An Israeli government minister has vowed that “Gaza will be entirely destroyed” as a result of an Israeli military victory, and that its Palestinian population will “leave in great numbers to third countries”, raising fears of ethnic cleansing in the occupied territory.

The declaration on Tuesday by the finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich, came a day after Israel’s security cabinet approved a plan for Operation Gideon’s Chariots, which an Israeli official said would entail “the conquest of the Gaza Strip and the holding of the territories”.

The Israeli threats to seize control of the territory permanently has stirred global outrage.

“We strongly oppose the expansion of Israel’s operations,” the UK’s Middle East minister, Hamish Falconer, said. “Any attempt to annex land in Gaza would be unacceptable.”

After the intensified offensive was announced, Hamas said it was no longer interested in truce talks with Israel and urged the international community to halt Israel’s “hunger war” against Gaza, a reference to the total blockade on aid deliveries to Gaza, which has been in place for more than two months.

“There is no sense in engaging in talks or considering new ceasefire proposals as long as the hunger war and extermination war continue in the Gaza Strip,” Basem Naim, a senior Hamas official, told AFP.

Effie Defrin, Israel’s chief military spokesperson, said the planned offensive would include “moving most of the population of the Gaza Strip … to protect them”.

Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, said the “population will be moved, for its own protection” in a video posted on social media, but gave no further details.

Smotrich, speaking to a conference on Jewish settlement in the occupied West Bank, went further, making clear that many Palestinians would be driven out of the territory altogether, as part of a scorched earth offensive.

“Gaza will be entirely destroyed, civilians will be sent to … the south to a humanitarian zone without Hamas or terrorism, and from there they will start to leave in great numbers to third countries,” the minister said.

Israel’s neighbours Egypt and Jordan have said they will refuse to allow an exodus of refugees on their territory, arguing that would make them party to the ethnic cleansing of Gaza.

The international court of justice is assessing allegations of genocide against Israel for its military campaign in Gaza, and last year issued a series of provisional measures that included orders for Israel to “take all measures” to prevent genocide being committed or incited, and to allow the “unhindered provision” of humanitarian assistance across the territory’s southern border with Egypt.

The international criminal court (ICC) has issued arrest warrants for Netanyahu and former defence minister Yoav Gallant, and the ICC prosecutor is reported to be preparing more warrant requests.

“Smotrich has been saying similar things for some time now, but obviously this is very serious in the context of the call for more troops by the government,” Victor Kattan, assistant professor in public international law at the University of Nottingham, said.

“Deportation and forcible transfer of civilians is a crime against humanity under the Rome statute [the ICC’s founding treaty], and that’s a clear call for that. If that’s occurring in the context of his ministerial position or as a result of deliberations in the cabinet, that could be very serious.”

Late on Tuesday, at least 29 people were killed in an Israeli strike on a school sheltering displaced people, medics said.

Dozens more were wounded in the attack on Bureij camp in the centre of the territory, civil defence media officer Ahmad Radwan told AFP.

The call for an intensification of Israel’s war in Gaza came as it carried out a second day of airstrikes aimed at Houthi forces in Yemen, severely damaging the country’s international airport in the capital, Sana’a.

The strikes came after Israel launched similar attacks on Monday in retaliation for a Houthi missile strike the previous day on Israel’s international airport.

Nearly all of Gaza’s population of 2.3 million has been displaced, often repeatedly, since the start of the war triggered by Hamas’s 7 October 2023 attack on Israel, in which militants killed about 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and abducted another 250.

More than 52,000 people have been killed in the Israeli offensive in Gaza that followed. A two-month ceasefire collapsed in mid-March when Israel reneged on a promise to implement a second phase.

Faltering indirect talks have continued since, brokered by Qatar and Egypt, but with little sign of any significant progress. Any breakthrough appears unlikely as long as Israel remains committed to forcing Hamas to disarm, and Hamas refuses to release hostages without a ceasefire leading to a permanent end to hostilities as well as a total withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza.

Some analysts suggest Israel’s threats of the new offensive, occupation of territory and massive displacement are designed to force concessions from Hamas, as well as shore up rightwing support for Netanyahu’s ruling coalition.

Hamas on Monday described the new Israeli framework for aid delivery in Gaza as “political blackmail” and blamed Israel for the war-ravaged territory’s “humanitarian catastrophe”.

A UN spokesperson said on Monday that António Guterres, the UN secretary general, was “alarmed” by the Israeli plan that “will inevitably lead to countless more civilians killed and the further destruction of Gaza”.

Humanitarian officials say the territory is on the brink of catastrophe as food and fuel runs out due to a total Israeli blockade imposed on 2 March.

Military officials in Israel have given different versions of a plan reportedly agreed by ministers to allow a limited amount of aid into Gaza, which would be distributed from a small number of newly constructed hubs in the south of the territory staffed by private contractors but protected by Israeli troops.

Humanitarian officials have dismissed the scheme as unworkable, dangerous and potentially unlawful.

“The design of the plan presented to us will mean large parts of Gaza, including the less mobile and most vulnerable people, will continue to go without supplies,” a joint statement by UN and other aid agencies said this week.

“It contravenes fundamental humanitarian principles and appears designed to reinforce control over life-sustaining items as a pressure tactic – as part of a military strategy.

“It is dangerous, driving civilians into militarised zones to collect rations, threatening lives, including those of humanitarian workers, while further entrenching forced displacement.”

Stephen Cutts, the interim head of Medical Aid for Palestinians, said: “Israel’s proposed military-controlled aid mechanism is a dangerous attempt to weaponise humanitarian aid, entrench further control over Gaza, and continue its ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.”

US officials have not reacted directly to Israel’s threat of a new offensive, but Donald Trump said on Monday that his administration would help get food to “starving” Palestinians. He blamed Hamas for making it “impossible” by diverting humanitarian assistance for its fighters.

“We’re going to help the people of Gaza get some food. People are starving, and we’re going to help them get some food,” Trump told reporters during an event at the White House.

Israeli officials have said the new operation will not be launched before Trump concludes his visit next week to Saudi Arabia, UAE and Qatar.

The Israeli plan to occupy and depopulate Gaza may not be identical to Donald Trump’s vision of a new riviera, but his inspiration and the US’s walkaway diplomacy have ushered Benjamin Netanyahu to the precipice of a dire new chapter in the Israel-Gaza war.

The common perception in both Washington and Israel is that Trump has largely moved on, leaving an emboldened Netanyahu to his own devices, while his offhand proposals for turning Gaza into a “Riviera of the Middle East” have provided cover for rightwing Israeli politicians to enthusiastically support the forced resettlement of the Palestinian population.

“Part of the tragedy is that the only one who can actually save us, Trump, is not even seriously interested in that,” said Amos Harel, a prominent military and defense correspondent for the Haaretz newspaper. “Our only hope to get out of this crazy situation is that Trump would force Netanyahu to reach a hostage deal. But [Trump] seems disinterested. He was enthusiastic when the Riviera [idea] was proposed, but now he has moved on to Greenland, Canada and Mexico instead.”

Trump’s interventions – specifically envoy Steve Witkoff’s threats to Netanyahu during a tense Shabbat meeting – were instrumental in achieving a temporary ceasefire to the conflict in January. His influence on Netanyahu appeared to be greater than that of previous US presidents, including his rival Joe Biden.

But since then the ceasefire has broken down, a two-month Israeli blockade on aid has sparked an even worse humanitarian crisis in Gaza, and, with few opportunities for a quick peace, the White House now appears uninterested and overstretched as Israel signals an offensive and occupation that critics have said will amount to a state policy of ethnic cleansing.

It is a trend that has repeated with this White House: broad designs for a grand deal followed by frustration when diplomacy fails to yield instant results. Recently, the White House announced that it was also ready to walk away from negotiations over the Russia-Ukraine conflict if a quick deal was not achieved. That has incentivized Russia to wait out the Trump administration, observers have said, and bank on a policy of US non-engagement in the longer term. Netanyahu similarly appears to have been unleashed by the White House’s growing disinterest.

The Israeli ultimatum comes as Trump is scheduled to tour the Middle East next week, with Israeli officials briefing that they will begin the operation only after he returns from a three-day visit to Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. Trump’s talks there are expected to focus on investment and a likely quixotic quest to normalize relations between Saudi Arabia and Israel, but not on achieving a resolution to the war. On Tuesday, Maariv, an Israeli newspaper, reported that a Trump visit to Israel was not out of the question, but White House officials have not yet signaled that Trump is ready to go meet Netanyahu.

Witkoff, the Trump envoy, still appears personally invested in a resolution to the conflict, but he is overstretched by attempting to mediate between Russia and Ukraine, and also negotiate an Iran nuclear deal simultaneously. The US has continued negotiations with Israel over an aid delivery scheme that would create a new mechanism for aid distribution to avoid Hamas, they have said. But the UN and all aid organizations working in Gaza have condemned the plan as an Israeli takeover. “It contravenes fundamental humanitarian principles and appears designed to reinforce control over life-sustaining items as a pressure tactic – as part of a military strategy,” the heads of all UN agencies and NGOs that operate in Gaza said in a joint statement on Sunday.

The Trump administration’s budget and personnel cuts have also signaled a retreat from diplomacy. The state department was reportedly ready to cut the role of the security coordinator role for the West Bank and Gaza, a three-star general who was tasked with managing security crises between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, particularly with regards to growing tensions between settlers and local Palestinian communities.

More importantly, Trump has given cover to Israeli officials who had sought more aggressive action in Gaza, including forced depopulations. Rightwingers in government have been particularly aggressive, with finance minister Bezalel Smotrich saying that within months Gaza would be “totally destroyed” and the Gazan population would be “concentrated” in a small strip of land. “The rest of the strip will be empty,” he said.

But other ministers have also become more radical using Trump’s rhetoric for cover, said Harel.

“Once Trump said that, you could see how not only the radicals, but also Likud ministers and so on, have an excuse,” said Harel. “‘It’s not us. It’s the world, the free world’s leader is saying that, so we have to play along.’”

Donald Trump said Tuesday that three more hostages held by Hamas in Gaza have died, bringing the number still alive to 21.

At a White House swearing-in ceremony for his Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff, Trump revealed that three more Israeli hostages have died in Gaza, meaning that just 21 of the hostages taken from Israel during the 7 October attacks remain alive.

“Well, we’ve gone very slowly,” Trump said of efforts to end the conflict, “because we want to try and get as many hostages saved as possible, and we’ve done a good job in that regard.”

“Two weeks ago, I had 10 hostages come in, and they thanked me profusely,” Trump continued. The Oval Office meeting was in fact two months ago, with eight former hostages.

The president then appeared to recount a conversation with the freed hostages about how many captives remained in Gaza.

“I said, ‘How many people are left?’” Trump said. “They said 59. I said, ‘Oh, wow, that’s more than I thought’. They said, ‘Well, only 24 are living.’”

“But now it’s 21,” Trump added, without revealing the source of his information. “That was a week ago. Now it’s 21 are living.”

“I say 21, because, as of today, it’s 21. Three have died,” the president said.

He did not provide any further details.

“This is a terrible situation,” Trump said.

The Israeli military, in its most recent update, said of the 251 people abducted 58 are still held in Gaza, including 34 believed to be dead.

Israel’s military resumed its offensive in Gaza on 18 March, ending a two-month truce that saw a surge in aid into the war-ravaged territory and the release of hostages in exchange for Palestinian prisoners held by Israel.

Hamas’s attack resulted in the deaths of 1,218 people on the Israeli side, mostly civilians, according to an AFP tally based on official figures.

The health ministry in Gaza said at least 2,507 people had been killed since Israel resumed its campaign in mid-March, bringing the overall death toll from the war to 52,615.

In the White House on Tuesday, the prime minister of Canada told Donald Trump: “As you know from real estate, there are some places that are never for sale.” Trump agreed: “That’s true.”

Mark Carney continued: “Having met with the owners of Canada over the course of the campaign … it’s not for sale. Won’t be for sale, ever.” “Never say never,” said Trump. Carney smiled and mouthed “never, never, never, never.”

The light sparring between the two leaders came as Trump’s script about a 100% tariff on foreign-made movies was undergoing a further rewrite as the president said he would consult with the industry.

Here are the key stories at a glance:

Catching up? Here’s what happened on 5 May 2025.

Donald Trump has said he “just want[s] to be friends with Canada” after his first post-election meeting with the country’s prime minister, Mark Carney – who used the gathering to shoot down any prospect of his country becoming the 51st state.

Speaking in the Oval Office, Trump praised Carney – whose Liberal party won the federal election last week – for one of the “greatest political comebacks of all time”, and described the prime minister’s visit as “an honour” for the White House.

The amicable tone of Tuesday’s meeting marked a stark contrast with Trump’s hostile rhetoric over recent months, as he launched a trade war against his northern neighbour, belittled Carney’s predecessor, Justin Trudeau, and made repeated threats to crush Canada’s economy with the aim of annexing it.

Carney returned the praise, telling Trump he was a “transformational president” with a strong focus on the economy. But he shot down any idea that Canada might accede to joining the US as the 51st state – a proposal again floated by Trump in the meeting.

“As you know from real estate, there are some places that are never for sale,” Carney told Trump.

“That’s true,” said Trump.

“Having met with the owners of Canada over the course of the campaign … it’s not for sale,” said Carney. “Won’t be for sale, ever.”

“Never say never,” said Trump. Carney smiled and mouthed “never, never, never, never.”

The meeting between the prime minister and president is probably the most closely watched summit in Canada’s history, amid fears of further diplomatic and trading friction between two countries which have traditionally shared political and cultural values.

Minutes before the meeting, Trump posted on social media that he “very much” wants to work with Carney, but revived a debunked figure that the US is “subsidizing Canada by $200 Billion Dollars a year, in addition to giving them FREE Military Protection”.

“We don’t need their Cars, we don’t need their Energy, we don’t need their Lumber, we don’t need ANYTHING they have, other than their friendship, which hopefully we will always maintain,” he wrote. “They, on the other hand, need EVERYTHING from us! The Prime Minister will be arriving shortly and that will be, most likely, my only question of consequence.”

Carney crafted much of his successful federal election campaign around a patriotic defiance to the US president’s threats to the nation’s sovereignty. The prime minister has repeatedly accused Trump of trying to “break” Canada so that he can “own” the country. Carney also used his first post-election press conference to once again quash any idea Canada was interested in becoming the 51st US state, a proposal repeatedly floated by Trump.

“It’s always important to distinguish want from reality,” Carney said last week. But Carney has throughout steered clear of criticizing the president personally, acutely aware the two countries also share a tightly integrated economy, with more than C$1tn (US$725bn) in trade – and that US diplomacy depends more than ever on the whims of its president.

The country’s trade relationship came up during the meeting, with Trump signalling he was interested in renegotiating key aspects of USMCA free trade agreement, calling the prior deal, Nafta, the “worst in the history of the world”.

“We’re dealing more with concepts right now,” Trump said later in the meeting, telling reporters he didn’t want Canadian cars or steel. “We want to do it ourselves.”

Asked if there was anything Carney could say to him that would make him lift the tariffs on Canada, Trump replied: “No.”

Carney pushed back on Trump’s characterization of the current deal, including the use of tariffs by US officials, but agreed the existing deal was a “framework” for future talks and a “bigger discussion”.

The prime minister later described his discussions with Trump as “very constructive,” and said they would at the G7 summit in Canada next month.

He also told reporters that he had asked Trump to stop referring to Canada as a part of the United States.

“I told him that it wasn’t useful to repeat this idea, but the president will say what he wants,” Carney said.

Trump was equally positive in his framing of the meeting, telling reporters after it went “very well” and set the stage for further talks.

“We want to do what’s right for our respective peoples, and that’s what’s going to happen,” he said. “As far as calling him governor Carney, no, I haven’t done that yet, and maybe I won’t. I did have a lot of fun with Trudeau. But I think this is, this is a big step up, it’s a good step up for Canada.”

Travelling with Carney were some of the country’s top trade and diplomatic officials, including the international trade minister, Dominic LeBlanc, foreign affairs minister, Mélanie Joly, public safety minister, David McGuinty and Canada’s ambassador to the US, Kirsten Hillman.

Seated alongside Trump were his vice-president, JD Vance; the US secretary of state, Marco Rubio; the US secretary of commerce, Howard Lutnick; and the US trade representative Jamieson Greer.

Trump, who at times used the meeting to attack the former US president Joe Biden, also used the forum to criticize Trudeau and the former finance minister Chrystia Freeland.

“She was terrible. Actually, she was a terrible person, and she really hurt that deal very badly because she tried to take advantage of the deal and she didn’t get away with it,” said Trump.

Before Carney and Trump met at the White House, Canadian provincial leaders weighed in.

“This guy drives me nuts,” Ontario’s premier, Doug Ford, said of Trump. “You see this guy on TV, ‘We don’t need Canada.’ Really?” he said, telling attenders that Canada’s largest trading partner desperately needed potash, nickel and uranium.

Ford, a populist conservative who has embraced his role as a patriotic anti-Trump figure, said a growing number of US governors “totally disagree” with the president’s trade war with its northern neighbour.

Ford pointed to fresh polling that shows a drop in Trump’s approval rating as the cost of tariffs hit American consumers.

“I can’t wait for the midterms. Then we’ll fix his little red wagon,” he said.

There were two main tensions during Donald Trump’s meeting in the Oval Office with Canada’s new prime minister, Mark Carney, the first beneficiary of a growing electoral phenomenon: the anti-Trump bump. For the first time this term, Trump was meeting with a prime minister elected in opposition to him, and try as the two leaders might, the tensions simmered just beneath the surface.

Both sought to play it cool.

Trump congratulated Carney on his victory. “I have a lot of respect for this man … He ran a really great campaign,” Trump said, joking that he may have contributed to the historic 30% swing in the Canadian elections. Carney in turn sought not to provoke Trump and called him a “transformational” president. Flattery is appreciated in the Oval Office these days.

But the first hangup was, as they so often are, a partner’s bad habit. When a reporter brought up Trump’s remarks that Canada could become the 51st state, the US president said coyly: “I still believe that. But it takes two to tango, right?”

Carney replied as he only could: “It’s not for sale. It won’t be for sale. Ever.” To which, Trump responded: “I say: never say never.”

After the talks, Carney confirmed that was an irritant. “Have you asked the president to stop calling Canada the 51st state?” a reporter asked. “Yes. Today. Exactly what you just said,” he replied.

“I said it’s not useful to repeat this idea,” Carney said later in French. “But he is the president and he will say what he wants.”

The second difference may be irreconcilable. Asked whether he would lift new tariffs on Canada, Trump responded bluntly: “No. Because that’s the way it is.” Carney sought to recast the relationship between the two countries in business terms, calling Canada the United States’ “biggest client”. But Trump signaled he would take a hard line on trade deals with foreign countries. “They have to sign deals with us,” Trump said.

There was no quick fix. Carney gave the negotiations an interesting spin: the beginning of the end of “redefining the relationship” of the two country’s long-term partnership. It hardly looks like the “wonderful marriage” that Trump suggested an annexation of Canada could produce. The question is whether it is headed for a messy breakup instead.

World leaders are practiced at befriending, flattering and wooing Trump. He clearly likes Emmanuel Macron and Keir Starmer, despite their political differences – and he loves Giorgia Meloni despite their differences on Ukraine. He regularly calls Mexico’s Claudia Sheinbaum a “lovely woman” despite his migration policy. And – in public – he had a cordial meeting with Carney, despite openly pondering the annexation of his counterpart’s country.

But there is no escaping the potential effects of the trade war that Trump has unleashed around the world. Set among his court in the Oval Office, Howard Lutnick, the commerce secretary, confirmed that the US would also review the United States-Mexico-Canada (USMC) Agreement, the trade deal Trump himself negotiated during his first term. (“That was a transitional deal,” Trump said.)

“We want to make our own cars,” Trump said. “We don’t really want cars from Canada, and we put tariffs on cars from Canada, and at a certain point it won’t make economic sense for Canada to build those cars. And we don’t want steel from Canada because we’re making our own steel.”

Carney during the campaign coined his strategy as “elbows up”, a hockey term for offering a stiff defense. And at moments today, he seemed to realize that he could not yield more ground to the US president. “Part of the way you conducted these tariffs has taken advantage of existing aspects of USMCA, so it’s going to have to change,” Carney retorted. Both sides predict tough negotiations to reach a revised trade deal.

There is an irony to Trump’s tariffs and bluster: the very policies meant to win him blue-collar and rightwing voters in the United States can repel those same constituents abroad. And in countries from Canada to Australia, voters are beginning to elect leaders who will be seen as standing up to an unpredictable, and sometimes insulting, US leader.

“There are some places that are never for sale,” Carney said during the meeting with Trump. “Having met with the owners of Canada over the course of the campaign, it’s not for sale. It won’t be for sale. Ever.”

UK firms have exported thousands of military items including munitions to Israel despite the government suspending key arms export licences to the country in September, new analysis of trade data shows.

The research also raises questions over whether the UK continued to sell F-35 parts directly to Israel in breach of an undertaking only to sell them to the US manufacturers Lockheed Martin as a way of ensuring the fighter jet’s global supply chain was not disrupted, something the government said was essential for national security and Nato.

The findings have led the former Labour shadow chancellor John McDonnell to call for a full investigation, adding it was a resigning matter if the foreign secretary, David Lammy, was shown to have misled parliament in breach of the ministerial code when he told MPs in September that much of what the UK sends to Israel was “defensive in nature”.

McDonnell said “The government has shrouded its arms supplies to Israel in secrecy. They must finally come clean in response to this extremely concerning evidence and halt all British arms exports to Israel to ensure no British-made weapons are used in Netanyahu’s new and terrifying plans to annex the Gaza Strip and ethnically cleanse the land.”

The research – conducted jointly by the Palestinian Youth Movement, Progressive International and Workers for a Free Palestine – uses Israeli tax authority import data to try to uncover what the continuance of the 200 arms export licences has allowed Israel to import. It covers the first seven months of the Labour ban to March.

In September, the Labour government suspended 29 arms export licences for offensive use in Gaza, leaving 200 arms licences in place. It also gave a carve-out for equipment used in the F-35 programme, saying national security required that the F-35 supply chain remained intact.

The suspensions were due to a clear risk that Israel might use the arms to commit serious breaches of international humanitarian law. Ministers have repeatedly assured MPs that the arms export licences remaining in place did not cover goods for use by the Israeli military in the conflict with Hamas.

Lammy, for instance, told parliament in September the continuing licences covered items such as “goggles and helmets for use by one of the UK’s closest allies”.

The Foreign Office has not published details of what the continuing licences covered.

But the new research raises questions over whether that distinction between supplying equipment for Israel’s offensive and defensive purposes is, or ever was, valid, especially if, as it appears, it provided a loophole for sales of munitions to Israel. The UK has no means of checking how the munitions it exports are used by the Israel Defense Forces.

This latest research indicates that 14 shipments of military items have been sent from the UK to Israel since October 2023, including 13 by air to Ben Gurion airport and one maritime delivery to Haifa that alone contained 160,000 items.

Since September 2024, 8,630 items were exported under the category “bombs, grenades, torpedoes, mines, missiles and similar munitions of war and parts thereof – other”.

In addition to weapons, four shipments were made after September of 146 items under a customs code identified as “tanks and other armoured fighting vehicles, motorised, whether or not fitted with weapons, and parts of such vehicles”.

Most of the shipments, valued in total at just over £500,000, occurred after the UK government suspended the arms export licences in September.

The Israeli data provides a code number identifying the type of export, details on country of origin, the value of the items, the month shipped and whether transported by land or sea. Neither the supplier or customer is listed.

On the commitment not to sell F-35 components to Israel directly, the report finds that the monthly pattern of UK shipments of aircraft parts to Israel is largely unchanged since September, but the data does not reveal if they are military parts.

Zarah Sultana, the MP for Coventry South, said: “This explosive report shows the government has been lying to us about the arms it is supplying to Israel while it wages genocide in Gaza. Far from ‘helmets and goggles’, the government has been sending thousands of arms and ammunition goods.” Labour has withdrawn the party whip from Sultana because she voted against benefit cuts.

The Foreign Office has been contacted for comment.

Meta Platforms won a $168m verdict against the Israeli surveillance firm NSO, the company said on Tuesday, capping a six-year arm-wrestling match between the US’s biggest social-networking platform and the world’s best-known spyware company.

Meta had already won after a December ruling found that NSO had unlawfully exploited a bug in its messaging service WhatsApp to plant spy software on its users’ phones. On Tuesday, a jury in California ruled that NSO owed Meta $444,719 in compensatory damages – and $167.3m in punitive damages, Meta said.

“Today’s verdict in WhatsApp’s case is an important step forward for privacy and security as the first victory against the development and use of illegal spyware that threatens the safety and privacy of everyone,” Meta said in a statement.

In its statement, NSO said it would “carefully examine the verdict’s details and pursue appropriate legal remedies, including further proceedings and an appeal”.

NSO, an Israeli firm that first drew global attention in 2016, has become “a poster child for the surveillance industry and their abuses and impunity”, said Natalia Krapiva, a senior lawyer with the human-rights group Access Now. NSO has long argued that its software is used to track terrorists and pedophiles, but the firm has been implicated in abusive surveillance in countries around the world, including Saudi Arabia, Spain, Mexico, Poland and El Salvador.

WhatsApp’s lawsuit – which was filed in 2019 and at one point made its way to the supreme court – has been closely followed both by NSO’s competitors in the surveillance-technology space and by human-rights advocates critical of the industry.

Victims of state-backed hacking have struggled to hold suppliers of spy software accountable for what their customers do with their tools, while hacking firms have long worried that their products could draw legal sanctions. The WhatsApp verdict was a sign that both outcomes were possible, said Krapiva.

“This is something that will hopefully show spyware companies that there will be consequences if you are careless, if you are brazen, and if you act in such a way as NSO did in these cases,” she said.

Beyond sending a message to spyware merchants, the case also pulled back the curtain – ever so slightly – on the inner workings of NSO itself.

The court heard about NSO’s 140 person-strong research team, whose $50m budget was in part devoted to exploiting security vulnerabilities in smartphones. An attorney for the company disclosed that its customers included Uzbekistan, Saudi Arabia and Mexico – rare on-the-record names from NSO’s closely guarded client list.

Much about the spyware company’s targets and clients remains unknown, in part because the firm refused to hand over evidence. In her December ruling, the district judge Phyllis Hamilton accused NSO of having “repeatedly failed to produce relevant discovery and failed to obey court orders regarding such discovery”. The Guardian reported last year that Israeli officials had seized documents from NSO in an effort to prevent the files from making their way to US court.

“This whole case is shrouded in so much secrecy,” Hamilton said during the trial. “There’s so much that’s not known.”

Meta Platforms won a $168m verdict against the Israeli surveillance firm NSO, the company said on Tuesday, capping a six-year arm-wrestling match between the US’s biggest social-networking platform and the world’s best-known spyware company.

Meta had already won after a December ruling found that NSO had unlawfully exploited a bug in its messaging service WhatsApp to plant spy software on its users’ phones. On Tuesday, a jury in California ruled that NSO owed Meta $444,719 in compensatory damages – and $167.3m in punitive damages, Meta said.

“Today’s verdict in WhatsApp’s case is an important step forward for privacy and security as the first victory against the development and use of illegal spyware that threatens the safety and privacy of everyone,” Meta said in a statement.

In its statement, NSO said it would “carefully examine the verdict’s details and pursue appropriate legal remedies, including further proceedings and an appeal”.

NSO, an Israeli firm that first drew global attention in 2016, has become “a poster child for the surveillance industry and their abuses and impunity”, said Natalia Krapiva, a senior lawyer with the human-rights group Access Now. NSO has long argued that its software is used to track terrorists and pedophiles, but the firm has been implicated in abusive surveillance in countries around the world, including Saudi Arabia, Spain, Mexico, Poland and El Salvador.

WhatsApp’s lawsuit – which was filed in 2019 and at one point made its way to the supreme court – has been closely followed both by NSO’s competitors in the surveillance-technology space and by human-rights advocates critical of the industry.

Victims of state-backed hacking have struggled to hold suppliers of spy software accountable for what their customers do with their tools, while hacking firms have long worried that their products could draw legal sanctions. The WhatsApp verdict was a sign that both outcomes were possible, said Krapiva.

“This is something that will hopefully show spyware companies that there will be consequences if you are careless, if you are brazen, and if you act in such a way as NSO did in these cases,” she said.

Beyond sending a message to spyware merchants, the case also pulled back the curtain – ever so slightly – on the inner workings of NSO itself.

The court heard about NSO’s 140 person-strong research team, whose $50m budget was in part devoted to exploiting security vulnerabilities in smartphones. An attorney for the company disclosed that its customers included Uzbekistan, Saudi Arabia and Mexico – rare on-the-record names from NSO’s closely guarded client list.

Much about the spyware company’s targets and clients remains unknown, in part because the firm refused to hand over evidence. In her December ruling, the district judge Phyllis Hamilton accused NSO of having “repeatedly failed to produce relevant discovery and failed to obey court orders regarding such discovery”. The Guardian reported last year that Israeli officials had seized documents from NSO in an effort to prevent the files from making their way to US court.

“This whole case is shrouded in so much secrecy,” Hamilton said during the trial. “There’s so much that’s not known.”

Germany’s new chancellor Friedrich Merz has warned the US to “stay out” of his country’s politics after the far-right AfD received strong backing from allies of the US president, Donald Trump.

Merz, 69, a conservative who was elected as chancellor of Europe’s biggest economy earlier in the day, also said he planned to speak by phone with Trump on Thursday.

His CDU/CSU alliance won February’s elections ahead of the anti-immigration Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, which came second with more than 20% – a record for the group.

During the campaign, the AfD won strong backing from Trump ally Elon Musk, the technology billionaire, and the US vice-president, JD Vance.

Merz condemned recent “absurd observations” from the US, without specifying particular statements, and said he “would like to encourage the American government … to largely stay out of” German domestic politics.

A politician with longstanding US ties, Merz said he had always felt that America “can clearly distinguish between extremist parties and parties of the political centre”.

Merz, speaking with the public broadcaster ZDF on Tuesday, noted that he “did not interfere in the American election campaign” that elected Trump.

Last week, after Germany’s domestic intelligence agency designated the AfD a “right-wing extremist” party, US secretary of state Marco Rubio called the move “tyranny in disguise” and said “Germany should reverse course”.

At the time, the German foreign ministry pushed back, saying: “This is democracy. This decision is the result of a thorough and independent investigation to protect our constitution and the rule of law. It is independent courts that will have the final say. We have learnt from our history that rightwing extremism needs to be stopped.”

Vance wrote on X: “The west tore down the Berlin Wall together. And it has been rebuilt – not by the Soviets or the Russians, but by the German establishment.”

Musk participated virtually at a January rally for the AfD, telling the crowd that “you really are the best hope” for Germany.

• The Pentagon under Pete Hegseth stopped arms shipments to Ukraine in February without being ordered to do so by Donald Trump, the newly inaugurated president, Reuters reports. The order – which the news agency said blindsided top US national security officials, and the Ukrainians – was reversed within a week, but it cost up to $US2.2m to cancel the 11 flights involved, according to records. Reuters said records showed Hegseth gave a verbal order for the stoppage after a 30 January Oval Office meeting where only the idea of stopping military assistance was discussed.

• Ukraine’s air defence units were trying repel a missile attack on Kyiv, the mayor said, after explosions shook the city just after 1am local time on Wednesday. A Russian ballistic missile attack killed three people including a child at Sumy in Ukraine and wounded 10 other people – most of them children, one of whom was in a severe condition, Ukrainian officials said.

• A Ukrainian drone barrage forced Russia to close a dozen airports deep behind the frontline on Tuesday as foreign leaders began gathering in Moscow for a second world war “Victory Day” parade. Moscow said Ukraine had launched more than 100 drones targeting a dozen regions, including on the Russian capital. Kyiv, meanwhile, said Russia attacked with 136 drones.

• Volodymyr Zelenskyy has asked his government to seek help from Ukraine’s western allies to finance and develop interceptor drones to knock down attack drones such as Russia’s Iranian-designed Shaheds. “We will develop this direction as much as possible and each region will have its own responsibility specifically for this task,” said the Ukrainian president. Ukraine already has some capability, with videos regularly posted online showing Ukrainian UAVs pursuing and ramming Russian attack drones out of the air, while other interceptors can fire shotgun cartridges to shoot down enemy UAVs.

• Catholic cardinals gathered in Rome ahead of the conclave to elect a new pope called on Tuesday for a ceasefire and negotiations without preconditions. Their statement “noted with regret that there has not been progress in promoting peace in Ukraine, the Middle East and many other parts of the world”, while offering their “heartfelt appeal to all parties involved to reach as soon as possible a permanent ceasefire and to negotiate, without pre-conditions” a longer-term peace.

• Ukraine and Russia handed over 205 prisoners of war each in an exchange on Tuesday, both sides announced.

Five members of Venezuela’s political opposition have left the Argentinian diplomatic compound in their country’s capital, Caracas, where they had sheltered for more than a year to avoid arrest, and were in the United States on Tuesday, US secretary of state Marco Rubio said.

Rubio did not provide details of the group’s movements to reach the US, but he described the event as a rescue operation.

The government of Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro did not immediately comment on the situation.

“The US welcomes the successful rescue of all hostages held by the Maduro regime at the Argentinian embassy in Caracas,” Rubio said on X. “Following a precise operation, all hostages are now safely on US soil.”

The government of Argentinian president Javier Milei allowed the five people into the ambassador’s residence in March 2024, when authorities loyal to Venezuela’s ruling party issued warrants for their arrest, accusing them of promoting acts of violence to destabilize the country.

The group included the campaign manager and communications director of opposition leader María Corina Machado.

Machado, also on X, thanked people involved in what she called an “impeccable and epic operation for the freedom of five heroes of Venezuela”.

Since late November, the group had denounced the constant presence of intelligence service agents and police outside the residence. It had also accused the government of cutting electricity and water services to the compound. The government had denied the allegations.

A sixth person, Fernando Martinez, a cabinet minister in the 1990s, sheltered with the group for nine months. Martinez abandoned the compound in mid-December and, according to Venezuelan authorities, appeared before prosecutors. He died in February.

Maduro’s government routinely targeted its real or perceived opponents ahead of last year’s presidential election, and its crackdown on dissent only increased after the country’s national electoral council, which is stacked with Maduro loyalists, declared him the winner despite credible evidence to the contrary.

The election results announced by the electoral council sparked protests across the country to which the government responded with force and ended with more than 20 people dead. They also prompted an end to diplomatic relations between Venezuela and various foreign countries, including Argentina.

In August, Brazil accepted Argentina’s request to guard the diplomatic compound in Caracas after Maduro’s government expelled its diplomats when Milei said that he would not recognize “another fraud”.

But a month later, Venezuela revoked Brazil’s authorization to guard the facility, alleging it had evidence of the use of the premises “for the planning of terrorist activities and assassination attempts”.

Brazil and Argentina have rejected those accusations.

Milei said in a statement on Tuesday that the operation “represents an important step in defending freedom in the region”.

The BBC has admitted to “a lapse in our usual high editorial standards” over its coverage on Radio 4’s Today programme of the broadcaster’s recent interview with the Duke of Sussex.

The admission came after it failed to include responses from the Home Office and Buckingham Palace to allegations made by the duke.

Prince Harry gave an interview to BBC News on Friday in response to the court of appeal’s dismissal of his case over security arrangements for him and his family while in the UK.

On Saturday, the Today programme covered the duke’s interview in which he described his court defeat as a “good old-fashioned establishment stitch-up”. The programme also had an interview with the close protection expert Richard Aitch, where Harry’s “stitch-up” claims were “repeated”, the BBC said.

On its Corrections and Clarifications website, the BBC said on Tuesday: “The programme covered the latest developments in the story of Prince Harry and his legal case around protection for him and his family in the UK and interviewed former close protection officer Richard Aitch to get a broader understanding of security considerations.

“Claims were repeated that the process had been ‘an establishment stitch-up’ and we failed to properly challenge this and other allegations. This case is ultimately the responsibility of the Home Office and we should have reflected their statement,” it said.

The BBC then included the Home Office statement: “We are pleased that the court has found in favour of the government’s position in this case. The UK government’s protective security system is rigorous and proportionate. It is our longstanding policy not to provide detailed information on those arrangements, as doing so could compromise their integrity and affect individuals’ security.”

The broadcaster said it should also have given the view of Buckingham Palace. The palace statement after Friday’s ruling read: “All of these issues have been examined repeatedly and meticulously by the courts, with the same conclusion reached on each occasion.”

The BBC added: “This was a lapse in our usual high editorial standards.”

During the Today interview, Aitch, who is the director of operations at security services company Mobius International, said he “was shocked but certainly not surprised” at the judgment.

He claimed that the “provision of protection should not be based on legal argument”, but on assessment of “risk and threat against Harry” and agreed that it had been a “stitch-up”.

Posting on X after the BBC clarification, Aitch said: “There should not be any need to apologise BBC News for opinion-based interviews. Absence of a threat and risk assessment on Prince Harry where the focus is on legal process influenced by the recommendations of a committee that is not independent, it defines ‘stitch up’.”