Nato summit: Trump says US could let Ukraine make Patriot missiles after meeting with Zelenskyy – Europe live
Defence and security editor in Ankara We’ve moved reluctantly and the room is now clearing.
UK judges begin hearing appeal over Trinidad and Tobago anti-gay law
Some of the UK’s top judges are hearing arguments over whether a Trinidad and Tobago court had the legal right to overturn a 2018 ruling to remove colonial-era homophobic laws that criminalise anal sex between consenting men. The country’s “buggery law”, often referred to as its “sodomy” law, was created in 1925 and was written into Trinidad and Tobago’s 1986 Sexual Offences Act. In 2017 a Trinidadian LGBTQ+ rights activist, Jason Jones, challenged the law, and in 2018 a high court ruled that it infringed upon his constitutional right to privacy and equality. Last year a court of appeal quashed that decision after an intervention by the country’s attorney general. Now Jones’s appeal is being heard by the London-based judicial committee of the privy council (JCPC), the highest court of appeal for the UK’s overseas territories, crown dependencies and several independent Commonwealth countries. It shares the same judges as the UK supreme court. Activists across the Caribbean are closely watching the proceedings, in which an outcome is expected in three to six months’ time. The Bahamas decriminalised homosexuality in 1991 and the UK government repealed such laws in 2001 in Anguilla, the British Virgin Islands, the Cayman Islands, Montserrat and the Turks and Caicos Islands. Recently, judges have struck down similar laws in Barbados, Dominica, St Lucia and Antigua and Barbuda. However, anal sex remains a crime in Guyana, Grenada, Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago and St Vincent and the Grenadines. The Trinidadian government is opposing Jones in the case. On Tuesday the prime minister, Kamla Persad-Bissessar, argued that the case could have a wide-ranging impact by also potentially affecting other “savings clauses” – laws imposed on Caribbean nations when they were still British colonies to ensure they preserved British laws after independence. “This ruling is going to be a very profound decision, not just impacting on sodomy laws but that whole issue of the saving clause. We have a lot of colonial laws that were saved, so this will give us guidance as to which ones we keep, which ones we don’t keep,” Persad-Bissessar told the Guardian in an interview at a Caribbean leaders’ summit in St Lucia. Darrell Allahar, a minister in the office of the prime minister and one of Persad-Bissessar’s lawyers, described the privy council hearing as a “very good exercise”. “We want to get the court’s view because the issue is more than the sodomy laws, the issue has to do with what is called the savings clause, which is a feature of all of our constitutions in the English-speaking Caribbean,” he said. He added that the clauses were created “to save existing laws at independence so we don’t have a wholesale gutting of those laws in light of the human rights provisions”. Jones, 61, said the case should never have had to reach the British court. “At any time over the last decade of my legal challenge, the state and indeed parliament could have put a stop to this and just removed these heinous laws themselves,” he said. “They have wasted millions of taxpayers’ money fighting me.” He said the law, under which a person can be jailed for up to five years for consensual same-sex intimacy, “dehumanises LGBTQ+ people. It makes us both a criminal and a victim at the same time.” Jones said he was confident he had a strong case. “The privy council will never uphold a 500-year-old homophobic piece of British law that goes against the rights of the individual. Not in 2026,” he said. “I know I’m on the right side of history.” Leo Varadkar, Ireland’s former taoiseach and a global LGBTQI and human rights fellow at Harvard University, said in an interview that the only five countries in the Americas that continued to outlaw homosexuality were under former British rule. He pointed to the irony that “colonial-era laws that have long since been repealed in the United Kingdom itself” remained active in former colonies. In a paper for Harvard last week, Varadkar wrote: “From Canada in the north to Chile in the south, homosexuality has been long since been decriminalised in the 35 countries that make up the Americas” apart from Jamaica, Guyana, St Vincent and the Grenadines, Trinidad and Tobago, and Grenada. “All are anglophone and formerly part of the British empire. This is not a coincidence.” He noted that the UK judges would preside over this week’s hearing in the knowledge that “human rights and freedoms, including the right to privacy and control over what happens to one’s own body and in one’s own bedroom”, were enshrined in British law.
Middle East crisis live: Trump threatens US will hit Iran ‘hard again tonight’ after saying truce is over
Trump threatened to “take over Kharg Island”, a critical hub for Iran’s oil exports that lies in the Gulf, and warned he may reinstate the US naval blockade of Iranian ports.
Nato leaders agree not to mention World Cup to Donald Trump to avoid irritating him
Nato leaders have informally agreed not to mention the football World Cup to Donald Trump for fear of irritating the US president at a crucial time for the military alliance. Officials said European leaders had discussed in the sidelines of the summit in Ankara how to keep Trump on side amid concerns he could further destabilise Nato with threats over defence spending. They are already working together to reassure the US president they are pulling their weight financially by building “a stronger and more European Nato” with each member on track to spend 5% of GDP on defence by 2035. In the first open acknowledgment of the strategy, the Belgian prime minister, Bart De Wever, told reporters in Ankara he would not be discussing his country’s 4-1 win over the US earlier this week. The summit follows a row caused by Trump asking the Fifa president, Gianni Infantino, to review the red card shown to the US striker Folarin Balogun, meaning he could then play in the match against Belgium. Before meeting Trump at the summit, De Wever joked to reporters that the US president “has the reputation of sometimes reacting a bit irritably to things that he doesn’t like, and I think this defeat will hit hard”. De Wever said Belgium’s footballing triumph against the US had dominated his early discussions in Ankara. “Everyone’s talking about one thing, and that is congratulations for the well deserved victory of the Red Devils,” he said, the nickname for the national side. “Of course, the losing party is also present. That also happens to be the biggest partner in Nato.” Asked whether he was worried Trump could be annoyed that the US had dropped out of the tournament, he told the Flemish broadcaster VRT: “I’m not going to start [talking] about it myself. But if he were to say something about it, then I’ll see what that is and how I can react to it.” Trump has yet to comment about the US team’s defeat, but was mocked during the match by several Belgian players mimicking his signature dance move after their fourth goal. In the run-up to England’s quarter-finals match against Norway on Saturday, Keir Starmer teased his Norwegian counterpart that England “only win the World Cup under Labour governments”. The prime minister exchanged banter with Jonas Gahr Støre after a meeting in Ankara during which they wore their respective national team shirts.
Marine Le Pen launches France presidential campaign after ban reduced
The French far-right leader Marine Le Pen has launched her presidential campaign after a decision by a court of appeal shortened her ban on running for office, allowing her to take part in the 2027 vote. Le Pen said voters would decide her future. “I’m a citizen like anyone else, who is using their rights,” she said on Wednesday, attempting to brush aside legal woes that her political opponents said would plague her campaign for next spring’s presidential election. On Tuesday, a court of appeal upheld Le Pen’s conviction for playing a key role in orchestrating a fake-jobs scam of unprecedented size and duration. Le Pen, the figurehead of the far-right, anti-immigration National Rally party (RN), was found guilty of being at the centre of the embezzlement of more than €2.8m (£2.4m) in European parliament funds and funnelling the money into her party in Paris between 2004 and 2016. Although her ban on running for office was shortened, opening the possibility of a presidential campaign, she was also handed a form of one-year custodial sentence in which she would have to wear an electronic ankle tag restricting her movements to and from her home. This sentence would have complicated her ability to campaign, and she had previously said she would not run for president under such restrictions. But Le Pen said on Wednesday she would appeal to France’s highest court, the Court of Cassation, on a point of law. While she lodges that appeal, her sentence will be put on hold. This meant she could run without wearing an electronic tag, she said. In La Flèche, a town in La Sarthe, Le Pen arrived for a market walkabout while some leftwing protesters shouted “thief”, “criminal” and “prison”. Crowds of supporters gathered to take selfies and cheer her on in the town, which recently voted in an RN mayor. Le Pen, who is seen as able to potentially reach the final round of the presidential race, was asked by reporters if she was simply stalling the justice system by lodging an appeal over legal technicalities to France’s highest court. She said: “I’m not playing for time.” She said she was “innocent” of all charges. Facing a barrage of questions from reporters on the complexities of her legal case, Le Pen said: “I’m not going to spend the campaign on legal analysis … What I want now is to talk about politics because that is about French people’s futures and they want solutions to their daily problems like the cost of living, security issues, deindustrialisation and low salaries.” But French politics is now dominated by the legal uncertainty surrounding Le Pen and whether there is any possibility she could end up having to wear an electronic tag close to the two-round vote in April and May. “Marine Le Pen is a delinquent,” said the socialist MP Boris Vallaud. “She’s a delinquent who was convicted in a first trial [in 2025] and then on appeal [this week].” Gabriel Attal, the former prime minister who is hoping to run as a centrist, said: “Her candidacy is hanging by a legal thread.” He said Le Pen had taken the campaign “hostage”. Manuel Bompard, of Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s radical left party, La France Insoumise, said it was “extraordinary” that Le Pen would decide to run just after an appeal court upheld her conviction for embezzlement. Le Pen’s lawyer, Rodolphe Bosselut, admitted on French radio that running for president while lodging an appeal to France’s highest court was “a risk”. The Court of Cassation had previously suggested it could return a verdict on Le Pen’s case early next year, although it usually takes longer. It is not mandated to look at the facts of the case, but just to rule on whether correct legal form has been followed. If the court ruled in Le Pen’s favour that correct legal form was not respected, she would face another trial. But there would not be time to organise a new trial before the presidential vote. If the court rules against Le Pen and decides that correct form was followed, then her conviction and sentence would become definitive. She could in theory face having to begin her sentence with an electronic ankle bracelet in the weeks before the election. However, the process of organising and fitting electronic monitoring often takes many months, which could allow her to reach the presidency without wearing a tag. If Le Pen were to win the presidency in May before an electronic tag had been fitted, she would have presidential immunity for her term in office and would not face wearing an electronic tag until she left office.
Race discrimination case over child’s swim puts ‘Dutch paradox’ in focus
When Henri Duiker went to check whether his 12-year-old son and his friend were enjoying their first “disco” swim evening alone, he was baffled. Instead of being in the water, Henri’s son was standing alone by the desk at the Watergeus pool, in Zoetermeer in the Netherlands. He did not have any ID to prove he was under 13 and pool attendants had told him he could not swim – although his friend of the same age and size had not been not asked for his documents. As Duiker’s partner watched for 10 minutes, only children of colour were asked to prove their age. “She saw that every white child was simply allowed to walk through, and every black child, without exception, was asked for their passport,” Duiker said, reflecting on that Friday evening in 2024. “And if they didn’t have it, they weren’t allowed in.” Last month he won a ruling from the Netherlands Institute for Human Rights: the company Optisport Zoetermeer, which runs the municipal pool, had used unlawful racial discrimination. The incident has prompted a reckoning in the city, with councillors from three parties asking formal questions about how this could have happened. It was not an isolated incident: last week the Dutch football association asked police to investigate online racist abuse towards World Cup players, and at an event commemorating the abolition of slavery, the Dutch prime minister, Rob Jetten, admitted discrimination and racism were “still systematically present and deeply rooted”. In Europe and North America, swimming pools have often become focal points for racial tension and exclusion. Last month a open-air swimming venue in Germany was ordered to lift a ban on bathers who do not speak German or face possible legal action. Duiker’s son was allowed in after he vouched for him, but Duiker said the incident was a reminder of an uncomfortable reality sometimes called the “Dutch paradox”: because of their own widespread rights and freedoms, some people do not acknowledge the existence of racism. “People act as though the Netherlands is so tolerant,” Duiker said, mildly. “Maybe it is … but it’s pretty awful to show children of 10, 11 and 12 that they are not equal. You are showing them that whatever you do, however you live, you are never the same as a white child.” Duiker complained to the pool management on the day of the incident. When it dismissed his formal complaint, he went to the national anti-discrimination helpline, Discriminatie.nl, which referred him to the Netherlands Institute for Human Rights, which issues non-binding rulings that can be used in court action. Optisport argued in written evidence and at a hearing that the 10-minute observation period was unrepresentative of a random checking policy. But in a recent formal apology letter from the chief executive, it told Duiker: “The specific control measure applied on the evening of 12 July 2024 was abolished after that date.” Duiker, who has received hateful messages for speaking out in Dutch media, believes his country needs to take reports of unequal treatment more seriously. “People act in the Netherlands as though things are fine, and the worst thing is that when it happens to you, you hardly dare to say anything,” he said. “Because the first thing they say is: ‘Oh, he’s playing the racism card again.’ The people who don’t want to see it are not going to see it.” In 2019, the UN special rapporteur E Tendayi Achiume was fiercely criticised after describing the “Dutch paradox” where equality and tolerance were seen as national values but people of minority ethnic origins were often characterised as “neither truly nor wholly Netherlanders”. Three years later, the then finance minister, Marnix van Rij, admitted institutional racism played a role in tax office fraud risk selection. A childcare benefits scandal falsely accusing thousands of parents of fraud disproportionately affected families with dual nationality, according to the government. In Zoetermeer, a deputy mayor has met Duiker, and two liberal progressive councillors, Shaniqua Monsels and Yasir el Achkar, are determined to put the issue on the agenda. “At first we wondered if we should pay attention to this in public or behind the scenes,” El Achkar said. “But [Duiker] made it clear that many more children were discriminated against and wanted it to be visible to them, and to society, that he fought and we all won. We thought that was very powerful.” The council and the swimming pool management company have accepted the ruling. Zoetermeer municipality in a statement: “We are very saddened to hear that a child has been treated unequally, something that is unacceptable. We are an inclusive city where all residents, particularly children and young people, feel welcome, safe and are treated equally – and where there is no place for discrimination.” Albert Arp, the chief executive of Optisport, said everyone should feel equally treated in the roughly 400 sports facilities it runs in the Netherlands and Belgium. “We take the ruling … seriously,” he said. “In response, we have reviewed our procedures for access and age verification. We believe such checks must always be carried out carefully, objectively and in a verifiable manner. We have been in contact with the family involved and have offered our sincere apologies.” Duiker would have preferred the apology two years ago, before the political and media attention. “I have Surinamese parents, I am a Dutchman … but 53 years later I’m still a foreigner for some people,” he said. “This is about my son and all of the other children who don’t dare to fight.”
Trump declares ceasefire with Iran over during angry broadside at Nato summit
Donald Trump has declared that the ceasefire with Iran is over as he arrived at the Nato summit in Ankara, launching an angry broadside in which he complained about the military alliance and repeated his demand for Greenland. The US president, sitting alongside the Nato secretary general, Mark Rutte, called Iran’s leadership scum and “sick people”, and added that he was “very upset” with the alliance and even threatened to cut off all trade with Spain in a row over defence spending. Overnight, the US had launched strikes on more than 80 Iranian targets around the strait of Hormuz and revoked a temporary sanctions waiver for Tehran to export oil after Iranian attacks on three commercial vessels on Tuesday. When asked whether he thought the ceasefire was still in place as he met Rutte in Turkey, Trump said: “I think it’s over. I don’t want to deal with them any more. They’re scum. You know what scum is? They’re scum. “They’re sick people. They’re led by sick people and they’re vicious, violent people. And if they had a nuclear weapon, they’d use it. As far as I’m concerned, it’s over.” However, he added that US negotiators wanted to keep talking. European leaders were concerned Trump was in a bad mood after a Nato dinner on Tuesday night and were bracing themselves for a difficult summit meeting on Wednesday morning as the situation in the Middle East deteriorated. That was confirmed when Trump sat down next to Rutte and began a diatribe, starting with Iran. The president then returned to issues and themes that have irritated him during a year in which he started a war with Iran that led to a hike in oil prices, a loss of control in Hormuz and a failure to resolve the nuclear issue. Trump said he was “very upset with Nato” and complained that alliance members “didn’t want to help us with the number one state sponsor of terror, that’s Iran”, a reference to a refusal by European countries apart from the UK to allow the US to carry out bombing missions from Europe’s airbases. There was a specific jibe aimed at the UK, which did not initially allow the US to use RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire for bombing missions in Iran before the British prime minister, Keir Starmer, changed his mind and allowed limited attacks on Iranian missile sites. “The United Kingdom wouldn’t let us use the island for two weeks, so we had to fly back,” Trump said, reiterating complaints he made against Starmer and Britain in the spring as the Iran war continued without the regime in Tehran collapsing. The 15-minute introduction next to Rutte became a litany of complaint. “Greenland is a big problem for us,” Trump said as he renewed his claim on the self-governing Arctic territory “very important for the United States, but it’s not important for Denmark”. Earlier, the Danish prime minister, Mette Frederiksen, said as she arrived that Denmark would defend “every inch” of its own territory and emphasised that Greenland was “of course not for sale”. There was a familiar comment about Nato defence spending from Trump, despite last year’s agreement by all members, with the exception of Spain, to lift national defence budgets to 3.5% of gross domestic product by 2035 – and so bring spending by Europe and Canada in line with the US. “I’m very upset with Nato, that we pay far, far too much,” he said. “Billions and billions of dollars, too much, because it’s unfair, because we’re protecting them, so we protect them, but they’re not there for us.” Fresh ire was reserved for Madrid given its decision to reject the 3.5% target. “Spain doesn’t agree to anything, and you shouldn’t carry them,” Trump told Rutte. “I don’t want to do any trade with them, alright?” the president said, turning to Scott Bessent, the US treasury secretary, who replied: “Yes, sir.” At first, through a mixture of flattery and occasional determined interruption, Rutte appeared to have blown Trump’s ire out – only for the US president to reignite when a journalist asked him if the Iran ceasefire was over. The secretary general, a former Dutch prime minister, said there had been only a few “isolated cases” of European Nato allies not allowing US air force flights relating to the Iran war and that on Greenland he had made a deal with Trump at the Davos summit that would see Nato jets patrolling over the Arctic. Rutte flattered Trump by saying he had persuaded allies to increase defence spending to US levels by 2035, adding that this had eluded a succession of US presidents. “You did what [President Dwight] Eisenhower tried to do,” he said, “It’s your win.” Trump, interrupting, responded “That’s why I like him” before the Iran question followed. Spanish government sources said they were greeting the US president’s latest broadside calmly. “Our country maintains an excellent social, cultural and economic relationship with the US, and we have no intention of changing that,” they said. Nato leaders have worked hard to try to Trump-proof the Ankara summit by agreeing a short draft communique in advance. It is expected to reiterate the alliance’s commitment to mutual self-defence if it is signed off by the leaders. However, a report from Bloomberg suggested Nato might not hold a summit in 2027. The hope would be to avoid a repeat of the outburst that has dominated this year’s summit, which was supposed to showcase more than $50bn (£37.5bn) in joint arms procurements, designed to show Nato members were bolstering defence spending to deter Russian aggression. Additional reporting by Sam Jones in Madrid