluids for wounded patients are dwindling. The WHO warns that vital supplies for pregnant mothers will run out imminently.

Dr Mark Perlmutter, an American surgeon who was recently working in Gaza, told the BBC that he was forced to use drill bits to fix a fracture in a child’s leg and that there was no working X-ray machine in the two hospitals where he was based.

He added that he was unable to clean wounds before operating or even wash his hands as soap had run out.

Another mass casualty event would mean “people are going to die from wounds that could have been corrected”, Dr Perlmutter said.

So far, at least 1,066 Palestinians have been killed – about one third of whom are children – since Israel began its renewed military offensive in Gaza, according to the Hamas-run health ministry.

The WHO also warns of serious public health concerns after the facilities for diagnosing infectious diseases were forced to close.

The international health charity Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) is calling on Israel to halt what it calls the “collective punishment of Palestinians”.

It says some patients are being treated without pain relief and that those with conditions requiring regular medication, such as epilepsy or diabetes are having to ration their supplies.

Last year, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to “take immediate and effective measures to enable the provision of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance to address the adverse conditions of life faced by Palestinians in the Gaza Strip”.

South Africa has brought an ongoing case before the UN’s top court, alleging that Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. Israel rejects the claim as “baseless.”

The war in Gaza was triggered by the deadly Hamas-led attacks on southern Israel on 7 October 2023, which killed some 1,200 people and led to 251 hostages being taken to Gaza. Since then, more than 50,000 Palestinians have been killed, Palestinian health authorities say.

Arab mediators are continuing to try to resurrect the ceasefire.

Hamas said on Saturday that it had accepted a new proposal from Egypt. Israel said it had made a counterproposal in coordination with the US, which has also been mediating.

There have been no signs of an imminent breakthrough or an end to the Israel closure of crossings into Gaza.

Twenty-three more women have come forward to the police with allegations against serial rapist Zhenhao Zou – a Chinese PhD student found guilty in London last month of drugging and raping 10 women across two continents.

Police said at the conclusion of his trial they had video evidence, filmed by Zou himself, of potentially 50 more victims – and they have been trying to trace these women. Detectives now say, however, that they believe Zou’s “offending group is far greater”.

Warning: This story contains descriptions of sexual violence

Two women who have contacted police in the past month with new allegations have also spoken to the BBC World Service. One said Zou raped her in his hometown in China, after spiking her drink which left her conscious but unable to speak or move. The other said Zou drugged her too – in London – and that she had woken up to find him filming himself sexually assaulting her.

We have also spoken to two women whose testimony helped convict Zou – who will be sentenced in June. “If I had spoken up earlier, maybe there wouldn’t have been so many victims after me,” one of them told us.

She and the other women say they struggle with the guilt of now knowing that Zou has assaulted so many women.

One of the women making new allegations, who we are calling Alice, told the BBC that Zou had assaulted her in London in 2021, but that she had only felt able to go to police after his trial last month. “I didn’t know that was something you could report,” the Chinese national told us.

She says she first met Zou while out clubbing in London with other Chinese-student friends. The group had all added one another on WeChat, a popular social messaging app.

Not long afterwards, a mutual friend invited Alice to have drinks at Zou’s upmarket student accommodation in Bloomsbury.

There were two bottles of spirits on the table, she says, both already opened and half-empty. She began to share drinks from one of the bottles with her friend – but says Zou only drank from the other one.

Alice says her friend normally tolerated alcohol well, but this time became drunk very quickly and appeared to fall asleep on the floor. The alcohol kicked in suddenly for Alice too, she says.

“Normally when you drink too much, you feel good for a while. But that night I just felt extremely dizzy and sleepy right away.”

Zou persuaded her it wouldn’t be safe to take a taxi home in the state she was in, she told us, and asked her to take a nap in his bedroom. She says she agreed, knowing her friend was also still in the apartment.

The next thing she says she remembers is waking up to Zou removing her trousers.

“I stopped him right away,” she says – explaining how she then noticed a torchlight from a mobile phone above her head, and realised, to her horror, that he was filming her.

Alice describes trying to leave his bedroom but being aggressively “yanked back from the doorway”. Zou used such strong force to try to keep her in the bedroom, she says, that she “had to cling on to the door frame with both hands”.

It was only when she threatened to scream for help, that he let go – she told us – with Zou then telling her not to make “a big deal” of things, or to go to the police.

Zou contacted Alice the next day on WeChat, she says, but he made no mention of the previous night. He asked her to dinner but she says she ignored him and they were never in touch again.

Alice confided in a few close friends, but took things no further.

“I thought that, first, you needed evidence. And second, something substantial had to have happened before you could call the police.”

Alice says the next time she saw Zou’s face was nearly four years later in the media – after he was charged by police.

It is challenging for foreign nationals to report sexual crimes in the UK, says Sarah Yeh, a trustee at Southeast and East Asian Women’s Association in London.

“It would be daunting for anyone [from] overseas to be traumatised by rape and then have to navigate the British legal system and the NHS, or even access the services provided for victims,” she told us.

They might not understand their rights or what resources are available to them – she says – as well as being concerned about repercussions, negative impacts on their studies, shame brought on themselves and their families, and potential legal challenges.

About a year after Alice says she was assaulted, she discovered that one of her male friends in London also knew Zou, but had cut all contact because he found out Zou had been spiking women’s drinks.

The friend – who the BBC is calling Jie – told us he “wasn’t surprised at all” when he heard Zou had been convicted.

“A lot of friends at the time probably knew [what Zou was doing]. I reckon some of our female friends knew too.”

Jie told us he accidentally drank from someone else’s glass at a party in 2022, and then became “unwell” and “very sleepy”. Zou then told him he had spiked the drink – says Jie – and had meant for a woman at the party to drink it.

Jie says Zou later showed him a small bag of drugs and asked if he wanted to “collaborate with him”. He says he took from this that Zou wanted his help finding girls whose drinks he could spike. Jie says he refused.

The BBC asked Jie why he had initially continued to see Zou and why he didn’t go to the police. Jie told us they both had lots of mutual friends so it was difficult not to socialise together. He says he did warn his friends about Zou, telling them not to hang out with him “because he was drugging people”.

Jie doesn’t like thinking about those memories, he says, and that is why he hasn’t gone to the police – adding that he had believed the women’s testimonies were enough to convict Zou.

Eventually, Jie says, he did cut all ties with him.

Another young woman who has been in touch with police in London and China since Zou’s trial is “Rachel”. She says she was drugged and raped by him in 2022 in his hometown of Dongguan – in Guangdong province.

Rachel told the BBC she had gone on a date with Zou, having met him online. She thought they were going to a bar, she says, but ended up at his home – a large villa which Zou had described as one of his family’s many properties.

With his back turned to her, she says Zou mixed her a green-coloured cocktail. They then started a drinking game, she says, and she experienced a “wave of dizziness”. Rachel has told UK police that Zou took her up to a bedroom, where she became unable to speak or move her body, and then raped her.

She thought about calling the police the next day, but decided against it. She feared it would be very difficult to prove non-consent. “It’s hard for me to prove the fact that I was willing to go to his place for drinks and that was not a signal that I was consenting to sex,” she told us.

She added that Dongguan is a small place and there was always a risk that people she knew – her parents, relatives and colleagues – would find out and think she was “indiscreet”.

We have seen Rachel’s statement to UK police. She wants her story to be heard now, she says, to encourage more victims to come forward – and because she would like to see Zou prosecuted in China as well as the UK.

Cdr Kevin Southworth – who leads public protection at the Metropolitan Police – told the BBC officers were still working their way through the 23 potential new cases and that some of the people were “definitely not identical” to those featured in Zou’s seized secret footage or from the charge cases so far.

“It speaks to the fact that his offending group is actually far greater than we had realised,” he says.

A second trial for the convicted rapist has not been ruled out and there is “certainly a case” to discuss with the Crown Prosecution Service, given the numbers of women coming forward, he adds.

The BBC has also spoken to the only two victims who police were able to identify ahead of Zou’s trial – both are Chinese nationals who had been studying in London. The women got to know each other on social media after one of them, who we are calling Beth, posted about her experience.

Beth was raped by Zou in 2023 and had tried to report the crime to the Metropolitan Police soon afterwards. But then she decided not to pursue things because she felt unsure of UK law and had been left feeling discouraged after her initial interaction with the police, which included a poor translation of her 999 call.

“Back then I didn’t know [Zou’s name]. I didn’t know his address, I could only give general information,” she says.

In frustration, Beth posted a warning on social media about what had happened to her. Another Chinese student, “Clara”, says she “immediately” knew this was the same man who had drugged and raped her after a night out in London’s Chinatown, two years before.

Every detail in Beth’s post pointed to the same man, says Clara: “He has a Guangdong accent, he looks honest and he wears a Rolex submariner watch.”

The women began to speak online and Beth encouraged Clara to report what had happened to her to the police.

Months later, police contacted Beth to say they were re-investigating the case. Clara had come forward.

On Zou’s seized devices, police had also found a video featuring Beth.

The Met has since expressed regret over how it initially handled her allegations.

“We want to avoid situations where victims feel like they’re maybe not being taken seriously, or heaven forbid, being disbelieved,” says Cdr Southworth. Additional training is now being rolled out to all front line officers, he says.

Clara describes a positive experience with British police. She says she didn’t want to fly to London for the trial, in case her parents found out, so the Met sent two officers to China to support her as she gave evidence by video instead.

The officers were assisted by the Chinese authorities, who have been working collaboratively with the Met and are “very supportive”, says Cdr Southworth.

“I hope that can give some encouragement to victim-survivors, wherever they are in the world, that you are safe to come forward.”

In addition to his time in London, Zou also studied in Belfast between 2017 and 2019 – police do not know if his campaign of drug rape had already begun while he was there.

Beth – who gave her evidence in court in London – says it was only afterwards that she realised that she and Clara were the only two women to have helped convict Zou.

“I thought for a long time that I wasn’t an important part of the case against Zou,” she says.

Now she is glad she testified and is encouraging other women to come forward.

If you have information about this story that you would like to share with us please get in touch.

You can contact BBC journalist wanqing.zhang@bbc.co.uk – please include contact details if you are willing to speak to her.

The UK’s Disasters Emergency Committee (DEC) is launching an appeal to help the thousands of people injured and displaced as a result of last week’s powerful earthquake which struck Myanmar and the wider region.

Made up of 15 UK aid agencies, including the British Red Cross, Oxfam and Save the Children, the DEC is asking the British public for donations before the monsoon season arrives in two months.

More than 2,800 people have died and more than 4,500 have been injured, according to the leaders of Myanmar’s military government, with figures expected to rise.

The charities say shelter, medicine, food, water and cash support is “urgently needed”.

Baroness Chapman, minister for development, said public donations to the DEC appeal would be matched pound-for-pound by the government, up to the value of £5m.

DEC’s chief executive Saleh Saeed said the situation was “ever more critical.”

“Funds are urgently needed to help families access life-saving humanitarian aid following this catastrophe,” he said.

Multiple international aid agencies and foreign governments have dispatched personnel and supplies to quake-hit regions.

• Inside Mandalay: BBC visits makeshift hospital treating earthquake victims in Myanmar

Myanmar was already facing a severe humanitarian crisis before the 7.7 magnitude earthquake due to the ongoing civil war there, with the DEC estimating a third of the population is in need of aid.

The country has been gripped by violence amid the conflict between the junta – which seized power in a 2021 coup – and ethnic militias and resistance forces across the country.

On Wednesday, Myanmar’s military government announced a temporary ceasefire lasting until 22 April, saying it was aimed at expediting relief and reconstruction efforts.

Rebel groups had already unilaterally declared a ceasefire to support relief efforts earlier this week, but the military had refused to do the same until Wednesday’s announcement.

Aid workers have come under attack in Myanmar. On Tuesday night, the army opened fire at a Chinese Red Cross convoy carrying earthquake relief supplies.

Nine of the charity’s vehicles came under attack. The UN and some charities have accused the military junta of blocking access.

The US Geological Survey’s modelling estimates Myanmar’s death toll could exceed 10,000, while the cost in damages to infrastructure could surpass the country’s annual economic output.

Roads, water services and buildings including hospitals have been destroyed, especially in Mandalay, the hard-hit city near the epicentre.

In Thailand, at least 21 people have died.

The Red Cross has also issued an urgent appeal for $100m (£77m), while the UN is seeking $8m in donations for its response.

“People urgently require medical care, clean drinking water, tents, food, and other basic necessities,” the International Rescue Committee (IRC) said on Monday.

The DEC brings together 15 leading UK aid charities to provide and deliver aid to ensure successful appeals.

The appeal will be broadcast on the BBC and other media outlets throughout Thursday.

Stewards are to be stationed next to a statue of Molly Malone in Dublin to discourage people from touching it.

Dublin City Council is running a pilot scheme for a week in May after complaints of people groping the sculpture’s breasts.

The council also said it has plans to re-patinate (re-cover) parts of the statue that have become discoloured by people touching it.

“Dublin City Council do not want anyone to touch any work of art whether indoors or outdoors to avoid damage and costly repairs,” a spokesperson said.

“The low plinth height and space around the statue allows crowds to congregate easily and the Molly Malone statue is a feature of tours given by tour guides.”

The council said other potential options to stop people touching the statue such as moving it or raising the plinth that it sits on are “under review”.

However, it said that these options would be “costly”, adding that placing a railing around the artwork “may increase risk”.

“A pilot week of stewarding will occur in May to begin educating those who are interacting with the statue and requesting they do not touch the statue or step on the plinth and discussing the reasons for not doing so,” the council statement said.

Tilly Cripwell, a student who has campaigned for the statue to be treated with more respect, criticised the idea of stewards as “short sighted and quite short term”.

However, she welcomed the planned restoration work as an “important advancement”.

She told the BBC’s Good Morning Ulster programme that she hoped behaviours would change “and if not [the statue should] potentially raised on a plinth”.

She also called for a plaque to be installed to explain the legacy of Molly Malone.

The Molly Malone statue was erected 37 years ago in tribute to a legendary Dublin woman who sold shellfish in the streets of the Irish capital.

It is not clear if the character is based on a real or fictional person, but the figure of Molly Malone has come to represent part of Dublin’s working class community.

She was also the subject of a traditional folk song, which tells the story of a fishmongers’ daughter who sold cockles and mussels from a wheelbarrow.

According to the colourful lyrics, Molly died of a fever but then returned as a ghost, still wheeling her wheelbarrow through the city’s streets.

Many public artworks in Dublin are popularly referred to by rhyming nicknames and for years, the Molly Malone statue was known as “the tart with the cart”.

This name was in part due to suggestions that Molly Malone worked as a fishmonger by day and as a sex worker by night.

The statue was first erected in Dublin’s Grafton Street in 1988, created by the renowned bronze sculptor, Jeanne Rynhart.

It was later moved to nearby St Andrews’ Street to accommodate the construction of a tram line.

After spending eight years in jail, a Nigerian televangelist accused of raping young women from his South African church has been found not guilty of all charges.

Timothy Omotoso had denied the 32 charges in a trial that was broadcast live and gained huge interest across the country.

In 2018, one witness told the court she had been raped by the pastor – who ran a church in the city of Port Elizabeth – when she was 14 years old.

When delivering the verdict on Wednesday, the judge presiding over the trial said that Mr Omotoso had been found not guilty because prosecutors had mishandled the case.

South Africa’s National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) shared a similar assessment, saying that “former prosecutors in the case acted improperly and the accused were not sufficiently cross-examined by the state”.

The NPA said it would now “consider its legal options” and that the drawn-out nature of the trial was partly down to Mr Omotoso filing numerous legal challenges.

For his part, Mr Omotoso told the media he thanked God for the verdict.

Hi co-accused, Lusanda Sulani and Zikiswa Sitho, were also found not guilty.

Mr Omotoso was dramatically arrested at an airport in 2017 as he sought to leave the country.

His trial was the first prominent rape case to be broadcast live in a country where sexual violence is rampant.

The hearings attracted huge interest, and raised difficult questions about victims’ rights, impartiality and whether justice is best served by having television cameras in courtrooms.

Following Wednesday’s verdict, Mr Omotoso will be deported to Nigeria, South African media outlet News24 reported.

• South Africa shocked by live rape trial of Timothy Omotoso
• Sexual violence in South Africa: ‘I was raped, now I fear for my daughters’
• The volunteer crime fighters using whistles, whips and guns

US President Donald Trump has announced a universal “baseline” 10% tariff on imports into the US, on what he has dubbed “Liberation Day”.

Describing 2 April, 2025 as “our declaration of America’s economic independence”, he said “reciprocal tariffs” would start at that baseline, although 60 countries would be hit with far higher rates of up to 50%.

The tariffs will take effect in the next few days.

Trump said that from midnight on 3 April, the US would start imposing 25% tariffs on all foreign-made cars. It is unclear if this was additional to the universal tariffs.

Trump argues the measures – which make foreign goods more expensive – will help US manufacturers and protect jobs. However, prices could go up for consumers.

Trump said that the US had been taken advantage of by “cheaters” and “pillaged” by foreigners and announced a 10% “baseline” tariff on all imports coming into the US.

However, nations including Cambodia, Vietnam, Malaysia and Bangladesh will be hit much harder, with tariffs reaching 50% in some cases.

UK goods will be hit by a 10% tariff, while those from the 27-member EU bloc by 20%.

The baseline 10% tariff will kick in on 5 April 12:01EST, while higher rates starting from 12:01 EST on 9 April.

Trump has previously announced a 25% tariff on all foreign-made cars coming into the US, which takes effect at midnight EST (04:00 GMT) 3 April.

Last month, he had unveiled a 25% tariff on all steel and aluminium imports.

The US president had also doubled to 20% a tariff on Chinese goods, slapped 25% on goods from Mexico and Canada, and a 10% tariff on Canadian energy imports.

Tariffs are taxes charged on goods imported from other countries.

Typically, tariffs are a percentage of a product’s value. For example, a 25% tariff on a $10 (£7.76) product would mean an additional $2.50 charge.

Companies that bring the foreign goods into the country have to pay the tax to the government.

Firms can choose to pass on some or all of the cost to customers.

The universal “reciprocal tariffs” announced by Trump are meant to target rival countries that are already placing import charges on American products – although the US president argues his levies are smaller than those imposed on the US.

• LIVE: Starmer ruling “nothing out” on Trump tariffs as EU prepares “robust” response
• Faisal Islam: Trump poised to reshape global economy and how world does business
• Three big unknowns ahead of Trump’s ‘Liberation Day’ tariffs

Tariffs are a central part of Trump’s economic vision. He says “tariff” is his favourite word.

He argues the taxes will encourage US consumers to buy more American-made goods, boosting the country’s economy and increasing the amount of tax raised.

Trump wants to reduce the gap between the value of goods the US imports and those it exports to other countries.

For example, the US had a trade deficit of $213bn (£165bn) with the European Union (EU) in 2024, something Trump has called “an atrocity”.

The US president also said tariffs were intended to force China, Mexico and Canada – the countries first targeted – to do more to stop migrants and drugs reaching the US.

He has refused to rule out the possibility of a recession as a result of his trade policies. US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said tariffs were “worth it” even if they led to an economic downturn.

Several tariffs announced by Trump have subsequently been delayed, amended or scrapped.

• Trump’s tariffs risk economic turbulence – and voter backlash
• Is the US really heading into a recession?
• The US firms backing Trump’s fight over trade

Economists expect tariffs to increase prices for US consumers across many imported goods, as firms pass on some or all of their increased costs.

The products affected could include everything from beer, whisky and tequila to maple syrup, fuel and avocados.

Firms may also decide to import fewer foreign goods, which could in turn make those which are available more expensive.

Among Trump’s targets are overseas car firms. The US imported about eight million cars last year – accounting for about $240bn (£186bn) in trade and roughly half of overall sales.

The new import taxes of 25% on cars and car parts will take effect on 2 April, with charges on businesses importing vehicles starting the next day. Taxes on parts are due to kick in later, possibly in May.

Car prices were already expected to rise as a result of tariffs on imports from Canada and Mexico.

Component parts typically cross the US, Mexican and Canadian borders multiple times before a vehicle is completely assembled.

The cost of a car made using parts from Mexico and Canada alone could rise by $4,000-$10,000 depending on the vehicle, according to analysts at the Anderson Economic Group.

The tariffs Trump announced during his first term as president raised the average price of steel and aluminium in the US by 2.4% and 1.6% respectively, according to the US International Trade Commission.

US tariffs on imported washing machines between 2018 and 2023 increased the price of laundry equipment by 34%, according to official statistics.

Prices fell once the tariffs expired.

The UK exported around £58bn of goods to the US in 2024.

The economy will be affected by the car and steel tariffs which have already been introduced – and is expected to be hit again by the latest measures.

Speaking at Prime Minister’s Questions ahead of the Trump announcement, PM Sir Keir Starmer said he was “preparing for all eventualities”, and ruling nothing out.

The UK government has so far not announced any taxes on US imports.

Trade Secretary Jonathan Reynolds has previously insisted that ongoing trade talks with the Trump administration mean the UK is in the “best possible position of any country” to have tariffs weakened or reversed.

Economists have warned any major tariffs could knock the UK’s economy off course and make it harder for the government to hit its self-imposed borrowing rules.

• Chris Mason: Jitters, uncertainty and hope as UK awaits Trump tariff decision

A number of other countries have introduced their own tariffs on goods imported from the US.

These will make US products more expensive, and are bolstering fears of a global trade war which could create problems for economies worldwide.

China has introduced a 10-15% tax on some US agricultural goods. It has also targeted US aviation, defence and tech firms.

EU tariffs targeting US goods worth €26bn (£22bn) will start on 1 April and be fully in place on 13 April. They will cover items ranging “from boats to bourbon to motorbikes”, as well as steel and aluminium products.

The head of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, has promised a “robust and calibrated response” to any further tariff announcements.

Canada has imposed 25% tariffs on US steel, aluminium and a range of other goods. Further counter tariffs may be introduced.

Mexico has delayed introducing its own retaliatory tariffs while negotiations continue.

Uriah Rennie became a familiar face to millions of football fans after becoming the Premier League’s first black referee.

Once described as the “fittest” match official in global football and a martial arts expert, he is now learning to walk again after a rare condition left him paralysed from the waist down.

After spending five months in hospital, the 65-year-old has spoken to BBC News about rehabilitation, his fighting spirit and a brand new role.

Rennie, who officiated more than 300 top-flight fixtures between 1997 and 2008, was on a birthday trip to Turkey last year when he was hit with a sudden striking pain in his back.

“I thought I had just slept funny on a sun lounger, I was hoping to go paragliding but because of my backache I couldn’t go,” he says.

“By the end of the holiday I couldn’t sleep a wink from the pain, and by the time I got home I could barely walk.”

Rennie made history in 1997 when he officiated a match between Derby County and Wimbledon, becoming the top division’s first black referee.

Tall in stature and a kick-boxing and aikido expert, protesting players rapidly discovered he was more than comfortable standing his ground during arguments.

A magistrate in Sheffield since 1996, he has campaigned for issues such as improving equality and inclusion in sport, supporting mental health and tackling deprivation.

Rennie was on the verge of starting a new role as Sheffield Hallam University chancellor when he was admitted to Northern General Hospital in October.

“I spent a month laid on my back and another four months sitting in bed,” he says.

“They kept me in hospital until February, they found a nodule pushing on my spine and it was a rare neurological condition so it’s not something they can operate on.

“I have had to learn to move all over again, I’m retraining my legs.”

“It was strange – I went from running around the city to in essence being in traction for such a long time.

“I didn’t have any previous back problems but quite suddenly I wasn’t able to move and was in a spinal unit.”

Discussing his current movement, he says: “I can move my feet and I can stand with a frame attached to my wheelchair but I need to work on my glutes.”

He jokingly shows the wheelchair scuffs on the skirting boards around his home, with physiotherapy currently taking up much of his day.

“I rock around in my chair doing my exercises, I’m a very good, compliant patient,” he laughs.

“It has been frustrating but family and friends have been invaluable, the hospital was absolutely superb and the university has been exceptional.”

He officially starts as university chancellor in May, a position he has been determined to take up despite his recent experiences.

“I emphasised I wanted to make a difference to Sheffield and to communities here,” he says.

“I carried on working with community sports teams while in hospital, directing them from my bed.”

He studied for an MBA at the university during his refereeing career and received an honorary doctorate in 2023 for his work with sport and local communities.

• Sam Allison: Why has it taken 15 years for another black Premier League ref?

“I’m aiming to be the best I can physically,” he says.

“No one has told me I won’t walk again, but even if someone did say that I want to be able to say I did everything I could to try.”

Rennie, who moved from Jamaica to the UK as a young child and grew up in the Wybourn area of the city, says being the first black referee was about “creating a legacy to enable other people to stand on your shoulders”.

Discussing his latest challenge, he says the spinal cord compression has given him a new outlook on life.

“Lots of people are in wheelchairs, but it doesn’t define them,” he says.

“It has made me resilient and forceful and I will never give up – I’m not on my own, there is a village helping me.”

He concludes: “I recognise how brittle things are in life now.

“I don’t know if I am going to walk fully, but I know what I need to do to try and you must never give up hope.”

South Yorkshire on BBC Sounds

The US State Department has revoked visas held by members of a Mexican band for “glorifying a drug kingpin”.

Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau said the band, Los Alegres del Barranco, had projected an image of El Mencho onto a screen at a recent concert in Mexico.

El Mencho, whose real name is Nemesio Oseguera Ramos, is the leader of the Jalisco New Generation Cartel (CJNG), one of the most feared transnational drug trafficking gangs.

The CJNG is one of eight criminal groups which the Trump administration recently declared “foreign terrorist organisations” as part of its strategy to “ensure the total elimination” of these groups in the US.

In a post on X, Landau wrote “in the Trump Administration, we take seriously our responsibility over foreigners’ access to our country”.

He added that “the last thing we need is a welcome mat for people who extol criminals and terrorists”.

Los Alegres del Barranco had been scheduled to perform more than a dozen concerts in US states including Oklahoma, Texas, Alabama, Kentucky and California.

Their music and that of other norteño bands has gained a large following in the US, particularly in areas where Mexican-Americans live.

The band fell foul of both the US and the Mexican authorities on Saturday when they displayed an image of El Mencho during their concert in the Mexican city of Zapopan.

It was projected while they played a song which praises him as “a man of war who loves his family” and extols his exploits as the leader of the “cartel with four letters”, a thinly veiled reference to the CJNG.

Narcocorridos, songs praising drug cartel leaders, are not uncommon in Mexico.

Many bands playing norteña music – a genre characterised by catchy lyrics often sung to a polka-inspired rhythm and accompanied by an accordion and the twelve-stringed bajo sexto – are paid by drug barons to compose these songs.

Some bands rely on income early in their careers from being hired to play at private parties, many of which are hosted by people involved in or with connections to the cartels.

The song praising El Mencho is not the only narcocorrido in Los Alegres del Barranco’s repertoire.

An earlier song entitled The 701 is about the leader of the Sinaloa cartel, Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán, and how he rose to number 701 in Forbes magazine’s list of the world’s richest people.

Composed before El Chapo was jailed, it describes him as “the world’s most wanted man” who is not only rich because he has “many banknotes” but also because he “can count on the friendship of the people”, the song claims.

The concert at which the band projected the image of El Mencho came just weeks after relatives searching for disappeared loved ones came across a ranch that has been described by the authorities as a “training and extermination camp” for the CJNG.

Hundreds of abandoned shoes and suitcases, as well as bone fragments and ovens, found at the ranch seem to indicate that the cartel used it to train people it had recruited forcibly or by deception, killing those who resisted.

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum was among those who criticised the band.

Asked about the incident at her morning news conference, she said that “this shouldn’t happen, it’s not right” and ordered an investigation.

The singer of Los Alegres del Barranco appeared pleased by the mention of his band during the president’s news conference.

Speaking in a video published on TikTok, he answered a fan’s question about it, saying “how cool” it was and thanking people “for all the support we have received”.

US President Donald Trump announced a sweeping new set of tariffs on Wednesday, arguing that they would allow the United States to economically flourish.

These new import taxes, which Trump imposed via executive order, are expected to send economic shockwaves around the world.

But the US president believes they are necessary to address trading imbalances and to protect American jobs and manufacturing.

Here are the basic elements of the plan.

• Live updates: Reaction to Trump’s tariffs announcement

In a background call before Trump’s speech, a senior White House official told reporters that the president would impose a “baseline” tariff on all imports to the US.

That rate is set at 10% and will go into effect on 5 April.

It is the companies that bring the foreign goods into the US that have to pay the tax to the government, although this could have knock-on effects to consumers.

Some countries will only face the base rate. These include:

• United Kingdom
• Singapore
• Brazil
• Australia
• New Zealand
• Turkey
• Colombia
• Argentina
• El Salvador
• United Arab Emirates
• Saudi Arabia

White House officials also said that they would impose what they describe as specific reciprocal tariffs on roughly 60 of the “worst offenders”.

These will go into effect on 9 April.

Trump’s officials say these countries charge higher tariffs on US goods, impose “non-tariff” barriers to US trade or have otherwise acted in ways they feel undermine American economic goals.

The key trading partners subject to these customised tariff rates include:

• European Union: 20%
• China: 54%
• Vietnam: 46%
• Thailand: 36%
• Japan: 24%
• Cambodia: 49%
• South Africa: 30%
• Taiwan: 32%

The 10% baseline rate does not apply to Canada and Mexico, since they have already been targeted during Trump’s presidency.

The White House said it would deal with both countries using a framework set out in Trump’s previous executive orders, which imposed tariffs on both countries as part of the administration’s efforts to address the entry of fentanyl to the US and border issues.

Trump previously set those tariffs at 25% on all goods entering from both countries, before announcing some exemptions and delays.

In addition, the president confirmed the beginning of a new American “25% tariff on all foreign made-automobiles”.

This tariff went into effect almost immediately, at midnight local time.

Donald Trump’s politics have shifted considerably over his decades in the public sphere. But one thing he has been consistent on, since the 1980s, is his belief that tariffs are an effective means of boosting the US economy.

Now, he’s staking his presidency on his being right.

At his Rose Garden event at the White House, surrounded by friends, conservative politicians and cabinet secretaries, Trump announced sweeping new tariffs on a broad range of countries – allies, competitors and adversaries alike.

In a speech that was equal parts celebration and self-congratulation, regularly punctuated by applause from the crowd, the president recalled his longtime support of tariffs, as well as his early criticism of free trade agreements like Nafta and the World Trade Organization.

The president acknowledged that he will face pushback in the coming days from “globalists” and “special interests”, but he urged Americans to trust his instincts.

“Never forget, every prediction our opponents made about trade for the last 30 years has been proven totally wrong,” he said.

• Live updates: Reaction to Trump’s tariffs announcement
• At a glance: What president’s new taxes mean for EU, China and others
• The full story: Trump charges high tariffs on ‘worst offenders’ globally
• Canada: No additional US tariffs for Canada, but no relief either
• Explainer: What are tariffs, and why is Trump using them?

Now, in a second term in which he is surrounded by like-minded advisers and is the dominant force in a Republican Party that controls both chambers of Congress, Trump is in a position to turn his vision of a new America-focused trade policy into reality. These policies, he said, had made the United States into a wealthy nation more than a century ago and would again.

“For years, hard working American citizens were forced to sit on the sidelines as other nations got rich and powerful, much of it at our expense,” he said. “With today’s action, we are finally going to be able to make America great again – greater than ever before.”

It is still an enormous risk for this president to take.

Economists of all stripes warn that these massive tariffs – 53% on China, 20% on the European Union and South Korea, with a 10% baseline on all nations – will be passed along to American consumers, raising prices and threatening a global recession.

Ken Roggoff, the former chief economist at the International Monetary Fund, predicted that the chances of the US, the world’s largest economy, falling into recession had risen to 50% on the back of this announcement.

“He just dropped a nuclear bomb on the global trading system,” Mr Roggoff told the BBC World Service, adding that the consequences for this level of taxes on imports into the US “is just mind-boggling”.

Trump’s move also risks escalating a trade war with other countries and alienating allies that America has otherwise tried to strengthen ties with. The US, for instance, sees Japan and South Korea as a bulwark against Chinese expansionist ambitions. But those three countries recently announced that they would work together to respond to America’s trade policies.

If Trump is successful, however, he would fundamentally reshape a global economic order that America had originally helped to construct from the ashes of World War 2. He promises that this will rebuild American manufacturing, create new sources of revenue, and make America more self-reliant and insulated from the kind of global supply chain shocks that wreaked havoc on the US during the Covid pandemic.

It’s a tall order – and one that many believe to be highly unrealistic. But for a president who seems fixated on cementing his legacy, whether through ending wars, renaming geographic locations, acquiring new territory or dismantling federal programmes and its workforce, this is the biggest, most consequential prize to be won.

It would be, he styled, America’s “liberation day”.

What appears clear, however, is that Wednesday’s announcement, if he follows through, is almost certain to mark a historic change. The question is whether it will be a legacy of achievement or one of notoriety.

Trump’s speech was triumphant – one that belied the potentially high costs his moves would impose on the American economy and on his own political standing.

But, he said, it was worth it – even if, at the very end of his remarks, a small shadow of presidential doubt may have peaked through the bravado.

“It’s going to be a day that – hopefully – you’re going to look back in years to come and you’re going to say, you know, he was right.”

President Donald Trump has announced new import taxes on all goods entering the US, in the biggest upheaval of the international trade order since the aftermath of World War Two.

His plan sets a baseline tariff of 10% on all imports, consistent with his proposal during last year’s White House campaign.

Items from about 60 trade partners that the White House described as the “worst offenders”, including the European Union and China, face higher rates – payback for unfair trade policies, Trump said.

Analysts said the trade war escalation was likely to lead to higher prices for Americans and slower growth in the US, while some countries around the world could be plunged into recession.

But in Wednesday’s announcement at the White House, Trump said the measures were necessary because countries were taking advantage of the US by imposing high tariffs and other trade barriers.

Declaring a national emergency, the Republican president said the US had for more than five decades been “looted, pillaged, raped and plundered by nations near and far, both friend and foe alike”.

“It’s our declaration of economic independence,” Trump said in the Rose Garden against a backdrop of US flags.

The White House said the US would start charging the 10% tariffs on 5 April, with the higher duties for certain nations starting on 9 April.

• Live updates and reaction to Trump tariffs
• What are tariffs and why is Trump using them?

“Today we are standing up for the American worker and we are finally putting America first,” Trump said, calling it “one of the most important days, in my opinion, in American history”.

His decision stunned many analysts.

“He just dropped a nuclear bomb on the global trading system,” Ken Rogoff, former chief economist at the International Monetary Fund, told the BBC.

Tariffs are taxes on imports. On the campaign trail last year, Trump said he would use them to boost manufacturing, promising a new age of US prosperity.

The import taxes could raise $2.2tn (£1.7tn) of revenue by 2034, according to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office.

He spent weeks previewing Wednesday’s announcement, which followed other orders raising tariffs on imports from China, foreign cars, steel and aluminium and 25% on some goods from Mexico and Canada.

For now, the White House said the latest changes would not change anything for Mexico and Canada, two of America’s closest trading partners.

But other allies will face new tariffs, including 10% for the UK and 20% for the European Union, said Trump.

The measure introduces a new 34% tariff on goods from China, on top of an existing 20% levy, bringing total duties to at least 54%.

The tariff rate will be 24% on goods from Japan, and 26% from India.

Some of the highest duties will hit exports from countries that have seen a rush of investment in recent years, as firms shifted supply chains away from China following tariffs in Trump’s first term.

Goods from Vietnam and Cambodia will be hit with 46% and 49% respectively.

Higher levies will also fall on much smaller nations, with products from the southern African country of Lesotho facing 50%.

• Here’s how Trump’s tariffs on China, EU and more will work
• Six things that could get more expensive for Americans

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent warned other countries not to hit back.

“My advice to every country right now is, do not retaliate,” Bessent told Fox News.

“Sit back, take it in, let’s see how it goes. Because if you retaliate, there will be escalation,” he said. “If you don’t retaliate, this is the high watermark.”

Later however, China’s commerce ministry said it “firmly” opposed the US’s new tariffs and will take “resolute countermeasures to safeguard its rights and interests”.

European Commission head Ursula von der Leyen also said she was preparing to take further steps against the US in the event that negotiations failed.

The new duties will affect trillions of dollars in trade, likely setting the stage for higher prices in the US on clothing, European wine, bicycles, toys and thousands of other items.

Olu Sonola, head of US economic research at the Fitch Ratings agency, said the measures would bring the US tariff rate to what was in place in 1910.

“Many countries will likely end up in a recession,” he said.

The US stock market was closed for trading by the time that Trump made his announcement, which he billed as “Liberation Day”.

But shares in the Asia-Pacific region opened lower on Thursday morning.

Japan’s benchmark stock index, the Nikkei 225, was down by 4% in early trading. Australia’s ASX 200 was around 2% lower.

Wedbush Securities analyst Dan Ives described the tariffs as “worse than the worst case” that investors had anticipated.

But he said he believed there would be negotiations and exemptions.

Trump has described his measures as “reciprocal” – intending them as a retaliation for other countries’ policies that he says fuel high trade imbalances.

These include high tariffs, as well as Value Added Tax (VAT) or regulations that bar foods with traces of certain chemicals.

Trump also reinstated plans to end tax-free treatment for small packages from China as of May, a move that would hurt Amazon rivals such as Shein and Temu.

He confirmed that a 25% tax on imports of all foreign-made cars, which he announced last week, would begin from midnight.

And he repeated his intention to hit specific items that were exempt from Wednesday’s action, such as copper and pharmaceuticals, with separate tariffs.

Donald Trump’s decision to impose new tariffs on all goods entering the US is a “major blow to the world economy”, European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen has said.

Her comments echo those of a number of other countries, including China, which has expressed its opposition to the move and has warned it will take “resolute countermeasures” against the US.

Their words of warning come after the US president announced a universal 10% tariff on all imports into the US from 5 April. Around 60 countries will also be hit with steeper tariffs from 9 April.

Trump said the measures were payback for unfair trade policies, adding that he had been “very kind” in his decisions.

Trump has said the tariffs will be used to boost US manufacturing, saying on Wednesday that the move would “make America wealthy again”.

Giving a statement on Thursday morning, von der Leyen said the new tax imports will see “uncertainty spiral”, causing “dire” consequences “for millions of people around the globe”.

She emphasised the impact on the most vulnerable countries, pointing out that some of those nations are now subject to some of the highest US tariffs.

The EC chief vowed Europe would take a unified approach and warned that the European Union – which will be subject to a 20% tariff – is preparing countermeasures in case negotiations fail.

“If you take on one of us, you take on all of us”, she said.

Italy’s Giorgia Meloni, a Trump ally, said the decision was “wrong” but that she would work towards a deal with the US to “prevent a trade war”.

Her Spanish counterpart Pedro Sánchez said Spain would “continue to be committed to an open world”, while in Ireland, Taoiseach Micheál Martin said Trump’s decision was “deeply regrettable” and benefitted “no-one”.

In France, President Emmanuel Macron will meet representatives from business sectors hit by the new taxes at the Élysée Palace on Thursday, the French presidency said.

• At a glance: What president’s new taxes mean for EU, China and others
• Full story: Trump charges high tariffs on ‘worst offenders’ globally
• Canada: No additional US tariffs for Canada, but no relief either
• Analysis: Trump’s tariffs are a longtime goal fulfilled – and his biggest gamble yet
• Explainer: What are tariffs, and why is Trump using them?

Outside the EU, China – one of the countries deemed the “worst offenders” by the US president – was hit with a 34% tariff on goods, on top of an existing 20% levy, bringing total duties to at least 54%.

The ministry of commerce urged the US to “immediately cancel” the tariffs, adding that China would “resolutely take countermeasures to safeguard its own rights and interests.”

Taiwan, which is set to face a 32% tariff for exports to the US, called the move “highly unreasonable”.

Premier Cho Jung-tai also said it would make “serious representations” to the US.

South Korean acting President Han Duck-soo said the global trade war “has become a reality” and his government would be looking at ways to “overcome the trade crisis” after the East Asian country was hit with a 25% rate.

Japan said its 24% levy was “extremely regrettable” and could violate World Trade Organization and US-Japan agreements, while Thailand said it would negotiate its 36% tariff.

Economic officials in Israel, which had scrapped all tariffs on American imports ahead of the announcement, were said to be in “complete shock” over its 17% tariff, local media reported.

“We were sure that the decision to completely cancel tariffs on imports from the US would prevent this move”, an official told local media.

White House officials said its levies were reciprocal to countries, such as China, which it said charge higher tariffs on US goods, impose “non-tariff” barriers to US trade or have otherwise acted in ways the government feels undermine American economic goals.

Leaders from countries subject to the 10% baseline rate have also reacted to Trump’s measures, with Australia’s Anthony Albanese saying Americans would end up paying the biggest price for what he called “unjustified tariffs”.

His government will not impose reciprocal measures, he said, adding: “We will not join a race to the bottom that leads to higher prices and slower growth”.

A Downing Street source told the BBC that the UK’s lower tariff “vindicates” the government’s recent efforts towards a trade deal with the US.

Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds said the government remained “fully focused on negotiating an economic deal with the US that strengthens our existing fair and balanced trading relationship”.

In Latin America, its biggest economy, Brazil, approved a law in congress on Wednesday – the Economic Reciprocity Law – to counter the 10% tariff imposed by Trump.

The foreign ministry said it would evaluate “all possible actions to ensure reciprocity in bilateral trade, including resorting to the World Trade Organization”.

Shortly after Trump’s announcement, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent warned countries not to “retaliate” and “sit back, take it in”.

“Because if you retaliate, there will be escalation”, he told Fox News.

Noticeably, the US’s two biggest trade partners, Canada and Mexico, were not mentioned in Wednesday’s announcements.

The White House said it would deal with both countries according to previous executive orders, which imposed 25% tariffs on the two nations as part of efforts to address fentanyl and border issues.

Regardless, Canada will still be impacted by the tariffs, Prime Minister Mark Carney said. Measures such as the 25% tariff on automobiles starting at midnight on Thursday would “directly affect millions of Canadians”, he added.

He vowed to “fight these tariffs with counter measures”, adding that the US levies would “fundamentally change the global trading system.”

The former president of Costa Rica, Oscar Arias, says his US visa has been revoked.

Arias, a Nobel laureate, said he was informed of the decision weeks after he had publicly criticised Donald Trump, comparing the behaviour of the US president to that of a Roman emperor.

The 84-year-old, who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his role in brokering an end to conflicts in Central America, said US authorities had given no explanation.

Arias hinted, however, that it may be due to his rapprochement with China during the time he was president from 2006 to 2010.

Speaking at a news conference in the Costa Rican capital, San José, Arias said he had “no idea” what the reason for the cancellation was.

He said he had received a “terse” email “of a few lines” from the US government informing him of the decision.

He added that he thought that it was not President Trump but the US State Department which had taken the decision.

While he said it would be conjecture on his part to speculate about the reason behind the visa revocation, he did point out that “I established diplomatic relations with China.

“That, of course, is known throughout the world,” he told journalists of his 2007 decision to cut ties with Taiwan and establish them with China instead.

The Trump administration has sought to oppose China’s influence in the Western hemisphere and has accused a number of Central American governments of cosying up to the Chinese government and Chinese companies.

• Read: Rubio demands Panama ‘reduce China influence’ over canal

However, it has been supportive of the current Costa Rican President, Rodrigo Chaves, praising his decision to exclude Chinese firms from participating in the development of 5G in Costa Rica.

But this perceived closeness between President Chaves and the US was criticised by Arias, who wrote a post on social media in February saying that “it has never been easy for a small country to disagree with the US government, less so when its president behaves like a Roman emperor, telling the rest of the world what to do”.

He added that “during my governments, Costa Rica never received orders from Washington as if we were a banana republic”.

Arias is not the only Costa Rican to have had his US visa revoked. Three members of the country’s national assembly who opposed President Chaves’s decree to exclude Chinese companies from participating in the development of 5G have also had theirs cancelled.

Tesla sales have plummeted to their lowest level in three years after a backlash against its boss Elon Musk.

The electric car maker delivered almost 337,000 electric vehicles in the first three months of 2025, a 13% drop from a year ago.

Tesla shares tumbled in early trading on Wednesday after the release of the low sales numbers.

The cars face increasing competition from Chinese firm BYD, but experts believe Musk’s controversial role in the Trump administration has had an effect too.

The firm has blamed the sales drop on the transition to a new version of its most popular car.

However some analysts have pointed the finger at Musk himself.

“These numbers suck,” early Tesla investor Ross Gerber of Gerber Kawasaki Wealth and Investment Management wrote on X.

“The brand is broken and may not be fixable”, added Mr Gerber, who was once a Musk supporter but has recently called for the board to remove the billionaire as CEO.

There have been protests and boycotts around the world prompted by Musk’s outspoken and controversial political involvement.

He has been heading up President Donald Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) initiative to cut federal spending and slash the government workforce.

On Wednesday, Politico reported that Trump had told his inner circle Musk would be stepping back from the administration in the coming weeks.

Shortly after the report was published, Tesla’s share price turned positive.

The White House shot down the report as “garbage”. Because he is considered a special government employee, Musk by law can only serve 130 days in the administration this year, which would put his departure closer to June.

The Tesla boss is the world’s richest man and contributed more than a quarter of a billion dollars to help Trump get elected in November.

In recent weeks, he poured millions into a Wisconsin Supreme Court race, supporting former Republican attorney general Brad Schimel who was soundly defeated on Tuesday.

The backlash against Mr Musk has included “Tesla Takedown” protests at Tesla dealerships across the US and in Europe.

Tesla vehicles have also been vandalised, and Trump has said his administration would charge people who deface Teslas with “domestic terrorism.”

Musk’s stewardship of his businesses, including Tesla, has been called into question.

In an recent interview, he admitted he was running his enterprises “with great difficulty,” adding: “Frankly, I can’t believe I’m here doing this.”

Tesla shares have lost more than a quarter of their value since the beginning of this year, as of 13:51 EDT (18:51 BST) on Wednesday.

“We are not going to look at these numbers with rose colored glasses… they were a disaster on every metric,” Wedbush analyst Dan Ives said in a note on Wednesday.

“The more political [Musk] gets with DOGE the more the brand suffers, there is no debate.”

Tesla did not respond to the BBC’s request for comment, but said in a filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission that the numbers released on Wednesday “represent only two measures” of the company’s performance and “should not be relied on as an indicator of quarterly financial results.”

Those results will be made public on April 22 in a full earnings report for the quarter. They will “depend on a variety of factors, including average selling price, cost of sales, foreign exchange movements and others”, Tesla said.

It also noted that it had temporarily suspended production of its Model Y sport utility vehicles in January.

Following the release of Wednesday’s report, Randi Weingarten, president of American Federation of Teachers, one of the most powerful labour unions in the US, wrote to dozens of public pension funds about the state of Tesla, saying the company’s latest sales numbers were “shaping up to be abysmal”.

She urged them to take close looks at their Tesla holdings and at what their money managers are doing to “safeguard retirement assets”.

“These declines seem in part to be driven by Musk spending his time pursuing political activities, some of which appear to be in conflict with Tesla’s brand and business interests, rather than managing Tesla,” Weingarten wrote.

The comptroller for New York City has already announced he is seeking to sue Tesla on behalf of the city’s massive pension systems, saying on Tuesday they had lost more than $300m in three months from the company’s plummeting stock price.

“Elon Musk is so distracted that he’s driving Tesla off a financial cliff,” said Comptroller Brad Lander in a statement.

An Indian court is due to hear a lawsuit filed by Elon Musk’s social media company X, accusing Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government of misusing the law to censor content on its platform.

Last month, X sued the government saying a new website – Sahyog – launched by the federal home ministry last year, was being used to expand its censorship powers and take down content.

X argued the portal gave government officials wide-ranging powers to issue blocking orders that were “in violation” of India’s digital laws. It said it could not be compelled to join Sahyog, which it called a “censorship portal”.

The Indian government has said that the portal is necessary to tackle harmful online content.

Other American technology giants such as Amazon, Google and Meta have agreed to be on Sahyog.

Sahyog describes itself as a portal developed to automate the process of sending government notices to content intermediaries like X and Facebook.

The lawsuit filed in the southern state of Karnataka came after the federal railway ministry ordered X to remove “hundreds of posts”.

These included videos of a crush in Delhi in which 18 people died as they were making their way to the world’s largest religious gathering, the Kumbh Mela.

In its petition, X argues that the portal and the orders issued through it fall outside the remit of the original law that allows the government to block content.

Under this law, senior officials have the power to issue takedown orders, but after following due procedure like giving notices, opportunities for hearings and allowing for a review of any decision.

But X says the government is bypassing these procedures to issue arbitrary content takedown orders through other legal provisions that have no safeguards.

As a result, “countless” government officials, including “tens of thousands of local police officers”, are “unilaterally and arbitrarily” issuing orders, X argues in its petition.

India’s federal IT and home ministries did not respond to the BBC’s request for comment.

In court, the government has argued that its actions are lawful. It said it was not sending blocking orders but only issuing “notices” to platforms against unlawful content.

The government also defended the Sahyog platform saying it was a “necessity” because of the “growing volume of unlawful and harmful content online”.

The case is of “vital importance” as the blocking mechanism of the Sahyog portal has resulted in “a wholesale increase in censorship”, said Apar Gupta of the digital rights organisation, Internet Freedom Foundation.

This is not the first time the Indian government and X are at loggerheads.

The Delhi police had raided the offices of X (then Twitter) in 2021, before Musk took over, after a tweet by a ruling party spokesperson was marked as “manipulated media”.

In 2022, the company had sued the Indian government against blocking orders, at least one of which pertained to a year-long protest by farmers against new laws brought in by the government. However, the court ruled against the company and imposed a fine of 5m rupees ($58,000; £45,000).

Under Musk’s leadership, X appealed against this decision, which is currently separately being heard in the Karnataka high court.

In 2023, India called X a “habitual non-compliant platform” during the appeal proceedings.

India is also reportedly investigating X’s chatbot Grok regarding its use of inappropriate language and “controversial responses” after it made politically sensitive comments to user prompts recently.

The timing of the lawsuit is interesting as it comes when Musk’s other companies Starlink and Tesla have just begun making inroads into India with their business plans.

Earlier in March, Starlink signed an agreement with two of India’s biggest telecoms firms to bring satellite internet to India and is awaiting government approval to start providing its services.

Tesla could finally be making its debut and has begun hiring for a dozen jobs in Delhi and Mumbai. It is also reportedly hunting for showrooms in both cities.

Musk also met Prime Minister Modi when he visited the White House last month.

His growing business interests in India and closeness with US President Donald Trump give him “ample leverage” with India, Michael Kugelman, director of the Wilson Centre’s South Asia Institute in Washington, told the BBC.

“This means he has a lot of leeway in terms of how he operates, including making a decision to sue the Indian government,” he added, saying the case might not hurt Musk’s business prospects in the country.

Australia has been hit with a tariff of at least 10% on all exports to the US, as Donald Trump announced his new sweeping global trade regime.

Trump cited “trade barriers” such as Australia’s biosecurity laws – singling out a ban on the import of US beef – as the reason for what he called a “reciprocal tariff”.

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese called the measure “totally unwarranted”, but said the nation would not introduce its own tariffs – also known as import taxes – in return.

The 10% dealt to Australia was the “baseline” measure, with the most severe tariffs – of up 49% – hitting countries like China, Malaysia, Vietnam and Cambodia.

“President Trump referred to reciprocal tariffs. A reciprocal tariff would be zero, not 10%,” Albanese said at a press conference on Thursday.

“The administration’s tariffs have no basis in logic and they go against the basis of our two nation’s partnership. This is not the act of a friend,” he added.

Trump’s new trade policy has hit the start of Australia’s closely battled election campaign, where the cost of living will be a key voting issue.

Opposition leader Peter Dutton said the tariffs were a “bad day” for Australia and would be a “significant impost” on jobs across the nation.

He also said the new tariffs were a reflection on Albanese’s relationship with Trump – who the prime minister had unsuccessfully been trying to organise a phone call with ahead of the decision.

“I just don’t think the prime minister has the strength or the ability to stand up to a situation that is unacceptable to us,” Dutton said.

The new measures come only weeks after President Trump imposed 25% tariffs on Australian steel and aluminium imports.

However, the prime minister said Australia would not be retaliating on US goods.

“We will not join a race to the bottom that leads to higher prices and slower growth,” he said.

But he warned the tariffs would have consequences for how Australians see ties with the US, and that the country would resort to formal “dispute resolution mechanisms” contained in its free trade agreement with the US if necessary.

During his “Liberation Day” speech, Trump pointed to Australia’s ban on fresh beef from the US – which was introduced in 2003, after cases of mad cow disease, an infectious neurological illness, were discovered in North America.

“They’re wonderful people and wonderful everything, but they ban American beef,” he said.

“They don’t want it because they don’t want it to affect their farmers.”

“I don’t blame them, but we’re doing the same thing right now,” Trump added.

The tariffs have also drawn an angry response from Australia’s National Farmers’ Federation (NFF), who expressed “profound disappointment”.

“This decision is a disappointing step backward for our nations and for the global economy,” NFF President David Jochinke said.

The NFF said the US’s decision created “unnecessary uncertainty”, but vowed to work closely with the federal government to seek a resolution.

Along with its biosecurity rules, Australia’s subsidised medicines scheme and laws requiring foreign tech companies to pay local media for news had drawn the US’s ire in recent tariff discussions.

Albanese earlier this week said those issues were non-negotiable: “I continue to stand up for Australia and have said very clearly we won’t compromise and negotiate on our PBS [Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme], on our biosecurity, on our media bargaining code.”

The US is one of Australia’s most important trading relationships, raking fifth for exports. China, however, dwarfs all of Australia’s other trade partners – in 2023-24, A$212.7bn (£102.2bn, $133.4) was exported to the Asian superpower.

In comparison, last year, Australia exported $37.5bn in goods and services to the US. Business services were the biggest sector at $6.2bn, followed by intellectual property charges and beef. In the same year, Australia imported $88.2bn in goods and services from the US.

It’s 10am, and in a little over two hours, Wayne Hawkins will be dead.

The sun is shining on the bungalow where the 80-year-old lives in San Diego, California with his wife of more than five decades, Stella.

I knock on the door and meet his children – Emily, 48, and Ashley, 44 – who have spent the last two weeks at their father’s side.

Wayne sits in a reclining chair where he spends most of his days. Terminally ill, he is too weak to leave the house.

He has invited BBC News to witness his death under California’s assisted dying laws – because if MPs in London vote to legalise the practice in England and Wales, it will allow some terminally ill people here to die in a similar way.

Half an hour after arriving at Wayne’s house, I watch him swallow three anti-nausea tablets, designed to minimise the risk of him vomiting the lethal medication he plans to take shortly.

Are you sure this day is your last, I ask him? “I’m all in,” he replies. “I was determined and decided weeks ago – I’ve had no trepidation since then.”

His family ask for one last photo, which I take. As usual, Stella and Wayne are holding hands.

Shortly after, Dr Donnie Moore arrives. He has got to know the family over the past few weeks, visiting them on several occasions alongside running his own end-of-life clinic. Under California law, he is what is known as the attending physician who must confirm, in addition to a second doctor, that Wayne is eligible for aid in dying.

Dr Moore’s role is part physician, part counsellor in this situation, one he has been in for 150 assisted deaths before.

On a top shelf in Wayne’s bedroom sits a brown glass bottle containing a fine white powder – a mixture of five drugs, sedatives and painkillers, delivered to the house the previous day. The dosage of drugs inside is hundreds of times higher than those used in regular healthcare and is “guaranteed” to be fatal, Dr Moore explains. Unlike California, the proposed law at Westminster would require a doctor to bring any such medication with them.

When Wayne signals he is ready, the doctor mixes the meds with cherry and pineapple juice to soften the bitter taste – and he hands this pink liquid to Wayne.

No one, not even the doctor, knows how long it will take him to die after taking the lethal drugs. Dr Moore explains to me that, in his experience, death usually occurs between 30 minutes and two hours of ingestion, but on one occasion it took 17 hours.

This is the story of how and why Wayne chose to die. And why others have decided not to follow the same course.

We first met the couple a few weeks earlier, when Wayne explained why he was going ahead with the decision to have an assisted death – a controversial measure in other parts of the world.

“Some days the pain is almost more than I can handle,” he said. “I just don’t see any merit to dying slow and painfully, hooked up with stuff – intubation, feeding tubes,” he told me. “I want none of it.”

Wayne said he had watched two relatives die “miserable”, “heinous” deaths from heart failure.

“I hate hospitals, they are miserable. I will die in the street first.”

Wayne met Stella in 1969; the couple married four years later. He told us it was something of an arranged marriage, as his mother kept inviting Stella for dinner until eventually the penny dropped that he should take her out.

They lived for many years in Arcata, northern California, surrounded by sweeping forests of redwood trees, where Wayne worked as a landscape architect, while Stella was a primary school teacher. They spent their holidays hiking and camping with their children.

Now Wayne is terminally ill with heart failure, which has already brought him close to death. He has myriad other health issues including prostate cancer, liver failure and sepsis which brings him serious spinal pain.

He has less than six months to live, qualifying him for an assisted death in California. His request to die has been approved by two doctors and the lethal medication is self-administered.

It was during our first meeting that he asked the BBC to return to observe his final day, saying he wanted terminally ill adults in the UK to have the same right to an assisted death as him.

“Britain is pretty good with freedoms and this is just another one,” he said. “People should be able to choose the time of their death as long as they meet the rules like six months to live or less.”

Stella, 78, supports his decision. “I’ve known him for over 50 years. He’s a very independent man. He’s always known what he wants to do and he’s always fixed things. That’s how he’s operating now. If this is his choice, I definitely agree, and I’ve seen him really suffer with the illness he’s got. I don’t want that for him.”

Wayne would also qualify under the proposed new assisted dying law in England and Wales. The measures return to the House of Commons later this month, when all MPs will have a chance to debate and vote on changes to the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill.

The proposed legislation, tabled by Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, says that anyone who wants to end their life must have the mental capacity to make the choice, that they must be expected to die within six months, and must make two separate declarations – witnessed and signed – about their wish to die. They must satisfy two independent doctors that they are eligible.

MPs in Westminster voted in favour of assisted dying in principle last November but remain bitterly divided on the issue. If they ultimately decide to approve the bill, it could become law within the next year and come into practice within the next four years.

There are also divisions here in California, where assisted dying was introduced in 2016. Michelle and Mike Carter, both 72 and married for 43 years, are each being treated for cancer – Mike has prostate cancer that has spread to his lymph nodes, and Michelle’s advanced terminal ovarian cancer has spread throughout much of her body.

“I held my mother’s hand when she passed; I held my father’s hand when he passed,” Michelle told me. “I believe there’s freedom of choice however for me, I choose palliative care… I have God and I have good medicine.”

Michelle’s physician, palliative care specialist Dr Vincent Nguyen, argued that assisted dying laws in the US state lead to “silent coercion” whereby vulnerable people think their only option is to die. “Instead of ending people’s lives, let’s put programmes together to care for people,” he said. “Let them know that they’re loved, they’re wanted and they’re worthy.”

He said the law meant that doctors have gone from being seen as healers to killers, while the message from the healthcare system was that “you are better off dead, because you’re expensive and your death is cheaper for us”.

Some disability campaigners say assisted dying makes them feel unsafe. Ingrid Tischer, who has muscular dystrophy and chronic respiratory failure, told me: “The message that it sends to people with disabilities in California is that you deserve suicide assistance rather than suicide prevention when you voice a desire to end your life.

“What does that say about who we are as a culture?”

Critics often say that once assisted dying is legalised, over time the safeguards around such laws get eroded as part of a “slippery slope” towards more relaxed criteria. In California, there was initially a mandatory 15-day cooling off period between patients making a first and second request for aid in dying. That has been reduced to 48 hours because many patients were dying during the waiting period. It’s thought the approval process envisaged in Westminster would take around a month.

Outside Wayne’s house on the morning of his death, a solitary bird begins its loud and elaborate song. “There’s that mockingbird out there,” Wayne tells Stella, as smiles flicker across their faces.

Wayne hates the bird because it keeps him awake at night, Stella jokes, hand in hand with him to one side of his chair. Emily and Ashley are next to Stella.

Dr Moore, seated on Wayne’s other side, hands him the pink liquid which he swallows without hesitation. “Goodnight,” he says to his family – a typical touch of humour from a man who told us he was determined to die on his terms. It’s 11.47am.

After two minutes, Wayne says he is getting sleepy. Dr Moore asks him to imagine he is walking in a vast sea of flowers with a soft breeze on his skin, which seems appropriate for a patient who has spent much of his life among nature.

After three minutes Wayne enters a deep sleep from which he will never wake. On a few occasions he lifts his head to take a deep breath without opening his eyes, at one point beginning to snore softly.

Dr Moore tells the family this is “the deepest sleep imaginable” and reassures Emily there is no chance her dad will wake up and ask, “did it work?”

“Oh that would be just like him,” Stella says with a laugh.

The family start to reminisce about hiking holidays and driving around in a large van they converted to become a camper. “Me and dad insulated it and put a bed in the back,” says Ashley.

On the walls are photos of Emily and Ashley as small children next to huge carved Halloween pumpkins.

Dr Moore is still stroking Wayne’s hand and occasionally checking his pulse. For a man who Emily says was “always walking, always outdoors, always active”, these are the final moments of life’s journey, spent surrounded by those who mean most to him.

At 12.22pm Dr Moore says, “I think he’s passed… He’s at peace now.”

Outside, the mockingbird has fallen silent. “No more pain,” says Stella, embracing her children in her arms.

I step outside to give the family some space, and reflect on what we have just seen and filmed.

I have been covering medical ethics for the BBC for more than 20 years. In 2006, I was present just outside an apartment in Zurich where Dr Anne Turner, a retired doctor, died with the help of the group Dignitas – but California was the first time I had been an eyewitness to an assisted death.

This isn’t just a story about one man’s death in California – it’s about what could become a reality here in England and Wales for those who qualify for an assisted death and choose to die this way.

Whether you’re for or against the proposed new Westminster law, the death of a loved one is a deeply personal and emotional time for a family. Each death leaves an imprint, as will Wayne’s.

Driving into Mandalay, the massive scale of the destruction from last Friday’s earthquake revealed itself bit by bit.

In nearly every street we turned into, especially in the northern and central parts of the city, at least one building had completely collapsed, reduced to a pile of rubble. Some streets had multiple structures which had come down.

Almost every building we saw had cracks running through at least one of its walls, unsafe to step into. At the main city hospital they’re having to treat patients outdoors.

Myanmar’s military government has said it’s not allowing foreign journalists into the country after the quake, so we went in undercover. We had to operate carefully, because the country is riddled with informers and secret police who spy on their own people for the ruling military junta.

What we witnessed was a people who had very little help coming their way in the face of this massive disaster.

“I have hope that he’s alive, even if it’s a small chance,” said Nan Sin Hein, 41, who’s been waiting on the street opposite a collapsed five-storey building, day and night for five days.

Her 21 year-old-son Sai Han Pha is a construction worker, renovating the interiors of the building, which used to be a hotel and was being turned into an office space.

“If they can rescue him today, there’s a chance he’ll survive,” she says.

When the 7.7 magnitude earthquake struck, the bottom of the building sank into the ground, its top lurching at an angle over the street, looking like it could tip over at any minute.

Sai Han Pha and four other workers were trapped inside.

When we visited, rescue efforts had not even begun at the building and there was no sign they would start soon. There just isn’t enough help available on the ground – and the reason for that is the political situation in the country.

Even before the earthquake Myanmar was in turmoil – locked in a civil war that has displaced an estimated 3.5 million people. Its military has continued operations against armed insurgent groups despite the disaster.

This means that security forces are too stretched to put their full might behind relief and rescue operations. Except in some key locations, we didn’t see them in large numbers in Mandalay.

The military junta has put out a rare appeal for international aid, but its uneasy relations with many foreign countries, including the UK and the US, has meant that while these countries have pledged aid, help in the form of manpower on the ground is currently only from countries like India, China and Russia, among a few others.

And so far those rescue efforts appear to be focused on structures where masses of people are feared trapped – the high-rise Sky Villa condominium complex which was home to hundreds of people, and U Hla Thein Buddhist academy where scores of monks were taking an examination when the earthquake struck.

Neeraj Singh, who is leading the Indian disaster response team working at the Buddhist academy, said the structure had collapsed like a “pancake” – one layer on top of another.

“It’s the most difficult collapse pattern and the chances of finding survivors are very low. But we are still hopeful and trying our best,” he told the BBC.

Working under the sweltering sun, in nearly 40C, rescuers use metal drills and cutters to break the concrete slabs into smaller pieces. It’s slow and extremely demanding work. When a crane lifts up the concrete pieces, the stench of decaying bodies, already quite strong, becomes overwhelming.

The rescuers spot four to five bodies, but it still takes a couple of hours to pull the first one out.

Sitting on mats under a makeshift tent in the compound of the academy are families of the students. Their faces are weary and despondent. As soon as they hear a body has been recovered, they crowd around the ambulance it is placed in.

Others gather around a rescuer who shows them a photo of the body on his mobile phone.

Agonising moments pass as the families try to see if the dead man is a loved one.

But the body is so disfigured, the task is impossible. It is sent to a morgue where forensic tests will have to be conducted to confirm the identity.

Among the families is the father of 29-year-old U Thuzana. He has no hope that his son survived. “Knowing my son ended up like this, I’m inconsolable, I’m filled with grief,” U Hla Aung said, his face crumpling into a sob.

Many of Mandalay’s historical sites have also suffered significant damage, including the Mandalay Palace and the Maha Muni Pagoda, but we could not get in to see the extent of the damage.

Access to everything – collapse sites, victims and their families – was not easy because of the oppressive environment created by the military junta, with people often fearful of speaking to journalists.

Close to the pagoda, we saw Buddhist funeral rituals being held on the street outside a destroyed house. It was the home of U Hla Aung Khaing and his wife Daw Mamarhtay, both in their sixties.

“I lived with them but was out when the earthquake struck. That’s why I survived. Both my parents are gone in a single moment,” their son told us.

Their bodies were extricated not by trained rescuers, but by locals who used rudimentary equipment. It took two days to pull out the couple, who were found with their arms around each other.

Myanmar’s military government says 2,886 people have died so far, but so many collapse sites have still not even been reached by the authorities, that that count is unlikely to be accurate. We may never find out what the real death toll of the earthquake was.

Parks and open spaces in Mandalay have turned into makeshift camps, as have the banks of the moat that runs around the palace. All over the city we saw people laying out mats and mattresses outside their homes as evening approached, preferring to sleep outdoors.

Mandalay is a city living in terror, and with good reason. Nearly every night since Friday there have been big aftershocks. We woke up to an aftershock of magnitude 5 in the middle of the night.

But tens of thousands are sleeping outdoors because they have no home to return to.

“I don’t know what to think anymore. My heart still trembles when I think of that moment when the earthquake struck,” said Daw Khin Saw Myint, 72, who we met while she was waiting in a queue for water, with her little granddaughter by her side. “We ran out, but my house is gone. I’m living under a tree. Come and see.”

She works as a washerwoman and says her son suffers from a disability which doesn’t allow him to work.

“Where will I live now? I am in so much trouble. I’m living next to a rubbish dump. Some people have given me rice and a few clothes. We ran out in these clothes we are wearing.

“We don’t have anyone to rescue us. Please help us,” she said, tears rolling down her cheeks.

Another elderly woman chimes in, eyes tearing up, “No one has distributed food yet today. So we haven’t eaten.”

Most of the vehicles we saw pulling up to distribute supplies were small vans with limited stocks – donations from individuals or small local organisations. It’s nowhere near enough for the number of people in need, leading to a scramble to grab whatever relief is available.

Parts of Mandalay’s main hospital are also damaged, and so in an already difficult situation, rows and rows of beds are laid out in the hospital compound for patients.

Shwe Gy Thun Phyo, 14, has suffered from a brain injury, and has bloodshot eyes. She’s conscious but unresponsive. Her father tries to make her as comfortable as possible.

There were very few doctors and nurses around to cope with the demand for treatment, which means families are stepping in to do what medical staff should.

Zar Zar has a distended belly because of a serious abdominal injury. Her daughter sits behind her, holding her up, and fans her, to give her some relief from the heat.

We couldn’t spend a lot of time at the hospital for fear of being apprehended by the police or military.

As the window to find survivors of the earthquake narrows, increasingly those being brought into the hospital are the dead.

Nan Sin Hein, who is waiting outside the collapsed building where her son was trapped, was initially stoical, but she now looks like she is preparing to face what seems like the most likely outcome.

“I’m heartbroken. My son loved me and his little sisters. He struggled to support us,” she says.

“I am just hoping to see my son’s face, even if he is dead. I want to see his body. I want them to do everything they can to find his body.”