Read the daily news to learn English

‘Obvious’ Putin does not want peace in Ukraine, say Nato ministers, as Russia denies rejecting US plan - Europe live

We also got more reactions from the Kremlin this morning, with spokesman Dmitry Peskov insisting that Russia was ready to continue engagement with the US on Ukraine peace deal for as long as it takes to get an agreement – even as he branded some of the proposals “unacceptable”. Peskov insisted that Putin had not rejected any proposals, but merely “some things were accepted, some things were marked as unacceptable – this is a normal working process of finding a compromise.” The Kremlin spokesman pointedly thanked US president Donald Trump for convening the talks, and said the EU leaders were not involved in the talks as “they are still obsessed with the idea of inflicting a strategic defeat on Russia.” Separately, Peskov also responded to the bloc’s move to turn off taps on Russian energy (10:24) would “only accelerate the process that has been under way in recent years of the European economy losing its leading potential.”

‘So much we don’t know’: why experts are warning against a new pipeline in British Columbia

When an earthquake in 2002 struck in a remote pocket of Alaska, the shock was the strongest ever recorded in the interior of the state. But, miraculously, an oil pipeline that crossed directly over the fault line was unscathed. Engineers behind the design of the 800 mile system were prepared. Knowing the high likelihood of seismic activity along the route, which bisected the Denali fault, they constructed sections where the pipeline rested on rail girders, allowing it to sway and shear without snapping. “It worked because they could pinpoint how and where to build: they could put their hand right on the fault,” said Edwin Nissen, a seismologist at the University of Victoria. “The problem for Canada is that there’s nothing like that in British Columbia, where a pipeline has been proposed. There’s never been a study as detailed as they one they did for the pipeline in Alaska and as a result, there’s just so much we don’t know.” Canada’s prime minister Mark Carney has given his government’s blessing to an oil pipeline last week that would cross Alberta and British Columbia and terminate at the Pacific. But amid fierce debate over the political, environmental and economic implications of the project, experts warn that the multibillion-dollar project faces immense – and poorly understood – geological hazards. While no route for a heavy oil pipeline has been officially proposed, nor has any company stepped forward to build it, the most efficient route from Edmonton, Alberta, would invariably pass through the Rocky Mountain trench and along the sparsely populated north of British Columbia before terminating at the Douglas Channel, a region with a crenulated landscape of deep fjords. The project has already faced strong opposition from First Nations over fears that Carney’s government will lift a five-decade oil tanker ban in the region. So far much of the public debate has focused on the immense risk of a maritime disaster, but Nissen warns the geography of the landscape itself presents fresh and troubling risks. Nissen and his research team argue that at least two seismic faults, including the Rocky Mountain trench which most Canadian geologists believe are ‘extinct’ or long dormant, are instead still active and “can host big surface-rupturing earthquakes”. He also says the tectonics in mountainous areas along the Pacific coast are “very poorly understood”. “This part of the world, where we’re talking about a pipeline, is very poorly instrumented and as a result, we actually know very little about it,” he said. A large earthquake – or even smaller earthquakes triggering landslides – could unleash environmental disaster. The challenge for Canada is that the vast majority of its seismic monitoring instrumentation is heavily concentrated along the country’s southern border, where the bulk of the population lives. “In the places where the pipeline might get built, there’s basically no monitoring of earthquakes. There’s no monitoring of landslides. And we don’t have the instrumentation that would actually map out small earthquakes along these faults,” he said. “Science funding in Canada is pretty threadbare compared to America. We don’t have the resources to just go out and deploy seismic stations and GPS stations. It’s expensive business and we don’t have the funds.” David Eby, British Columbia’s premier, has emerged as a sharp critic of the project, expressing frustration over being excluded from discussions between Ottawa and Alberta even though the route would cross through his province. “The oil sands in Alberta will get most of the profit from this pipeline, but all of the risk is being placed on British Columbia and particularly the First Nations along the west coast,” said Nissen. “In a way, it feels like the global financial crisis of 2008: the profit was private, the bailouts were for the big bank and the risk was basically subsidized by all taxpayers.” While risks of building in seismically active areas can be minimized through engineering, that process is “phenomenally expensive” if the “basic science” hasn’t yet been completed. “What’s going on in these regions? Where are the faults? What is the risk of an earthquake on each of them? These are questions we should ideally be asking – and have answered before the conversation even begins about a pipeline,” he said. “Black swan events are by their nature unlikely, but they’re something we should factor in. Because when these massive landslides and massive earthquakes and tsunamis happen, they often take professionals like myself by surprise.” In 1958, an earthquake in a remote Alaskan bay triggered a landslide which in turn created a megatsunami, with a wave reaching a height of roughly 553 meters – nearly double the height of The Shard in London. A wave of such “phenomenally terrifying elevation” was only possible because of the physical geography of fjord, where, unlike in the ocean, the energy could not easily dissipate, said Daniel Shugar, a geomorphologist at the University of Calgary. The challenge for a pipeline stretching across British Columbia is that the landscape around a possible terminus is eerily similar to that of much of Alaska’s south-eastern coastline, where the Lituya Bay mega-tsunami occurred. The most likely location for a terminal where large oil tankers could load up with crude oil for transport to Asia is in the Douglas Channel, an increasingly busy shipping route through the fjord. Canada’s geological survey has recently carried out “superb” high resolution sonar mapping, uncovering roughly 100 past landslides in the Douglas channel, said Shugar. While some were small, a handful were “truly gigantic” and would prove “catastrophic, not only to a tanker, but potentially to any towns or other infrastructure in the fjord”, he said. While these events are scattered over millions of years, with enough data and time, scientists could calculate a recurrence interval, which gives a rough sense of how often these landslide might occur. “When we’re designing or making decisions about facilities that have a lifespan of decades we need to be considering the geophysical risks that might exist – even if those risks are relatively small,” he said. He points to Greenland’s government, which recently announced it would “discourage” all marine traffic in a fjord over risks of landslide-created tsunamis. “We tend not to have a very long view of history. Our politicians tend to think in four-year time frames. But nature doesn’t care about that. Geology certainly doesn’t care about that. And the disasters of the past teach us that ecosystems can take many decades to recover from what might only unfold in a few minutes.”

A year after South Korea’s martial law crisis, the president urges unity, but the wounds are still raw

South Korea’s President Lee Jae Myung has marked the anniversary of an attempt to impose martial law by declaring that those behind the bid to topple its democracy must face justice, while adding that the fight to secure the country remains unfinished. “Investigations and trials of those who participated are still ongoing,” Lee said in a televised address. He pledged that “righteous unity” would be possible only once accountability was delivered. However, on a typically crisp winter’s afternoon in Seoul that belied the significance of the day, that sense of unity appeared as distant as ever. Several hundred supporters of ousted president Yoon Suk Yeol – the instigator of the ill-fated martial law attempt – gathered near the national assembly, waving Korean and American flags alongside banners defending his martial law as justified and shouting “Yoon Again”. Meanwhile, workers strung lights and set up sound systems for the evening’s much larger pro-democracy celebrations, where thousands were expected to gather. Wednesday’s anniversary commemorates one of the most dramatic nights in South Korea’s history. On 3 December 2024, then-president Yoon Suk Yeol declared martial law, claiming “pro-North anti-state forces” and election fraud threatened national security. The command aimed to ban political activities, authorise warrantless arrests and deploy 280 armed troops to the national assembly. Within six hours, however, the move had collapsed. As thousands of citizens rushed to the parliament building – some helping MPs scale its walls to reach the chamber – 190 lawmakers voted unanimously to overturn the decree. Lee on Wednesday described the event as a “self-coup”, saying that Korean citizens deserved a Nobel peace prize for overcoming “an unprecedented democratic crisis in world history” without the use of force. In the days that followed, ordinary Koreans adopted colourful K-pop concert lightsticks as symbols of peaceful resistance, gathering nightly in what was dubbed the “revolution of light”. Yoon was impeached four months later and removed by the constitutional court, triggering a snap election that brought Lee to power. The former president, now in detention, faces trial on charges of leading an insurrection and an unprecedented count of aiding an enemy for allegedly provoking North Korea to justify emergency rule. His lawyers have denied the allegations against him. Prosecutors allege Yoon ordered drone flights near Pyongyang in October 2024 in the hope that a retaliatory response could serve as a pretext for martial law. Former prime minister Han Duck-soo and former defence minister Kim Yong-hyun are also on trial over allegations they played roles in the attempt. Verdicts are not expected until early 2026. Despite Lee’s calls for unity, the political and social fractures exposed during the crisis remain raw. “These divisions existed well before the martial law incident, but they have become more politicised and intensified,” said Hannah Kim, professor of international studies at Sogang University. “Deepening polarisation raises serious concerns about the long-term health of Korean democracy.” The crisis has also fuelled the rise of a radical rightwing movement. In January, dozens of Yoon supporters stormed a courthouse after a judge approved his arrest warrant, smashing windows in scenes that shocked the country. The riot drew on conspiracy theories that had taken hold during Yoon’s presidency, including false claims that elections were “stolen” and that China had assisted in manipulating votes. These narratives have since broadened into a wider wave of anti-China sentiment in parts of the right. Over the past year, youth-led groups have held regular rallies in central Seoul with slogans such as “China out”. The conservative People Power party, which Yoon was once part of, issued a rare apology on Wednesday. Its floor leader, Song Eon-seog, acknowledged “heavy responsibility” for failing to prevent the crisis. But the party remains deeply split over whether to break with Yoon and his supporters. Its latest approval rating stands at 37%, below that of President Lee’s Democratic party’s 45%. Lee’s government, meanwhile, has launched a sweeping review and a nationwide investigation into over 700,000 civil servants is under way, partly relying on anonymous tipoffs and searches of mobile phones that have raised concerns about invasions of privacy and overreach. Police on Monday issued their own apology, with acting commissioner Yoo Jae-seong admitting officers unlawfully blocked lawmakers from entering parliament on the night of the martial law attempt. “Due to [the] wrong judgment by some leadership,” he said, “police caused great disappointment and pain to the people.” In its editorial on Wednesday, the conservative Chosun Ilbo wrote that “punishment for martial law is inevitable”, but accused the Lee administration of an unprecedented “rampage and tyranny” in the way it has governed since taking office. The liberal Hankyoreh, by contrast, warned that sluggish investigations and stalled court proceedings risk enabling insufficient accountability. Addressing foreign correspondents on Wednesday, Lee said he hoped South Korea’s “beautiful and peaceful citizen revolution” and the restoration of democracy could stand as a model for other countries. Lee also announced plans to designate 3 December as “National Sovereignty Day”. On Wednesday evening, he was scheduled to join crowds again carrying lightsticks in central Seoul, returning to the same streets where last year’s crisis unfolded. But the country’s political healing will take far longer, said Hannah Kim from Sogang University. “Genuine reconciliation and meaningful reforms will be necessary to address the root causes,” she said. “The trauma of the martial law episode has left lasting scars.”

Wednesday briefing: Does the new US plan put Ukraine and Russia on the path to peace?

Good morning. On Tuesday, Vladimir Putin welcomed Donald Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff to Moscow for talks on ending the war on Ukraine, nearly four years after Russia launched its full-scale invasion. The summit came amid intense diplomatic activity. Two weeks ago the US presented a 28-point peace plan to Kyiv that was widely seen as favourable to Moscow. Since then US and Ukrainian officials have met in Geneva and in Florida to rehash the plan. That revised offer was to form the basis of discussions at the summit. Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, said the updated proposal “looks better” but emphasised “it was not over yet”. The White House said it was “very optimistic” about reaching a deal. By Tuesday evening, though, there was no sign of progress as Witkoff departed Moscow and the Kremlin said the two sides were “neither further nor closer to resolving the crisis in Ukraine. There is a lot of work to be done.” European leaders had hoped this week could prove “pivotal” for the US-brokered peace talks, but admitted fears that the Putin-Witkoff summit could pile pressure on Ukraine to make concessions. Most analysts believe any substantial change to the original 28 points is unacceptable to the Kremlin. Moments before the talks began, Putin made hawkish remarks accusing European governments of sabotaging the peace process. He added: “Russia does not intend to fight Europe, but if Europe starts, we are ready right now.” To unpick the rehashed plan, and whether any real progress is on the cards, for today’s newsletter I spoke to Pjotr Sauer, Russian affairs reporter for the Guardian. But first the headlines. Five big stories UK news | The families of those who died in the 1989 Hillsborough disaster have said it is a “bitter injustice” that no police officer will ever be held accountable for failings set out in the final report of the police watchdog after a 14-year investigation. The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) found that 12 officers would have faced proceedings if they had not since retired. Royal family | The public accounts committee is to launch an inquiry into the crown estate and its leases on properties to members of the royal family after questions over the letting of Royal Lodge to Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor. Justice | David Lammy has been accused of making a “massive mistake” by Labour MPs and peers after announcing radical plans to cut thousands of jury trials across England and Wales. Policing | A quarter of police forces in England and Wales are yet to implement “basic policies for investigating sexual offences”, an official report has found. Gender | Trans girls will no longer be able to join Girlguiding, the organisation has announced, saying it has made the decision after seeking legal advice as a result of the supreme court ruling on gender earlier this year. In depth: ‘Everything points to the fact that Russia is not going to accept any revisions’ While Ukraine has signalled it is ready to move towards peace, Putin has shown little appetite for compromise. From the start, the optics for progress did not seem favourable. On Monday, the night before the Putin-Witkoff summit, Russian TV showed carefully curated pictures of Putin in military fatigues. From a command post, he delivered a speech claiming Russian forces had taken control of the strategic city of Pokrovsk in Ukraine. Yesterday, Ukraine denied Pokrovsk had fallen, saying its forces remained in control of the northern part of the city. For more on the 18-month battle for Pokrovsk, read Dan Sabbagh’s excellent feature from the scene. “The message was: we’re winning this war, so it’s better to pressure Ukraine into peace,” said Pjotr. “Or, you know, wait for us to continue fighting, and then Ukraine will be in an even worse situation.” Ahead of the talks, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov had signalled that while Putin and Witkoff would discuss the “understandings” reached between Washington and Kyiv, Russia would insist on achieving the goals of its “special operation”. Those goals – including deep cuts to Ukraine’s armed forces, a ban on western military assistance, limits on political independence and the handover of Ukrainian territory in the east that Russia does not hold – would severely erode Ukraine’s sovereignty. Moscow has also been insisting that Ukraine pledge never to join Nato and accept caps on the size of its armed forces. Putin’s remarks on Europe, moments before the talks, appeared to be an attempt to drive a wedge between Washington and Europe, which have backed Kyiv in proposing revisions to the initial 28-point peace plan that favoured Moscow. “European demands are not acceptable to Russia,” Putin declared – but did not clarify exactly which European demands on Ukraine he found unacceptable. *** What is Putin planning? The Russian president early on said the original draft proposal “could form the basis for future agreements”. But towards the end of last week, he said that even if both sides do agree a peace deal, it still isn’t possible because Russia doesn’t consider Zelenskyy to be a legitimate leader. “His thinking is actually relatively consistent,” said Pjotr. “Yes, they’re open for a peace deal, but one that would be completely on Russia’s terms. “Obviously, Ukrainian officials sat together with US officials over the weekend in Florida, and they rehashed this plan. But I think everything points to the fact that Russia is not going to accept any revisions. “The Russians see this as a win-win situation,” said Pjotr, where either the plan they want goes ahead or they “just keep on fighting”. And Putin has said he is perfectly happy to do just that. In this piece, Pjotr said that the Russian newspaper often described as “Putin’s favourite”, Komsomolskaya Pravda, implied that Moscow views the latest US-Ukrainian talks as a dead end, claiming Kyiv is refusing to capitulate. “The US has tried for the third time in the past 10 days to pressure Ukraine, and Washington has once again failed,” it said. *** Will Witkoff have put any pressure on Putin? If Russia doesn’t make any progress on peace then it would seem “logical” to exert pressure, reminding Putin he may face consequences from the US, said Pjotr. However, Witkoff – a former property developer recently exposed for coaching Russian officials on how to win Trump’s favour – is unlikely to get involved in that. Other meetings between the two have been “quite friendly”, in sharp contrast to the often “quite intense” US meetings with the Ukrainians where Zelenskyy and his negotiators have been put under pressure “every time”. “Witkoff is not ideological, he’s a purely transactional person who has no diplomatic experience,” Pjotr said. “The Russians themselves realise Witkoff isn’t an experienced diplomat.” A phone call leaked to Bloomberg last week between Witkoff and the Kremlin, in which the Trump envoy was coaching Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov on the best way to get into the US president’s favour, was interpreted by many as being proof of Witkoff’s closeness to the Russian position during negotiations. The leak showed Witkoff is “sympathetic” to the Russian position, said Pjotr. “He thinks: ‘If only Ukraine just gives up this land, then we can get a deal with everyone.’ That’s Witkoff’s philosophy.” *** What will Trump be looking for? Over the past few months, it appeared that Trump “realised it was Putin who was the main obstacle” to any peace, Pjotr said. But that shifted again after this 28-point peace plan was put forward. Trump started blasting the Ukrainians again, calling them “ungrateful”. “It is difficult to predict,” Pjotr said. Russia has been “walking a diplomatic tightrope” between not coming off as rejecting a peace plan, which would anger Trump, and not accepting a peace plan that does not explicitly favour Russia. “There is a danger that Russia says: ‘Listen, we are on paper, ready for peace. If only Ukraine does this, this and this.’ Then Witkoff might go back to Trump saying, well, if peace is to be reached, Ukraine has to give up land and compromise on a few other points.” *** Can the US find a peace plan that works for everyone? “That’s a really difficult question,” said Pjotr. “Ukraine is ready to compromise. But Russia thinks ‘Why compromise now? In two, three months, our position will be stronger.’ That’s what they believe. It’s hard to know, but they are capturing cities slowly.” Trump’s approval ratings at home are at a historic low. After delivering what the president said was a peace plan in Gaza, he believed that he could do the same with Russia and Ukraine – but it has turned out to be much harder. “At some point he might just walk away,” said Pjotr. “That is not something that Russia is scared of. Russia would not shed a tear. But it would leave Ukraine quite vulnerable and exposed.” What else we’ve been reading Life Invisible is a new Guardian documentary following Cristina Dorador as she seeks discoveries to aid the fight against superbugs in the driest place on Earth. Martin This collection of “most loved’ and “most hated” Christmas hits of “professional” Santas, as told to Dave Simpson, made me smile. Karen A deeply worrying read from Sally Weale about the growing prevalence of the use of “nudify” apps to generate deepfake sexual images in schools. Martin The House of Lords, which will examine the assisted dying law this month, should argue it should not be implemented until a promised and much-needed overhaul of end of life care, says Gordon Brown. Karen Cullen Poythress chatted with Henry Rollins for Huck magazine in a nostalgic look back at how the worlds of punk and skateboarding collided. Martin Sport Premier League | Erling Haaland scored his 100th Premier League goal and Phil Foden added a double as Manchester City beat Fulham 5-4 after leading 5-1. Cristian Romero scored an unlikely double with his injury-time overhead kick snatching a 2-2 draw for Tottenham at Newcastle. More results Football | An early goal from Lucia Kendall, who earned praise from Sarina Wiegman, and a late penalty from Alessia Russo gave England a 2-0 win against Ghana in their friendly. Cricket | The former England cricketer Robin Smith has died at the age of 62, with his former county Hampshire saying they were devastated by his loss. The front pages The Guardian splashes on “‘A bitter injustice’: no officers will face discipline over Hillsborough”. “No justice” is the Mirror’s main headline, under the banner “Hillsborough: police shame” and the i has “Still no justice”. “Lammy: the jury’s out” – that’s the Metro on proposed reforms to court trials. Elsewhere in politics the Financial Times runs with “Farage tells Reform donors he expects tie-up with Tories before next election” and the Telegraph has “Treasury mandarin dragged into OBR row”. An OECD assessment of the Reeves budget leads the Times: “Economists warn of low growth and higher bills”. The Mail’s top story is “‘Cut-price’ royal rents under fire”. The late Sarah Everard is on the front of the Express with a quote from a damning report, urging action to prevent violent deaths like hers: “No better time to act than now as there are lives at stake”. Today in Focus The 27-year-old white supremacist radicalising Maga Where is Nick Fuentes trying to lead the Republican party? J Oliver Conroy reports Cartoon of the day | Ella Baron The Upside A bit of good news to remind you that the world’s not all bad Four years ago, workers at a Starbucks store in Buffalo, New York voted to unionise – a move that defied intense resistance from the coffee chain and opened the floodgates for hundreds of stores to follow. Initially a local organising effort, about 2,500 workers across 120 stores and 85 cities are striking during the American coffee chain’s crucial holiday season. A promised reset under the new CEO, Brian Niccol, has instead unravelled into deepening tensions, with workers accusing Starbucks of fighting their efforts at every turn. Despite the company claiming that less than 1% of its coffee houses have been affected by the action, Starbucks Workers United insists it is prepared to escalate unless meaningful concessions are made – a sign, they say, that after years of pushback, “we’re not going anywhere”. Sign up here for a weekly roundup of The Upside, sent to you every Sunday Bored at work? And finally, the Guardian’s puzzles are here to keep you entertained throughout the day. Until tomorrow. Quick crossword Cryptic crossword Wordiply

Search for Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 to resume more than 11 years after plane went missing

The search for the missing Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 will resume this month, the Malaysian transport ministry has said, more than a decade after the plane disappeared in one of aviation’s greatest mysteries. In a statement on Wednesday, the transport ministry confirmed the search would resume on 30 December, saying that US-based robotic company Ocean Infinity would recommence a search of the seabed over a period of 55 days, conducted intermittently. It said the new search operations would target areas where it is believed there is the highest likelihood of finding the missing aircraft, though details of the exact locations have not been given. Flight MH370 veered off course and vanished from air traffic radar on 8 March 2014, during a routine flight from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing. It was carrying 12 Malaysian crew and 227 passengers, most of whom were Chinese citizens. Thirty-eight Malaysian passengers were on board, along with seven Australian citizens and residents, plus citizens from Indonesia, India, France, the US, Iran, Ukraine, Canada, New Zealand, the Netherlands, Russia and Taiwan. Danica Weeks, whose husband Paul, an Australian citizen, was onboard, welcomed news of the renewed search efforts, saying she was “incredibly grateful and relieved that the Malaysian government has committed to continuing the search”. “We’ve never stopped wishing for answers, and knowing the search will go on brings a sense of comfort. I truly hope this next phase gives us the clarity and peace we’ve been so desperately longing for, for us and our loved ones, since March 8th 2014,” said Weeks. In the years since the disappearance, vast swathes of the Indian Ocean have been scoured to locate the plane’s wreckage through both multinational and private efforts, without success. Last year, Malaysia said it was willing to reopen an investigation into the disappearance if there was compelling new evidence. It agreed to a “no-find, no-fee” contract with Ocean Infinity to resume searching across a new 15,000 sq km (5,800 sq mile) site in the ocean. Under the agreement, Ocean Infinity will be paid $70m only if wreckage is discovered. However, the most recent search activity in the southern Indian Ocean was suspended in in April this year due to poor weather conditions. Flight MH370, a B777-200 aircraft, had departed Kuala Lumpur at 12.41am local time on 8 March 2014, bound for Beijing. The plane was last seen on military radar at 2.14am, heading west over the strait of Malacca. Half an hour later, the airline announced it had lost contact with the plane, which was due to land at its destination about 6.30am. The families of those onboard have long campaigned for accountability, saying answers are needed to prevent another tragedy. Some travelled to Madagascar in 2016 to comb the beaches there for debris: pieces of the plane had been found off the Tanzanian and Mozambican coasts. In January 2017, Malaysian, Australian and Chinese authorities announced the end of an underwater hunt for the wreckage after two and a half years spent by Australian teams searching 120,000 sq km in the southern Indian Ocean. Later that year, Australian investigators delivered their final report on the disappearance, saying the inability to bring closure for victims’ families was a “great tragedy” and “almost inconceivable” in the modern age. In 2018, an official investigation by Malaysia concluded the plane was manually turned around in mid-air, rather than being under the control of autopilot, and that “unlawful interference by a third party” could not be ruled out. However, it dismissed theories that had suggested the pilot and first officer brought the plane down in a suicide mission, and ruled out mechanical failure as a cause. In a statement on Wednesday, the Malaysian transport ministry said: “The latest development underscores the government of Malaysia’s commitment in providing closure to the families affected by this tragedy.”

UK government delays decision on China’s super-embassy until January

The government has delayed its decision on whether to approve China’s super-embassy in London until January, when Keir Starmer is expected to visit Beijing. Ministers are expected to greenlight the controversial plans after formal submissions by the Home Office and Foreign Office raised no objections on security grounds. The Guardian reported last month that the security services had signalled to ministers that they could handle the security risks of the embassy, which would be China’s biggest diplomatic outpost in the world. A government spokesperson said on Tuesday that consolidating China’s seven existing diplomatic sites in London into a single embassy “clearly brings security advantages”. The Chinese government has agreed to combine all its diplomatic premises in London into the Royal Mint Court site, which spans 20,000 sq metres near Tower Bridge in London. The final decision on whether to grant planning permission has been delayed to 20 January, around the time when the prime minister is planning to travel to China for bilateral talks. It is the third time ministers have deferred the decision. Starmer would be the first prime minister to visit Beijing since Theresa May in 2018. In a speech on Monday night, he argued that the government could not continue to blow “hot and cold” on China and needed to strike a balance. “We had the golden age, which then flipped to an ice age. We reject that binary choice,” he said, describing China as a “nation of immense scale, ambition and ingenuity” and “a defining force in technology, in trade and global governance”. “Our response will not be driven by fear, nor softened by illusion. It will be grounded in strength, clarity and sober realism,” Starmer said. In a letter sent to concerned parties and released by the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China, the home secretary, Shabana Mahmood, and foreign secretary, Yvette Cooper, said their departments had “carefully considered the breadth of considerations” related to the proposed embassy. They said they had worked with police and others to ensure national security issues had been addressed and recognised “the importance of countries having functioning diplomatic premises in each other’s capitals, whilst maintaining the critical need to uphold and defend our national security”. The plan has met fierce opposition from some local residents and campaigners who are concerned about Beijing’s human rights record in Hong Kong and the Xinjiang region. Several protests have taken place near the site in recent months. A government spokesperson said: “An independent planning decision will be made by the secretary of state for housing, communities and local government in due course.” “The Home Office and Foreign Office provided views on particular security implications of this build in January and have been clear throughout that a decision should not be taken until we had confirmed that those considerations had been completed or resolved, which we have now done. “Should the planning decision for a new embassy in the London borough of Tower Hamlets be approved, the new embassy will replace seven different sites which currently comprise China’s diplomatic footprint in London which clearly brings security advantages.” A spokesperson for the Chinese embassy said: “We strongly deplore the UK side’s repeated postponement of the decision on the planning application for the new Chinese embassy project.” The spokesperson called on the UK to approve the planning application quickly “to avoid further undermining the mutual trust and cooperation between the two sides”. China bought the Royal Mint Court site for £255m in 2018, but its plans to build an embassy there stalled after Tower Hamlets council refused planning permission in 2022. The Conservative government declined to intervene but Labour took the matter out of the council’s hands by calling it in soon after taking power last summer.

‘A king above all’: The rise and rise of Asim Munir, Pakistan’s increasingly powerful army chief

Since it was penned in 1973, Pakistan’s constitution has been dealt many blows. Originally a statement of democracy, it was just a matter of years before a pattern of endless constitutional amendments began, validating successive coups and military dictatorships. Yet for the past 15 years, the constitution had – at least on the surface – returned Pakistan to some semblance of civilian rule. That was until last month. As parliament rushed to pass the 27th amendment, critics and analysts widely decried it as a “constitutional coup” that would enshrine military dominance over Pakistan in perpetuity. “There is no constitution in Pakistan now. No judiciary. No social contract. The amendment is an unforgivable crime against the country” said Mahmood Khan Achakzai, the chair of the opposition alliance known as Tehreek Tahafuz Ayeen-e-Pakistan. “They have made one man into a king above all.” It was widely acknowledged that there was really just one beneficiary to the 27th amendment. General Asim Munir, Pakistan’s army chief, was already the most powerful man in the country. Now, however, he is set to become one of the most powerful generals in the country’s history, with privileges akin to those of past military dictators. Munir will oversee not just the army but also the navy and air force. His five-year term will restart, and has the possibility to be extended again, raising the prospect of him remaining in his role for at least another decade – an unprecedented term. He has also been granted lifelong immunity from criminal prosecution. The amendment has also been accused of being a direct attack on Pakistan’s already-beleaguered judiciary. A new constitutional court, where judges are picked by the government, will replace the supreme court. Several senior judges have resigned in protest, claiming that the only remaining check on executive and military power has been crushed. “It’s military rule, martial law by any other name,” said Ayyaz Mallick, a lecturer in human geography, specialising in Pakistan, at the University of Liverpool. “During direct forms of military rule in Pakistan we saw exactly the same thing happen.” The amendment also prompted criticism from UN high commissioner for human rights Volker Turk, who warned of “far-reaching consequences for the principles of democracy and rule of law”. To many observers, this was Munir seizing his moment. After an election in 2024 that was marred by documented allegations of rigging and bias, Pakistan’s ruling coalition government is widely seen as weak, unpopular and illegitimate, solely dependent on the backing of Munir – what Mallick described as a “military ventilator” – to stay in power. Meanwhile, Munir has been riding a wave of popularity after hostilities with neighbour and rival India broke out in May, which saw cross-border drone and missile strikes launched by both sides. After Pakistan claimed to have shot down several Indian jets, Munir claimed victory over India, prompting a wave of militaristic and jingoistic fervour to grip the country. The India clashes were nothing short of a “godsend” for Munir, said Mallick, with the army chief promoted to post of five-star general. Munir began to position himself as something of a global statesman. After Pakistan nominated Donald Trump for the Nobel peace prize for his supposed role in bringing India and Pakistan back from the brink of war, Munir had an unprecedented two meetings with the US president in Washington. For Pakistan, which has been shut out by the White House for a decade, Munir’s perceived success in bringing the country in from the cold – even earning the title of Trump’s “favourite field marshal” – elevated his position further. Munir was also at the forefront as Pakistan signed a significant defence pact with Saudi Arabia in September. To many, the level of power that now rests in Munir’s hands was revealed by the speed at which the 27th constitutional amendment was approved. While previous amendments were discussed, revised and debated on for weeks by parliament, it took just a couple of hours for it to sail through both the senate and then the lower house with the necessary two-thirds majority, with only minor tweaks. “What we have now is a political government whose legitimacy is so fragile that without the military’s backing, it would basically be nowhere,” said Farzana Shaikh, associate Fellow of the Asia-Pacific programme at Chatham House. “And Munir has seized this opportunity.” While Shaikh emphasised that Pakistan’s history was one of political parties enabling the military for their own short-term political gain, she added, “it’s still extraordinary seeing two parties cave in the manner they have.” The consequences, she added, were grave. “There’s no question that it is a significant – I would say the most significant – setback to any kind of transition towards an accountable government, let alone democracy,” said Shaikh. “This constitutional amendment allows Munir to act with complete impunity. It’s an extremely dangerous situation.” Concerns have also been raised within the army at Munir’s newfound concentration of power over all three branches of the military, in particular its consequences for his authority over Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal. Some raised concerns that Munir – whose reputation is one of a “reckless operator” and an ideologue, especially when it comes to his hardline approach to India – would now have unparalleled control over nuclear command. One retired senior general, who spoke anonymously for fear of retribution, called the amendment “disastrous” and said resentment “has already begun among other forces, in the navy and air force. The proposed amendment does not benefit the defence structure; rather it benefits just one individual”. Streamlining the nuclear command under singular army control – effectively removing all civilian government oversight – was also “deeply problematic”, he added. Defence minister Khawaja Asif, among those who voted in favour of the amendment, refuted the criticism. “Pakistan’s armed forces are part of the state and if they do good work, we support them and stand by them,” he said. “Parliament bestowed immunity upon Field Marshall Munir because he won the war against India for the country. Saying he is all-powerful is just speculation.” To some, the amendment simply codified a longstanding arrangement, that of the military de facto running the country and manoeuvring politics. Since he became army chief, it was Munir who was seen to have engineered the crackdown against popular former prime minister Imran Khan and his Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party. Khan and senior PTI leaders are all now behind bars, after they challenged military interference in Pakistani politics. Two serving cabinet ministers, finance and interior, are both recognised as Munir appointments. Yet, as Walter Ladwig, senior associate professor in International Relations at King’s College London, emphasised, “the long-term implications of this are profound”. “If there were ever an effort to try to reverse or rebalance power away from the military and back under civilian control, undoing this amendment will be significant feat,” he said. “Munir is now harder to remove than the prime minister or the president or any army chief who came before him.” Nonetheless, analysts pointed out that Munir’s newfound power also came with challenges. Pakistan is grappling with two domestic terrorist insurgencies as well as hostilities with neighbours India and Afghanistan, and the country is also in the midst of a severe economic crisis that he has been unable to fix. Munir was not the first Pakistan general to come up with a plan to retain power for years, Mallick noted; the country’s last military dictator Pervez Musharraf had one that spanned decades, before widespread dissatisfaction toppled him. “As history also shows, these long-term plans by generals never really work in Pakistan,” he said. “If money doesn’t flow in, the whole thing falls apart.”