The United States and China were headed towards an all-out trade war on Wednesday, locked in a high stakes game of brinkmanship as US president Donald Trump unleashed a new wave of tariffs against dozens of partners.

The global economy has been rocked since sweeping 10% US tariffs took effect over the weekend, triggering a dramatic market sell-off worldwide and sparking recession fears.

Rates on imports to the United States from dozens of economies rose further from 12.01am (0401 GMT) on Wednesday, with tariffs imposed on Chinese products since Trump returned to the White House reaching a staggering 104%. The new tariffs include rates of 20% on the European Union, 26% on India and 49% on Cambodia.

The new wave of tariffs had an immediate effect on some Asian markets, with Taiwan stocks falling 5.8% in afternoon trading and Japan’s Nikkei benchmark index diving 5%. At the same time the yen rallied 1% as investors sought refuge from impact of the new tariff regime. Hong Kong’s benchmark Hang Seng, was down 1.6%, but China’s market appeared to be weathering the storm after government interventions. Oil prices dropped to their lowest in more than four years.

They are tailored to specific countries based on a formula that has been criticised by economists that divides trade in goods deficit by twice the total value of imports.

“President Trump has a spine of steel and he will not break,” the press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, said on Tuesday. “And America will not break under his leadership.”

US stocks dropped on Tuesday for a fourth straight trading day since Trump’s tariffs announcement last week, with the S&P 500 closing below 5,000 for the first time in almost a year.

Several governments announced interventionist measures, including Taiwan, which pre-authorised emergency stabilisation funds for the stock exchange. Seoul announced a $2bn emergency support package for its auto sector, including financial support, tax cuts and subsidies. Trump’s 25% tariffs on imported cars and light trucks is expected to have a significant impact on Korea’s industry.

New Zealand’s central bank cut interest rates citing US tariffs, saying that “uncertainty about global trade policy (has) weakened the outlook”.

The US president believes his policy will revive America’s lost manufacturing base by forcing companies to relocate to the United States. But many business experts and economists question how quickly – if ever – this can take place, warning of higher inflation as the tariffs raise prices.

Scott Bessent, the US treasury secretary, has insisted the new tariffs are at “maximum” levels, and expressed confidence that negotiations will bring them down.

“I think you are going to see some very large countries with large trade deficits [with the US] come forward very quickly,” he told CNBC, the financial news network, on Tuesday. “If they come to the table with solid proposals, I think we can end up with some good deals.”

Trump was asked on Monday whether the tariffs set the stage for negotiations with countries, or were permanent. “Well, it can both be true,” he told reporters. “There can be permanent tariffs, and there can also be negotiations.”

Trump claimed on Tuesday the United States was “taking in almost $2bn a day” from tariffs. At an evening speech to Republican lawmakers, Trump said he would soon announce “major” tariffs on pharmaceutical imports, arguing the duties would push drug companies to move manufacturing operations to the US.

The administration has scheduled talks with South Korea and Japan, two close allies and major trading partners, and Italian prime minister Giorgia Meloni is due to visit next week.

“These are tailored, highly tailored deals,” Trump said at a White House event. “We’ve had talks with many, many countries, over 70, they all want to come in. Our problem is, can’t see that many that fast.”

Trump’s top trade official Jamieson Greer told the Senate that Argentina, Vietnam and Israel were among those who had offered to reduce their tariffs.

Trump originally unveiled a 34% additional tariff on Chinese goods. But after China unveiled its own 34% counter tariff on American products, he vowed to pile on another 50% duty. Counting existing levies imposed in February and March, that would take the cumulative tariff increase for Chinese goods during Trump’s second presidency to 104%.

Beijing criticised what it called US blackmail and vowed to “fight it to the end”. Trump insisted the ball was in China’s court because Beijing “wants to make a deal, badly, but they don’t know how to get it started.”

On China’s social media, the tariffs made up half of Weibo’s daily trending topics on Wednesday. Users mocked the US and its egg shortage, with some accounts sharing pictures of empty shelves in US supermarkets. “If you can’t even handle an egg, why are you fighting a trade war,” one user wrote.

Weibo users also discussed the prospect of iPhones rocketing in price thanks to the tariffs, with several people saying that they would switch to using phones made by Chinese companies Huawei or Xiaomi.

Influential Chinese bloggers have suggested that China could restrict the import of American poultry and eggs as a countermeasure in the trade war, which would be a further blow to US farmers.

On Tuesday, Rachel Reeves, the UK chancellor, sought to ease concerns about market volatility, telling parliament she had spoken to Andrew Bailey, the governor of the Bank of England, who confirmed “markets are functioning effectively and that our banking system is resilient”.

A trade war “is in nobody’s interest”, Reeves argued, confirming that the UK was seeking to negotiate a new deal with the US. Trump has imposed a 10% tariff on UK exports, in line with the minimum benchmark introduced at the weekend.

The European Union has sought to cool tensions, with the bloc’s chief Ursula von der Leyen warning against worsening the trade conflict in a call with Chinese Premier Li Qiang.

She stressed stability for the world’s economy, alongside “the need to avoid further escalation,” said an EU readout.

French President Emmanuel Macron called on Trump to reconsider, adding if the EU was forced to respond “so be it.”

Agence France-Presse contributed to this report

Donald Trump is poised to unleash his trade war with the world on Wednesday, pressing ahead with a slew of tariffs on the US’s largest trading partners despite fears of widespread economic damage and calls to reconsider.

The US president claimed “many” countries were seeking a deal with Washington, as his administration prepared to impose steep tariffs on goods from dozens of markets from Wednesday.

However, Beijing vowed to “fight to the end” after Trump threatened to hit Chinese exports with additional 50% tariffs if the country proceeds with plans to retaliate against his initial vow to impose tariffs of 34% on its products. That would come on top of the existing 20% levy and take the total tariff on Chinese imports to 104%.

Here are the key stories at a glance:

Catching up? Here’s what happened on 7 April.

The opening shots seem like a distant memory. Back in January, US president Donald Trump threatened to impose a tariff of 10% on Chinese imports. Less than three months later, the rate is now 104%.

China has condemned the tariffs. As well as applying its own reciprocal tariff of 34% on US imports, Beijing has been fighting a war of words.

“When challenged, we will never back down,” said China’s foreign ministry spokesperson, Lin Jian. The commerce ministry said: “China will fight to the end if the US side is bent on going down the wrong path.” Further countermeasures have been promised by Beijing.

The tit-for-tat measures could spark fears of a race to the bottom, with ordinary people suffering as prices rise and a fears of a global recession grow.

But although China’s economy has in recent years been beset by its own challenges, when it comes to tariffs specifically, Beijing is unlikely to blink first.

“For President Xi, there is only one politically viable response to Trump’s latest threat: Bring it on! Having already surprised domestic audiences with a forceful 34% reciprocal tariff, any appearance of backing down would be politically untenable,” says Diana Choyleva, founder and chief economist at Enodo Economics, a forecasting firm.

One of the most helpful factors in Beijing’s favour is the fact that the US is far more dependent on Chinese imports than China is on the US.

The main items that the US imports from China are consumer goods, such as smartphones, computers and toys. Last week, analysts at Rosenblatt Securities predicted that the cost of the cheapest iPhone available in the US could rise from $799 to $1,142 – and that was when Trump’s China tariffs were just 54%. “Trump cannot credibly deflect blame on to China for these economic hardships,” Choyleva says.

In contrast, the goods that China imports from the US are industrial and manufacturing supplies, such as soya beans, fossil fuels and jet engines. It is much easier for price increases in these commodities to be absorbed before a consumer gets their wallet – or in the case of China, their smartphone – out to pay.

Plus, this is not China’s first rodeo. Since Trump’s first trade war with China in 2018, China has ramped up trade with other countries, making it less dependent on the US. Between 2018 and 2020, Brazil’s soya bean exports to China increased by more than 45% compared to the 2015-2017 average, while US exports declined 38% over the same period. China is still the largest market for US agricultural goods, but the market is shrinking, hurting American farmers. In 2024, the US exported $29.25bn of agricultural products to China, down from $42.8bn in 2022.

China has other measures up its sleeve. On Tuesday, two influential nationalist bloggers published identical lists of possible Chinese retaliations, based on sources. China’s foreign ministry declined to comment on the articles but did not deny their content either.

The suggestions included suspending cooperation on fentanyl control, investigating US companies’ intellectual property gains in China, and banning Hollywood films from China. On the final point, a top-down embargo may not be necessary. China has in the past allowed online nationalists to whip up grassroots boycott campaigns. In 2017, Chinese consumers participated in a mass shunning of the South Korean supermarket chain Lotte, in response to the conglomerate’s involvement in a deal that allowed a US missile defence system to be installed in South Korea, which China saw as a security threat. Nearly half of the company’s more than 100 stores in mainland China were forced to close.

China’s strategic advantages do not make it totally immune from a trade war. The stock markets in China and Hong Kong are falling. Beijing has not yet figured out a way to meaningfully boost domestic demand, something that economists say is essential to truly tariff-proof the economy.

The political impact of Trump’s tariffs, coupled with the fear that the US is trying to turn other countries against China, is pushing US-China relations to an all time low. “I do not remember ever being this pessimistic about the trajectory of US-China relations,” wrote China analyst Bill Bishop in a newsletter. “The trade relationship is the linchpin between the two countries, and as it breaks we should probably expect other areas to see more stress.” But as the Trump administration talks of “Chinese peasants” and suggests that China is playing with a weak hand, Beijing is unlikely to back down anytime soon.

Donald Trump signed four executive orders on Tuesday aimed at reviving coal, the dirtiest fossil fuel that has long been in decline, and which substantially contributes to planet-heating greenhouse gas emissions and pollution.

Environmentalists expressed dismay at the news, saying that Trump was stuck in the past and wanted to make utility customers “pay more for yesterday’s energy”.

The US president is using emergency authority to allow some older coal-fired power plants scheduled for retirement to keep producing electricity.

The move, announced at a White House event on Tuesday afternoon, was described by White House officials as being in response to increased US power demand from growth in datacenters, artificial intelligence and electric cars.

Trump, standing in front of a group of miners in hard hats, said he would sign an executive order “that slashes unnecessary regulations that targeted the beautiful, clean coal”.

He added that “we will rapidly expedite leases for coal mining on federal lands”, “streamline permitting”, “end the government bias against coal” and use the Defense Production Act “to turbocharge coal mining in America”.

The first order directed all departments and agencies to “end all discriminatory policies against the coal industry” including by ending the leasing moratorium on coal on federal land and accelerate all permitted funding for coal projects.

The second imposes a moratorium on the “unscientific and unrealistic policies enacted by the Biden administration” to protect coal power plants currently operating.

The third promotes “grid security and reliability” by ensuring that grid policies are focused on “secure and effective energy production” as opposed to “woke” policies that “discriminate against secure sources of power like coal and other fossil fuels”.

The fourth instructs the justice department to “vigorously pursue and investigate” the “unconstitutional” policies of “radically leftist states” that “discriminate against coal”.

Trump’s approach is in contrast to that of his predecessor Joe Biden, who in May last year brought in new climate rules requiring huge cuts in carbon pollution from coal-fired power plants that some experts said were “probably terminal” for an industry that until recently provided most of the US’s power, but is being driven out of the sector by cheaper renewables and gas.

Trump, a Republican, has long promised to boost what he calls “beautiful” coal to fire power plants and for other uses, but the industry has been in decline for decades.

The EPA under Trump last month announced a barrage of actions to weaken or repeal a host of pollution limits, including seeking to overturn the Biden-era plan to reduce the number of coal plants.

The orders direct the interior secretary, Doug Burgum, to “acknowledge the end” of an Obama-era moratorium that paused coal leasing on federal lands and to require federal agencies to rescind policies transitioning the nation away from coal production.

The orders also seek to promote coal and coal technology exports and to accelerate development of coal technologies.

Trump has long suggested that coal can help meet surging electricity demand from manufacturing and the massive datacenters needed for artificial intelligence.

“Nothing can destroy coal. Not the weather, not a bomb – nothing,” Trump told the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, by video link in January. “And we have more coal than anybody.”

Energy experts say any bump for coal under Trump is likely to be temporary because natural gas is cheaper and there is a durable market for renewable energy such as wind and solar power no matter who holds the White House.

Environmental groups were scathing about the orders, pointing out that coal is in steep decline in the US compared with the increasingly cheap option of renewable energy. This year, 93% of the power added to the US grid will be from solar, wind and batteries, according to forecasts from Trump’s own administration.

“What’s next, a mandate that Americans must commute by horse and buggy?” said Kit Kennedy, managing director of power at the Natural Resources Defense Council.

“Coal plants are old and dirty, uncompetitive and unreliable. The Trump administration is stuck in the past, trying to make utility customers pay more for yesterday’s energy. Instead, it should be doing all it can to build the electricity grid of the future.”

Clean energy, such as solar and wind, is now so affordable that 99% of the existing US coal fleet costs more just to keep running than to retire a coal plant and replace it with renewables, a 2023 Energy Innovation report found.

A high-profile former Ukrainian commander has called for the head of the country’s military to step aside, accusing him of a lack of strategic imagination and putting Ukrainian soldiers’ lives at risk with “borderline criminal” orders.

Bohdan Krotevych, who quit as the chief of staff of the Azov brigade in February partly so he could speak out, said he believed that armed forces commander, Gen Oleksandr Syrskyi, “must go” and Ukraine’s military leadership must be shaken up.

The veteran complained in an interview that Syrskyi and the existing leadership were engaged in “manual micro-management of the whole army” and highlighted orders given to soldiers and units forcing them to rest and base too close to the front.

“I started receiving from the high army command, from the commander-in-chief HQ, orders that became more and more borderline criminal, which I, in my good conscience, was unable to fulfil and follow,” Krotevych said.

One of Ukraine’s best-known soldiers, Krotevych, 32, served in Azov from 2014 and survived the last stand at the Azovstal steelworks in spring 2022. Captured by Russian forces, he endured a short period of captivity before being exchanged.

Krotevych then chose to return to the front, and became increasingly outspoken during his final period of military service, openly criticising other commanders who he believed had been careless with soldiers’ lives.

But the veteran told the Guardian that he had “70% decided to quit” the Ukrainian military because commanders were still “asking of soldiers things which they wouldn’t ask of themselves”. As a former prisoner of war, he is one of the relatively few serving soldiers who has the right to leave.

“The general staff ordered that when a soldier’s shift [on he frontline] is over, they can’t rest in the rear, they have to rest 50 metres from the front,” Krotevych said, which he added was typically at a platoon forward observation base.

Forcing soldiers to recover so close to the front put “all these people in grave danger”, he argued. He accused the army command of being “criminally guilty of not understanding the principles of war right now” and in particular “how FPV drones work, how glide bombs work”.

The dramatic expansion of the use of FPV drones – which could operate at a range of up to 22km, Krotevych said – and Russian glide bombs, which until recently Ukraine had struggled to stop, have dramatically expanded the depth of the frontline. But Krotevych said Ukraine’s commanders had failed to react accordingly.

“They still have the mentality of fighting in the second world war,” he said. “They still refuse to acknowledge the new means of hitting targets.” He said the army commander was relying on regulations issued in 2016 to justify forcing soldiers to be based so far forward, a time when “war was completely different”.

He said similar thinking affected the positioning of larger headquarters. At one point, Krotevych said, Azov’s brigade headquarters was itself struck, after the unit had been “asking, insisting” that it be moved back because Russian forces were advancing. “They specifically told us no, and we got a direct hit.”

Krotevych said: “Syrskyi must go,” arguing that the military commander-in-chief, appointed in February 2024, had failed to break the Russian lines except into Kursk in August, where he had found “the weakest spot” and executed a simple “linear strike”.

Though Krotevych said the attack into Russia had made sense at the time, he accused Syrskyi of being overly focused on the attack “when we had huge issues” defending Pokrovsk in southern Donbas and “remaining there too long” as Moscow has gradually rolled up the salient, with Ukrainian forces incurring significant losses.

Ukraine had failed to find a way of prosecuting manoeuvre warfare while “the enemy somehow manages to break through our lines every month”, Krotevych complained.

“Syrskyi is not trying to apply a high science and an art of war,” Krotevych said, accusing him of having “just two functions: if the enemy is attacking, you just throw more people in there. And if the enemy is overwhelming, withdraw the people and say that you’re concerned about the lives of the people.”

Ukraine has been gradually losing territory throughout 2024 and 2025 as Russian forces first advanced from Avdiivka in the east towards Donbas, before Moscow’s main effort switched to eliminating the Kursk incursion.

Many observers have put Russia’s modest but persistent success down to its greater personnel numbers and a pause in US weapons shipments in the early part of 2024, but Krotevych’s comments are notable because they try to shift the focus on to Ukraine’s commanders and their direction of the war effort.

The former soldier now intends to set up a private company, Strategic Operational and Intelligence Agency (Soia), obtaining intelligence on Russia, Belarus, North Korea and other countries unfriendly to Ukraine and acting as an expert liaison with the west.

As part of that work, Krotevych said he hoped to spend time in London, though he stressed he was not aligned with Ukraine’s ambassador to the UK, Valerii Zaluzhnyi, a predecessor to Syrskyi, who is considered a potential future candidate for Ukraine’s presidency.

Krotevych said he had no intention of entering politics himself. “I just want to destabilise Russia so it could not make war again,” he said.

Ukraine’s general staff was approached for comment but did not respond prior to publication.

Ukrainian forces have captured two Chinese nationals fighting with the Russian army in the eastern Donetsk region, according to Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

The Ukrainian president said they were two of many more Chinese members of the Russian armed forces, and he accused the Kremlin of trying to involve Beijing in the conflict “directly or indirectly”.

Zelenskyy said he would ask his foreign minister “to immediately contact Beijing and clarify how China intends to respond to this”, though it was not clear if the captured soldiers had been sent at the behest of their government or were individuals who had chosen for themselves to sign up.

A few hundred Chinese nationals are thought to have travelled to fight as mercenaries with the Russian army alongside others from Nepal and central Asian countries. Their status appears to be different to that of the 11,000 soldiers from North Korea who were deployed on the frontline after a political agreement between Pyongyang and Moscow.

Zelenskyy said identity documents, bank cards and personal data were found in the possession of the two men captured, and that his country’s domestic security agency, the SBU, was “verifying all the facts”.

He argued that the capture of the two men indicated that Russia had no interest in agreeing to a ceasefire in US-brokered peace negotiations, which have made only limited progress over the past two months.

“Russia’s involvement of China, along with other countries, whether directly or indirectly, in this war in Europe is a clear signal that Putin intends to do anything but end the war. He is looking for ways to continue fighting,” Zelenskyy wrote on social media.

He said the development “definitely requires a response” from the US, Europe and “all those around the world who want peace”. There was no immediate reaction from Moscow or Beijing.

Below his post on X, Zelenskyy released a short video apparently showing a captured soldier, his hands tied, speaking in Mandarin. Prisoners of war are protected from public curiosity according to the Geneva conventions and should not have their images published online.

China says it is a neutral party in the conflict. Russia makes heavy use of Chinese-made components in its arms industry, and Ukraine does so to some extent. Both sides make significant use of Mavic drones from the Chinese manufacturer DJI, though Kyiv is trying to reduce its dependence on products from Beijing.

Western sources said it was early to reach definitive conclusions about the captured individuals. But one official said that so far “we’re not seeing evidence of state sponsorship here”, indicating an initial belief that the captured soldiers had acted on their own initiative.

Individuals from about 70 countries, including the US, UK and other European countries, have fought with Ukraine’s military. Some units, such as the Azov brigade, have actively sought to recruit foreigners to bolster forces depleted after more than three years of war.

Twenty people have died in a fire at a nursing home in northern China’s Hebei province, Beijing’s state news agency Xinhua said on Wednesday.

The fire broke out on Tuesday night at the nursing home in Longhua County, roughly 180km northeast of the Chinese capital Beijing, Xinhua said.

As of Wednesday morning, 20 people were confirmed dead, it added.

“Other elderly people in the nursing home have been transferred to nearby hospitals for further observation and treatment,” the state news agency said.

The cause of the blaze is under investigation, it said.

Deadly fires are relatively common in China due to lax building codes and an often slipshod approach to workplace safety.

In January, a fire at a vegetable market in Zhangjiakou city, northwest of Beijing, killed eight people and injured 15.

A month before that, nine people died in a fire at a construction site in eastern China’s Rongcheng city.

Twenty people have died in a fire at a nursing home in northern China’s Hebei province, Beijing’s state news agency Xinhua said on Wednesday.

The fire broke out on Tuesday night at the nursing home in Longhua County, roughly 180km northeast of the Chinese capital Beijing, Xinhua said.

As of Wednesday morning, 20 people were confirmed dead, it added.

“Other elderly people in the nursing home have been transferred to nearby hospitals for further observation and treatment,” the state news agency said.

The cause of the blaze is under investigation, it said.

Deadly fires are relatively common in China due to lax building codes and an often slipshod approach to workplace safety.

In January, a fire at a vegetable market in Zhangjiakou city, northwest of Beijing, killed eight people and injured 15.

A month before that, nine people died in a fire at a construction site in eastern China’s Rongcheng city.

More than 70 people have died and about 160 others injured in the Dominican capital early on Tuesday after the roof collapsed at a nightclub where politicians, athletes and others were attending a merengue concert, authorities said.

The death toll reached 79 by the late evening as crews continued to search for survivors in the rubble at the one-storey Jet Set nightclub in Santo Domingo, said Juan Manuel Méndez, director of the Center of Emergency Operations.

“We presume that many of them are still alive, and that is why the authorities here will not give up until not a single person remains under that rubble,” he said.

Nearly 12 hours after the top of the nightclub collapsed on to patrons, rescue crews were still pulling out survivors from the debris. At the scene, firefighters removed blocks of broken concrete and sawed planks of wood, using them to lift heavy debris as the noise of drills filled the air.

Méndez said rescue crews were prioritising three areas in the club: “We’re hearing some sounds.”

Nelsy Cruz, the governor of the north-western province of Montecristi and sister of seven-time Major League Baseball All-Star Nelson Cruz, was among the victims.

She had called President Luis Abinader at 12.49am saying she was trapped and that the roof had collapsed, first lady Raquel Arbaje told reporters. Officials said Cruz died later at the hospital.

“This is too great a tragedy,” Arbaje said in a broken voice.

The Professional Baseball League of the Dominican Republic posted on X that MLB pitcher Octavio Dotel died. Officials had earlier rescued Dotel from the debris and taken him to a hospital.

Meanwhile, the injured included legislator Bray Vargas and merengue singer Rubby Pérez, who was performing when the roof collapsed, officials said.

His manager, Enrique Paulino, whose shirt was spattered with blood, told reporters at the scene that the concert began shortly before midnight, with the roof collapsing almost an hour later, killing the group’s saxophonist.

“It happened so quickly. I managed to throw myself into a corner,” he said, adding that he initially thought it was an earthquake.

It wasn’t immediately clear what caused the roof to collapse.

Jet Set issued a statement saying it was cooperating with authorities. “The loss of human life leaves us in a state of deep pain and dismay,” it said.

Manuel Olivo Ortiz, whose son attended the concert but did not return home, was among those anxiously waiting outside the club, which is known for its traditional parties where renowned national and international artists perform. “We’re holding on only to God,” Olivo said.

Also awaiting word was Massiel Cuevas, godmother of 22-year-old Darlenys Batista. “I’m waiting for her. She’s in there, I know she’s in there,” Cuevas said, firm in her belief that Batista would be pulled out alive.

President Abinader wrote on X that all rescue agencies are “working tirelessly” to help those affected.

“We deeply regret the tragedy that occurred at the Jet Set nightclub. We have been following the incident minute by minute since it occurred,” he wrote.

Abinader arrived at the scene and hugged those looking for friends and family, some with tears streaming down their faces.

“We have faith in God that we will rescue even more people alive,” he told reporters.

An official with a megaphone stood outside the club imploring the large crowd that had gathered to search for friends and relatives to give ambulances space.

“You have to cooperate with authorities, please,” he said. “We are removing people.”

At one hospital where the injured were taken, an official stood outside reading aloud the names of survivors as a crowd gathered around her and yelled out the names of their loved ones.

Meanwhile, dozens of people gathered at the National Institute of Forensic Pathology, which projected pictures of the victims so their loved ones could identify them.

A US judge on Tuesday ordered the White House to restore full access to the Associated Press to presidential events, after the news agency was punished for its decision to continue to refer to the Gulf of Mexico in its coverage.

The order from the US district judge Trevor McFadden, an appointee of Donald Trump, requires the White House to allow the AP’s journalists to access the Oval Office, Air Force One and events held at the White House.

The White House “sharply curtailed” the AP’s access to media events with the US president after he renamed the Gulf of Mexico the “Gulf of America” and the news agency did not follow suit, McFadden wrote in a 41-page decision.

“Under the First Amendment, if the government opens its doors to some journalists – be it to the Oval Office, the East Room, or elsewhere – it cannot then shut those doors to other journalists because of their viewpoints,” McFadden wrote. “The Constitution requires no less.”

The AP sued three senior Trump aides in February, alleging the restrictions violated the US constitution’s first amendment protections against government abridgment of speech by trying to dictate the language they used in reporting the news.

Lawyers for the Trump administration have argued that the AP does not have a right to what the White House has called “special access” to the president.

On the first day of his second administration, Trump signed an executive order directing the US interior department to change the name of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America.

The AP said it would continue to use the gulf’s long-established name in stories while acknowledging Trump’s efforts to change it.

“For anyone who thinks The Associated Press’ lawsuit against President Trump’s White House is about the name of a body of water, think bigger,” Julie Pace, the AP’s executive editor, wrote in a Wall Street Journal op-ed. “It’s really about whether the government can control what you say.”

US secretary of defense Pete Hegseth said on Tuesday that the Panama canal faces ongoing threats from China but that together the United States and Panama will keep it secure.

Hegseth’s remarks triggered a fiery response from the Chinese government, which said: “Who represents the real threat to the Canal? People will make their own judgement.”

Speaking at a ribbon cutting for a new US-financed dock at the Vasco Nuñez de Balboa Naval Base after a meeting with Panama president, José Raúl Mulino, Hegseth said the US will not allow China or any other country to threaten the canal’s operation.

“To this end, the United States and Panama have done more in recent weeks to strengthen our defense and security cooperation than we have in decades,” he said.

Hegseth alluded to ports at either end of the canal that are controlled by a Hong Kong consortium, which is in the process of selling its controlling stake to another consortium including BlackRock Inc.

“China-based companies continue to control critical infrastructure in the canal area,” Hegseth said. “That gives China the potential to conduct surveillance activities across Panama. This makes Panama and the United States less secure, less prosperous and less sovereign. And as President Donald Trump has pointed out, that situation is not acceptable.”

Hegseth met with Mulino for two hours on Tuesday morning before heading to the naval base that previously had been the US Rodman naval station.

On the way, Hegseth posted a photo on Twitter/X of the two men laughing and said it was an honor speaking with Mulino. “You and your country’s hard work is making a difference. Increased security cooperation will make both our nations safer, stronger and more prosperous,” he wrote.

The visit comes amid tensions over Donald Trump’s repeated assertions that the US is being overcharged to use the Panama canal and that China has influence over its operations – allegations that Panama has denied.

Shortly after the meeting, the Chinese embassy in Panama slammed the US government in a statement on X, saying the US has used “blackmail” to further its own interests and that who Panama carries out business with is a “sovereign decision of Panama … and something the U.S. doesn’t have the right to interfere in”.

“The US has carried out a sensationalistic campaign about the ‘theoretical Chinese threat’ in an attempt to sabotage Chinese-Panamanian cooperation, which is all just rooted in the United State’s own geopolitical interests,” the embassy wrote.

After Hegseth and Mulino spoke by phone in February, the US state department said that an agreement had been reached to not charge US warships to pass through the canal. Mulino publicly denied there was any such deal.

The US president has gone so far as to suggest the US never should have turned the canal over to Panama and that maybe that it should take the canal back.

The China concern was provoked by the Hong Kong consortium holding a 25-year lease on ports at either end of the canal. The Panamanian government announced that lease was being audited and late on Monday concluded that there were irregularities.

The Hong Kong consortium, however, has already announced that CK Hutchison would be selling its controlling stake in the ports to a consortium including BlackRock Inc, in effect putting the ports under US control once the sale is complete.

Secretary of state Marco Rubio told Mulino during a visit in February that Trump believes China’s presence in the canal area may violate a treaty that led the US to turn the waterway over to Panama in 1999. That treaty calls for the permanent neutrality of the US-built canal.

Mulino has denied that China has any influence in the operations of the canal. In February, he expressed frustration at the persistence of the narrative. “We aren’t going to speak about what is not reality, but rather those issues that interest both countries,” he said.

The US built the canal in the early 1900s as it looked for ways to facilitate the transit of commercial and military vessels between its coasts. Washington relinquished control of the waterway to Panama on 31 December 1999, under a treaty signed in 1977 by Jimmy Carter.

“I want to be very clear, China did not build this canal,” Hegseth said on Tuesday. “China does not operate this canal and China will not weaponize this canal. Together with Panama in the lead, we will keep the canal secure and available for all nations through the deterrent power of the strongest, most effective and most lethal fighting force in the world.”

Iran, wrongfooted by Donald Trump’s revelation that “direct talks” between the US and Iran on its nuclear programme are set to start in Oman on Saturday, insisted the talks would actually be in an indirect format, but added that the intentions of the negotiators were more important than the format.

Trump on Monday threw Tehran off guard by revealing the plan for the weekend talks and saying that if the talks failed Iran would be in “great danger”. There has been an unprecedented US military buildup across the Middle East in recent weeks, and Trump’s decision to make the talks public looks designed to press Iran to negotiate with urgency.

The US delegation to the talks will be led by Steve Witkoff, Trump’s special envoy to the Middle East, who has also been involved in talks with Russia over the Ukraine war; and the Iranian side by its foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi. Witkoff’s efforts to broker peace between Israel and Hamas and between Russia and Ukraine have so far failed.

Iran had in public been stalling about talks, saying simply that it was prepared for indirect talks with the US, but had not yet received a formal response from the US as to whether talks were going ahead. In a post on X issued some hours after Trump used an Oval Office press conference to reveal the agreement to stage weekend talks, Araghchi described the talks as an opportunity and a test. He insisted the ball was in the US’s court.

Speaking during a visit to Algiers, Araghchi elaborated that Iran wanted indirect talks. He said: “The form of negotiations is not important, whether they are direct or indirect. In my opinion, what is important is whether the negotiations are effective or ineffective, whether the parties are serious or not in the negotiations, the intentions of the parties in the negotiations, and the will to reach a solution. These are the criteria for action in any dialogue.”

He added Iran had not agreed on any formula that would allow indirect talks to convert into direct talks, but the US expects the talks to evolve into a direct negotiation. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, has vetoed direct talks in protest at US sanctions and in deference to hardliners that believe talks with the US over Tehran’s nuclear programme are a political trap.

The former Iranian president Hassan Rouhani welcomed the news of the talks and said if the 2015 nuclear deal was conducted indirectly it would have taken 20 years and not two to conclude.

Trump pulled out of that deal – known as the joint comprehensive plan of action – during his first term. That deal had offered Iran sanctions relief in exchange for limitations on its uranium enrichment activities.

Iran is waiting to see if Trump will be content if the talks focus on a new system of surveillance of its civil nuclear programme, not dissimilar to the treaty from which Trump withdrew the US in 2018; or instead the US will seek to dismantle Iran’s entire nuclear programme, a step that increasingly has been referred to as the Libya option. In December 2003, Libya’s longtime leader Muammar Gaddafi renounced the country’s weapons of mass destruction programme and allowed international inspectors to verify that Tripoli would follow through on its commitment.

Speaking alongside Trump in the Oval House on Monday, Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, advocated the Libya option, but Iran insists it will not abandon its civil nuclear programme. Israel ultimately does not trust Iran and expects the talks to fail. It then favours a US-Israeli military strike to destroy Iran’s nuclear sites.

But Witkoff, in an interview with Tucker Carlson three weeks ago, suggested Trump’s demands of Iran may be relatively modest. He said Trump, in his letter seeking talks with Iran, had said: “We should clear up the misconceptions. We should create a verification programme so that nobody worries about weaponisation of your nuclear material. And I’d like to get us to that place because the alternative is not a very good alternative. That’s a rough encapsulation of what was said.”

But Trump is under pressure to reach an agreement that is more watertight than the agreement reached by Barack Obama in 2015.

Previewing Iran’s position in the talks, Araghchi said: “Iran’s nuclear programme is completely peaceful and legitimate. UN security council resolution 2231 has just confirmed its legitimacy. There is no doubt about it internationally. If anyone has any questions or ambiguities, we are ready to clarify. We are confident that our nuclear programme is peaceful and we have no problem building more confidence into this unless it creates a limitation for us or is an obstacle to Iran’s goals.”

Iran has always insisted a fatwa exists against building nuclear weapons, but senior Iranian politicians, faced by a series of military reversals, have increasingly challenged that.

Iran also faces the threat that Trump has set a two-month deadline – expiring in May – for the talks to achieve an outcome. Iran, being a consummate negotiator, may test Trump’s patience, especially if Witkoff eventually demands its ballistic weapons programme and financial support for militant forces is also put on the agenda.

A February report by the International Atomic Energy Agency found that Iran’s stockpile of uranium enriched to 60% purity had increased sharply since December. Experts say that reaching 90% enrichment – the threshold for weapons-grade material – is relatively easy from that point. As of 8 February, Iran’s 60%-enriched uranium stockpile had grown by 92.5kg over the previous quarter, reaching 274.8kg. Iran says the stockpile is a response to US sanctions.

The third season of The White Lotus may be over, but the drama continues for the hit HBO show. In a new interview, creator Mike White hit back at composer Cristóbal Tapia de Veer, who told the New York Times last week that he is quitting the show.

De Veer, who composed the show’s score and viral title sequence stylized for each of the three seasons’ locations, told the Times that he would not return for the show’s fourth season following creative differences with White. “We already had our last fight for ever, I think,” he said of White. “He was just saying no to anything.”

Speaking with Howard Stern on Tuesday following the season finale, White, who also serves as the show’s sole writer and director, disputed de Veer’s characterization of the split. “I honestly don’t know what happened, except now I’m reading his interviews because he decides to do some PR campaign about him leaving the show,” he said. “I don’t think he respected me. He wants people to know that he’s edgy and dark and I’m, I don’t know, like I watch reality TV.”

“We never really even fought. He says we feuded,” he continued. “I don’t think I ever had a fight with him – except for maybe some emails. It was basically me giving him notes. I don’t think he liked to go through the process of getting notes from me, or wanting revisions, because he didn’t respect me. I knew he wasn’t a team player and that he wanted to do it his way. I was thrown that he would go to the New York Times to shit on me and the show three days before the finale. It was kind of a bitch move.”

De Veer’s work has been acclaimed by fans and critics: he won three Emmys for The White Lotus, including outstanding theme for season one. The season two version of the theme song became a club hit, remixed by artists such as Tiësto and Sofi Tukker.

White added that he and de Veer had had a rocky relationship during the first two seasons of the black dramedy, which has netted HBO 15 Emmys to date. “By the time the third season came around, he’d won Emmys and he had his song go viral, he didn’t want to go through the process with me, he didn’t want to go to sessions,” he told Stern. “He would always look at me with this contemptuous smirk on his face like he thought I was a chimp or something … he’s definitely making a big deal out of a creative difference.”

Stern replied: “You’re the genius behind this thing. Why quit a hit show because you got some notes and some differences? Just work it out.”

White responded: “He is very talented. [But] I’ve never kissed somebody’s ass so hard to just get him to – to lead that horse to water. Have fun with whatever you’re doing next.”

In the Times story, de Veer said: “Maybe I was being unprofessional, and for sure Mike feels that I was always unprofessional to him because I didn’t give him what he wanted. But what I gave him did this, you know – did those Emmys, people going crazy … That is the main thing that I’m most happy about – it was worth all the tension and almost forcing the music into the show, in a way, because I didn’t have that many allies in there.”

At issue appears to be the third season’s title sequence, which proved more divisive with fans – some expressed disappointment over the absence of the distinctive “ooh-loo-loo-loo” vocal ululation of the previous versions. According to de Veer, he attempted to persuade producers to assuage critics by releasing a full version of the theme that included it, but White refused.

“I texted the producer and I told him that it would be great to, at some point, give them the longer version with the ooh-loo-loo-loos, because people will explode if they realize that it was going there anyway,” he said. “He thought it was a good idea. But then Mike cut that – he wasn’t happy about that.”

Though the third season and its conclusion drew mixed critical reviews, The White Lotus has become a juggernaut for HBO. Sunday’s season finale drew 6.2 million viewers, breaking a series record set the week before by 30%.