Read the daily news to learn English

Thursday briefing: Will Keir Starmer’s cautious China gamble pay off?

Good morning. The Starmer has landed. Yesterday, Keir Starmer became the first British prime minister to make the trip to China since Theresa May’s in 2018 (meaning a surprisingly large number of PMs didn’t) and has vowed to bring “stability and clarity” to the UK’s approach to Beijing. Ahead of talks with Starmer, Chinese leader Xi Jinping has said the UK’s relationship with his country had gone through “twists and turns” over the years but that a more “consistent” approach was in both their interests. In response, Starmer told Xi he wanted a “more sophisticated” relationship between the two countries. Number 10 is all too aware that China cannot be ignored. It is the world’s second-largest economy, a central player in the technologies shaping the future, and a geopolitical power with a clear sense of where it wants to go (which is more than can be said about the man in the White House). So what does Starmer hope to achieve from this visit, and what will Beijing be looking for in return? To understand the opportunities and risks of Britain’s China reset, I spoke to Laura Chappell, associate director for international policy at the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR). That’s after the headlines. Five big stories Iran | Donald Trump has warned time is running out for Tehran and said a massive US armada was moving quickly towards the country. Assisted Dying | Supporters of assisted dying will seek to force through the bill using an archaic parliamentary procedure if it continues to be blocked by the Lords. UK politics | Centrist ideas are no longer wanted in the Conservative party, Kemi Badenoch has said. Ofsted | A snap inspection of a Bristol secondary school criticised for postponing a visit by an MP who is a member of a group that advocates for Israel has found “no evidence of partisan political views”. BBC | The BBC has named senior executive Rhodri Talfan Davies as its interim director general, as the corporation continues the search for a permanent replacement for Tim Davie. In depth: ‘There are still things the two countries can achieve together’ Starmer joins a growing list of western leaders who have visited Beijing in recent weeks. Emmanuel Macron went in December, Mark Carney travelled there earlier this month, and Germany’s Friedrich Merz is due next. Like Carney in Davos last week, Starmer has warned that the world is entering its most unstable period in a generation. But unlike Carney, he is keen to avoid framing the trip as any kind of rupture with Washington, and to sidestep the criticism Donald Trump recently aimed at Canada over its China outreach. Instead, the UK prime minister is attempting a careful balancing act: engaging with Beijing while keeping close to both Brussels and Washington. For that reason, Laura Chappell says expectations from this meeting should be modest. “It is a more careful trip,” she says. “It’s trying to signal that we are exiting what Keir Starmer himself called an ‘Ice Age’, and that there are still things the two countries can achieve together.” By meeting Xi Jinping, he hopes to begin a cautious thaw. But, Chappell adds, “I don’t think what’s going to come out of this visit is going to be a transformational change, either in how we talk about the relationship or in major announcements that make a totemic difference to the UK’s growth trajectory.” *** The awkward relationship When I ask Chappell to describe the UK’s China policy, she lands on one word: confused. “My overall summary of how the UK treats China is that we try to tread a middle ground,” she says. “Labour’s got an articulation of this around ‘cooperate, compete, challenge’. The Conservatives have had similar phraseologies, and the US under Biden had a similar structure.” The problem, she argues, is not the language but the lack of strategic action behind it. “It didn’t feel like we knew where we were cooperating, where we were competing, where we were challenging,” she tells me. “We’ve held ourselves at a bit of a remove, without real clarity on what we’re trying to achieve and what the risks and costs are on the other side.” China is Britain’s third largest trading partner. Total trade in goods and services between the UK and China was £98.4bn in 2024. “At this moment, both geopolitically and economically, China is essential [to Britain],” Chappell says. But the relationship does come with notable security risks. China has been accused of cyber-attacks on UK parliamentarians, linked to a high-profile spying case, and has provoked a political row over plans for a new “mega-embassy” in London. Starmer is all too aware that he will have to balance any economic opportunities against these concerns. On the geopolitical front, Chappell argues, China stands out in an increasingly unstable world. “We’re seeing a world in which all the old rules and norms are being thrown into the air. China is probably the one that’s best placed in terms of knowing what it’s trying to achieve and having the capability to try to drive there,” she says. China has also had an “extraordinary” trajectory in its economy. “From having large numbers of the world’s poorest people in the 1980s to growth rates barely seen by any other country. Growth has slowed now, but they’re still growing at a significant rate, and their place in the global economy is very well chosen.” In particular, China has positioned itself at the heart of the green transition. “They are absolutely dominant in many green technologies. No other player has anything like China’s market share. They’ve designed their economic structure to be pivotal in the economy of the future,” Chappell says. The same is true for artificial intelligence. Last January, China blew the race for domination in artificial intelligence wide open after the launch of a Chinese chatbot that appeared to deliver the same performance with fewer resources, wiping $1tn from the leading US tech index. The relaxation of rules around the export of Nvidia’s AI microchips from America to the country was compared to “selling nuclear weapons to North Korea” by the CEO of leading AI firm Anthropic. *** Sending the right signals China isn’t expecting any dramatic changes in the UK’s policy towards it, instead, Chappell says, it’s looking for the right political signals. “With some partners, for example Canada, recent visits resulted in language about a ‘new strategic partnership’. China would like countries to make those sorts of statements as often as possible, the sense that China is being chosen as a closer partner, even despite US pressure,” she says. “I don’t think they expect [something similar from Starmer],” she says. “They’ll know that he is trying to ride a three-horse race.” As well as symbolism, Chappell says China is looking for several “discrete deliverables” to come out of this trip, such as “opportunities for Chinese firms, visa-free travel for short-term business visitors.” But the UK has to remain vigilant. “In a world of economic security and leverage, countries are increasingly using their position in supply chains to apply pressure. The US does this, and China does it too,” Chappell says. That matters for the UK. “One of the things Britain needs to be aware of is whether agreements today make us subject to pressure later. China will be looking to see if there are opportunities for the UK to put itself in that position.” *** Growth, without rupture Chappell sees three core objectives for the Labour government: the economy, diplomacy, and attention. The prime minister’s meeting with Xi at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing was scheduled to last about 40 minutes, followed by a series of cultural and business receptions. On the economy, Starmer wants a positive story on growth and living standards. “Economic deliverables will be big. Can they announce investment deals? Can British firms trade more easily in China?” she asks. Starmer will also want to “slightly deepen the relationship with China without alienating the EU or the US. That balancing act is central.” Will this trip mark a decisive moment for that? Again, Chappell is skeptical. “I don’t think he’s on the cusp of making major choices in favour of one side or another. I don’t think there are significant deals about to be signed. This is about warming relationships, not a definitive break.” And finally, the quieter, but less talked about benefit of simply getting Starmer to properly focus on China. “Prime ministers are very busy. How often does Keir Starmer get to think with his whole brain about China? How often does he sit down with diplomats and get a full read-out of the risks and opportunities?” That immersion, she argues, matters. “The benefit of this visit is that he’s forced to engage deeply with what Britain actually knows about China.” What should underpin all these goals, Chappell says, is clarity. “We shouldn’t be trying to tread a middle line. We should be trying to seize opportunities and manage risks. That requires a really good mapping of what those opportunities are and where the security risks actually lie.” The problem, or reassurance, depending on your view, is that Starmer is widely viewed as a technocrat. “They’ll try to deliver big economic numbers, but in tone and ambition it won’t look radical. Over time, that could change. But they won’t frame it as a dramatic recalibration,” she says. For now, it’s time to turn on the heat. What else we’ve been reading The brutal story of how Eve Henderson’s husband being murdered in a random attack in Paris led to her setting up a charity to support people whose loved ones are killed abroad. Martin Jonathan Liew learned that an article he wrote about the England cricket team had been copied and repackaged without permission by another website. It is just one example of living in a world defined by petty theft. Aamna Betsy Johnson tells i_D magazine “creativity isn’t a god-given gift – it’s a discipline” as she releases a book – Revision – illustrating six years worth of her creative process. Martin The era of gentle parenting may finally be coming to an end. Thank god, I initially thought, until I read in shock (I may have also laughed) at what will follow: Fuck around and find it parenting. Aamna Pamela Hutchinson, one of the UK’s foremost experts on the silent cinema age, ponders the re-purposing of Alfred Hitchcock’s serial killer drama The Lodger for streaming in a new vertical phone-friendly cut. Martin Sport Football | Real Madrid missed out on automatic qualification for the Champions League knockout round, after losing 4-2 to Benfica. Holders Paris St Germain also slipped out of the top eight as they could only draw 1-1 at home to Newcastle United – a result that left both sides facing a playoff. Manchester City secured a place in the last 16 after a 2-0 victory over Galatasaray. Super Bowl | US Customs and Immigration Enforcement (ICE) agents are expected to conduct immigration enforcement operations during next month’s Super Bowl game in Santa Clara, California. Rugby union | Ireland will kick off the Six Nations next week without Bundee Aki, after a “misconduct complaint” relating to an alleged post-match incident with officials after Connacht’s URC game against Leinster on Saturday. The front pages The Guardian leads with “Time is running out, Trump says as US armada heads towards Iran.” The Mirror has “Trump’s war threat to Iran”, while the i says “Nuclear ultimatum: abandon weapons programme or ‘massive armada’ will bomb Iran, US threatens Ayatollah”. The Mail simply goes with “Countdown to conflagration”. The Sun speaks to a police officer involved with the arrest of Lucy Letby, under the headline “The greatest miscarriage of justice this century”. The Times reports “PM shelves fresh plan to overhaul benefits”. The Financial Times says “Miners boost value by $476bn after global tensions drive up metal prices”. Finally the Telegraph leads with “Starmer: Use ECHR to investigate British troops”. Today in Focus How did British Muslims become ‘the problem’? Miqdaad Versi, Shaista Aziz, Aamna Mohdin and Nosheen Iqbal on the rise of the far right and growing Islamophobia in the UK Cartoon of the day | Pete Songi The Upside A bit of good news to remind you that the world’s not all bad Mary Ann Patten was clearly something of a force to be reckoned with. Aged just 19, and three months pregnant, she took control of a mutinous clipper crew after the death of her husband – the captain – and successfully navigated Neptune’s Car around Cape Horn through a tumultuous storm to San Francisco. Her story has been rediscovered and retold by author and historian Tilar J Mazzeo for her new book. “There were very few sea captains in the 1850s and 1860s who could have achieved what she achieved, as a maritime feat. It’s amazing she and her crew survived. The story is really about what a woman in the 1850s – given an education and an opportunity – was capable of doing, and how we remember that.” 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. Martin Belam’s Thursday news quiz Quick crossword Cryptic crossword Wordiply

Veteran Indian politician Ajit Pawar dies in plane crash, leaving power vacuum

Three days of mourning have been declared in the Indian state of Maharashtra after the death of the state’s deputy chief minister Ajit Pawar, who was killed when his plane went down in flames on Wednesday. Pawar, who had spent decades in politics in the wealthy and powerful Indian state, was travelling back to campaign in his home constituency when his plane made a failed attempted landing and caught fire as it hit the ground. Two members of his staff and two crew members were also on board the flight. The authorities confirmed there were no survivors. Thousands of his followers and supporters filled the streets of his home region of Baramati on Thursday for his funeral, where he was to be cremated with full state honours. Home minister Amit Shah was expected to attend the funeral. Over his career, Pawar was deputy chief minister of the state six times, under various coalition governments. Prime minister Narendra Modi paid tribute to Pawar as a “leader of the people” who was “widely respected as a hardworking personality at the forefront of serving the people of Maharashtra.” His death is likely to create a significant power vacuum in Maharastra politics. Born into a political family, in 1980 he had joined the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP), which was formed by his uncle Sharad Pawar. He was seen as the natural heir to take over from his uncle as the party leader. However, their differing political styles led to tension and Pawar was seen to struggle to get out from beneath his uncle’s shadow. After an initial failed rebellion in 2019, Pawar was instrumental in a dramatic upheaval of Maharashtra state politics in 2023 when he formed a faction within the NCP and broke away to join the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) as they seized power in the state. His move splintered the NCP party into two rival camps, with Pawar’s faction taking the NCP name, symbol and some of its most influential leaders and legislators with him, significantly undermining his once-powerful uncle. Pawar was named deputy chief minister once again after the BJP-led alliance won the 2024 state elections. More recently, discussions had begun about the two NCP factions merging back together. After his death, questions now remain over who will be his successor and if the NCP party factions will be reunited.

Iran tries to confront ‘catastrophe’ of violent clampdown on protests

A deep and painful inquest is under way inside Iran as politicians, academics and the security establishment try to come to terms with what has been described as a catastrophe after the violent protests and their even more violent suppression by the security forces. The shape of the debate taking place in the heavily censored society is emerging, as selective newspapers and Telegram channels slowly open up to international audiences after the protests – which some estimates suggest could have left more than 30,000 dead – that have stunned many Iranians. Fissures are appearing across politics, society and diplomacy, suggesting Iran may be entering a more unpredictable period than a phase of repression by the dominant security establishment. Calls are being made for an independent external inquiry into the death toll, for speeding up the reopening of the internet to save businesses on the brink, and for the government to shift its stance on foreign policy. There is also deep concern that economic shock therapy and sanctions are driving food inflation close to an unsustainable 200% annually, with the stock market and the rial under severe pressure. Few deny the severity of the tragedy that has befallen Iran, even if they disagree about its cause and scale. Politically the crisis is especially deep for the reformists as they have held the presidency for 18 months and initially described the protests as legitimate. Mohammad Fazeli, a reformist sociologist, wrote on his Telegram channel: “Iran’s history will be entangled with this event for decades, buried under the rubble of this catastrophe. “But in these days, beyond the grief for those thousands killed and wounded, a deep sorrow has gripped my entire being. I have no doubt that dozens of others like me have sunk into this same grief and bewilderment. The grief and misery of ‘We failed’.” Criticism of the security services, or their claim that only 3,000 people were killed, is starting to appear. Many commentators attribute the protests to a loss of hope and the now 50-year generation gap between many protesters and Iran’s ageing leadership. Ahmad Zeidabadi, a reformist journalist and former political prisoner, argued: “Only a professional report from the UN’s independent jurists can serve as the final arbiter of the contradictory narratives about this national tragedy. Rejecting such a request on the part of the Islamic Republic would be a historic mistake.” The head of the Reform Front, Azar Mansouri, also implied the truth had not yet been revealed, promising: “We will not allow the blood of these dear ones to be forgotten or the truth to be lost in the dust.” Fatemeh Mohajerani, the chief government spokesperson, at a press briefing on Tuesday referred to the need for two inquiries into specific episodes during the protests. In the past, the security services have rejected all such investigations. Iran’s vice-president, Mohammad Reza Aref, has also demanded explanations from the ministry of culture as to why the reformist newspaper Ham-Mihan was shut after it published two articles covering the bloody outcome of the protests. Those calling for a free press claim Iran is being squeezed between unwatchable state propaganda television and anti-government UK-based satellite channels. The University of Tehran student association in a statement said it was “stunned and bewildered as to what has befallen us”, and said the perpetrators should not be allowed to escape the burden of responsibility. Few senior figures have yet called on the Iranian leadership to offer the key diplomatic concessions the US requires on the nuclear file. Dr Javad Salehi, a US-based Iranian economist, pointed out in the Iranian press the direct link between Iran’s global isolation and its economic backwardness. He said: “The only effective measure in the short term to improve the country’s economic situation is to resolve hostilities in the field of foreign policy.” Faizullah Arabsorkhi, a former commerce minister and political prisoner, said foreign policy was at the root of the lack of economic growth. “The authorities must change policies and change the way they deal with the world. The Chinese themselves advise Iran to solve your problems with America.” For those inside Iran contemplating another foreign attack, the question is whether a second assault – either direct or through a blockade – will lead to the kind of nationalist revival that occurred last summer. The government would doubtless try to engineer it, and there are many Iranians who liken their current sense of lost sovereignty to 1941, when the country was occupied by Russia and the UK. Many of them cannot stomach the hypocrisy of the US condemning Iran’s failure to manage its economy when US sanctions are the bedrock of that failure. But there is also deep disillusionment at the failure of the government to take the chance to set a new course after the 12-day war last June. The recent calls in the street for the return of the shah may have been an act of desperation but they were also a sign that some now feel the source of their salvation lies abroad. Abolfazl Ghadyani, the 80-year-old jailed political activist, called the suppression of the protests a crime against humanity, saying: “Ali Khamenei’s personal instruction was to put the rioters in their place.” The order revealed “his endless hostile vindictiveness and the desire for revenge against the Iranian people. The scale of the crime was unprecedented in 100 years.” He added: “Khamenei is like a drowning man who resorts to any means, but salvation is impossible for him. These moral vices that are his essence will no longer serve him.” From the perspective of the security services such criticism affirms the need to keep the internet suppressed. But in a sign of the tensions over the issue, government members made clear the security services were to blame for the internet shutdown.

South Korea’s ‘world-first’ AI laws face pushback amid bid to become leading tech power

South Korea has embarked on a foray into the regulation of AI, launching what has been billed as the most comprehensive set of laws anywhere in the world, that could prove a model for other countries, but the new legislation has already encountered pushback. The laws, which will force companies to label AI-generated content, have been criticised by local tech startups, which say they go too far, and civil society groups, which say they don’t go far enough. The AI basic act, which took effect on Thursday last week, comes amid growing global unease over artificially created media and automated decision-making, as governments struggle to keep pace with rapidly advancing technologies. The act will force companies providing AI services to: Add invisible digital watermarks for clearly artificial outputs such as cartoons or artwork. For realistic deepfakes, visible labels are required. “High-impact AI”, including systems used for medical diagnosis, hiring and loan approvals, will require operators to conduct risk assessments and document how decisions are made. If a human makes the final decision the system may fall outside the category. Extremely powerful AI models will require safety reports, but the threshold is set so high that government officials acknowledge no models worldwide currently meet it. Companies that violate the rules face fines of up to 30m won (£15,000), but the government has promised a grace period of at least a year before penalties are imposed. The legislation is being billed as the “world’s first” to be fully enforced by a country, and central to South Korea’s ambition to become one of the world’s three leading AI powers alongside the US and China. Government officials maintain the law is 80-90% focused on promoting industry rather than restricting it. Alice Oh, a computer science professor at the Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST), said that while the law was not perfect, it was intended to evolve without stifling innovation. However a survey in December from the Startup Alliance found that 98% of AI startups were unprepared for compliance. Its co-head, Lim Jung-wook, said frustration was widespread. “There’s a bit of resentment,” he said. “Why do we have to be the first to do this?” Companies must self-determine whether their systems qualify as high-impact AI, a process critics say is lengthy and creates uncertainty. They also warn of competitive imbalance: all Korean companies face regulation regardless of size, while only foreign firms meeting certain thresholds – such as Google and OpenAI – must comply. The push for regulation has unfolded against a uniquely charged domestic backdrop that has left civil society groups worried the legislation does not go far enough. South Korea accounts for 53% of all global deepfake pornography victims, according to a 2023 report by Security Hero, a US-based identity protection firm. In August 2024, an investigation exposed massive networks of Telegram chatrooms creating and distributing AI-generated sexual imagery of women and girls, foreshadowing the scandal that would later erupt around Elon Musk’s Grok chatbot. The law’s origins, however, predate this crisis, with the first AI-related bill submitted to parliament in July 2020. It stalled repeatedly in part due to provisions that were accused of prioritising industry interests over citizen protection. Civil society groups maintain that the new legislation provides limited protection for people harmed by AI systems. Four organisations, including Minbyun, a collective of human rights lawyers, issued a joint statement the day after it was implemented arguing the law contained almost no provisions to protect citizens from AI risks. The groups noted that while the law stipulated protection for “users”, those users were hospitals, financial companies and public institutions that use AI systems, not people affected by AI. The law established no prohibited AI systems, they argued, and exemptions for “human involvement” created significant loopholes. The country’s human rights commission has criticised the enforcement decree for lacking clear definitions of high-impact AI, noting that those most likely to suffer rights violations remain in regulatory blind spots. In a statement, the ministry of science and ICT said it expected the law to “remove legal uncertainty” and build “a healthy and safe domestic AI ecosystem”, adding that it would continue to clarify the rules through revised guidelines. Experts said South Korea had deliberately chosen a different path from other jurisdictions. Unlike the EU’s strict risk-based regulatory model, the US and UK’s largely sector-specific, market-driven approaches, or China’s combination of state-led industrial policy and detailed service-specific regulation, South Korea has opted for a more flexible, principles-based framework, said Melissa Hyesun Yoon, a law professor at Hanyang University who specialises in AI governance. That approach is centred on what Yoon describes as “trust-based promotion and regulation”. “Korea’s framework will serve as a useful reference point in global AI governance discussions,” she said.

‘I was violated and put in extreme danger’: women denied abortions sue over Arkansas ban

As Emily Waldorf languished in an Arkansas hospital, she felt like “a ticking time bomb”. It was 2024, and the physical therapist was in the midst of miscarrying a much-wanted pregnancy. But because her fetus still had a heartbeat, hospital officials said Arkansas’s near-total abortion ban blocked them from taking steps to induce labor and end her pregnancy. Instead, Waldorf had to wait and hope that she didn’t develop a deadly infection. Waldorf’s sister, Elizabeth, called the office of Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the Republican governor of Arkansas, to ask for help. “What do you expect the governor to do?” a male official from Sanders’s office asked. Waldorf, the official said, should “find a lawyer”. Waldorf took the advice, as a sweeping new lawsuit shows. On Wednesday, Waldorf, an OB-GYN and three other Arkansas women who say they were also blocked from getting abortions sued the state in an attempt to strike down its near-total abortion ban. Two of the women say that, like Waldorf, they were denied abortions even though their pregnancies had effectively ended. One of the women says that she was unable to get an abortion after getting pregnant through a sexual assault, because Arkansas doesn’t permit abortions in cases of rape. “Arkansas’s abortion bans are vague, confusing, and worse, extremely dangerous,” the lawsuit alleges. “How are pregnant Arkansans supposed to access comprehensive obstetric care when leaving Arkansas means traveling through some of the most remote parts of the state, and when Arkansas is surrounded by other states with their own abortion bans?” Since the US supreme court overturned Roe v Wade in 2022, unleashing a wave of state-level abortion bans, dozens of women have come forward to say they were denied medically necessary abortions. Many of these women have also joined lawsuits that aimed to clarify the exceptions in abortion bans, which are supposed to allow people to get abortions in emergencies. Doctors across the country have said that the exceptions are worded so vaguely as to be unworkable in practice. The lawsuit is the first to be filed by Amplify Legal, the litigation arm of Abortion in America, a reproductive rights group that focuses on sharing the stories of abortion patients and was co-founded by the late Cecile Richards, one of the foremost abortion rights activists of the 21st century. It argues that the laws banning abortion in Arkansas – there are two virtually identical laws on the books – must be struck down because they violate the state constitution and its guarantee that people have the right to equality, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. These anti-abortion laws, the lawsuit alleges, not only infringe on people’s right to choose how to build their families, but also threaten their lives, fertility and economic wellbeing. They are also unconstitutionally vague, according to the lawsuit. Waldorf’s account of her ordeal and her sister’s conversation with a Sanders official are part of the lawsuit’s allegations. In response to questions about Waldorf’s allegations and the lawsuit, Sam Dubke, director of communications for Sanders’ office, said in an email: “Arkansas was named the most pro-life state in the country for the sixth year in a row not just because the Sanders administration offers complete protection for the unborn but also because Governor Sanders has made needed investments in foster care and adoption, maternal health, and childhood wellbeing. Governor Sanders looks forward to defending Arkansas’s pro-life laws in court.” Ultimately, according to the lawsuit, hospital officials agreed to transport Waldorf in an ambulance to another hospital in Kansas, which permits abortions. That hospital induced Waldorf, who was about 17 weeks into her pregnancy. Waldorf gave birth to a baby who died shortly after birth. Waldorf, who is now 40, named her Bee. ‘She felt she had no choice’ Chelsea Stovall, another plaintiff, is a 35-year-old mother of two. In late 2022, she learned that the fetus she carried had a congenital anomaly that doomed the pregnancy. Stovall and her husband emptied their bank account and their savings to travel to Illinois for an abortion, according to the lawsuit. At the Illinois clinic, an anti-abortion protester threw a bloody Maxi pad at their car, the lawsuit alleges. A third plaintiff, 30-year-old Theresa Van, got pregnant in 2023 but soon learned she did not have enough amniotic fluid to allow her fetus to develop, according to the lawsuit. However, because her fetus still had a heartbeat, she could not get an abortion. She continued her pregnancy for several weeks, at growing risk to herself, until the fetal heartbeat vanished and she gave birth to a stillborn daughter. The lawsuit alleges Van feared criminal prosecution if she tried to leave the state for an abortion. “In addition, the financial strain of traveling for abortion care was too intense. She felt she had no choice but to continue her pregnancy until her daughter passed,” the lawsuit says. The fourth woman suing Arkansas, Allison Howland got pregnant in 2024, according to the lawsuit, after being sexually assaulted at a hotel in 2024. Rather than immediately traveling out of state for an abortion, she continued the pregnancy for weeks in the hopes that police might be able to use DNA from the pregnancy to prove her allegations against the assaulter, the lawsuit says. However, police concluded that there was little they could do, since the alleged assailant maintained that the encounter was consensual. One detective allegedly told Howland that the assailant “seemed like a really nice guy”. When Howland informed the police that she planned to get an abortion in Illinois and asked if she needed to preserve the remains of the pregnancy, a detective told her “not to bother”, as the lawsuit put it, as the police were unable to take proper care of the potential evidence. “I do not want to keep the product of this assault,” the lawsuit quoted Howland as saying. “Call that selfish but I stand by it. I was violated and put into extreme danger and living in a state like Arkansas – I was royally fucked.”

Le scoop! France’s last newspaper hawker celebrated with prestigious award

For more than five decades he’s pounded the pavements of Paris, becoming part of the city’s cultural fabric as he strikes up conversations, greets longtime friends and offers parodies of daily news headlines. On Wednesday, the efforts of the man believed to be France’s last newspaper hawker were recognised, as Ali Akbar, a 73-year-old originally from Pakistan, received one of France’s most prestigious honours. In a ceremony at the Élysée Palace, France’s president, Emmanuel Macron, described Akbar as the “most French of the French” as he made him a knight of the National Order of Merit in recognition of his distinguished service to France. “You are the accent of the sixth arrondissement, the voice of the French press on Sunday mornings. And every other day of the week, for that matter,” said Macron. “A warm voice that, every day for more than 50 years, has boomed across the terraces of Saint-Germain, making its way between restaurant tables.” Speaking to Reuters in August, Akbar highlighted the delight he got from walking through Paris each day. “It’s love,” Akbar said as he crisscrossed the cobbled streets of Saint Germain-des-Prés. “If it was for the money, I could do something else. But I have a great time with these people.” Born in Rawalpindi, Pakistan, Akbar said he stumbled across his calling after arriving in Paris in 1973. When visa issues stymied his first attempt to carve out a life in Europe, he was determined to find a job that would allow him to support his parents and seven siblings back home. With the help of an Argentinian student who was selling satirical magazines, Akbar joined the ranks of the few dozen newspaper sellers in the city. His ready smile, sense of humour and readiness to walk miles a day proved a hit, allowing him to make a modest living. By day he sold newspapers to France’s powerbrokers, such as the former president François Mitterrand, and to Sciences Po students who would later join their ranks, such as Macron and the former prime minister Édouard Philippe. At night, in his early years, he slept rough under bridges and in squalid rooms as he scrambled to send as much money as he could to Pakistan. As the decades passed, Akbar became a familiar face in the restaurants and bars of the Left Bank. “Ali is an institution,” said Marie-Laure Carrière, a lawyer. “If Ali didn’t exist, St-Germain-des-Prés wouldn’t be St-Germain-des-Prés.” Slowly and steadily, he built a life in Paris, getting married and raising five children, even as the newspaper industry began to wilt. While once it had been easy to sell as many as 200 newspapers a day, those days were a distant memory, Akbar said. “I sell about 20 copies of Le Monde in eight hours,” he said. “Everything is digital. People just don’t buy newspapers.” Still, he persisted. “I have a certain way of selling newspapers. I try to make jokes, so people laugh. I try to be positive and I create an atmosphere … I try and get into people’s hearts, not their pockets,” he said. When news of the order of merit came, it felt like a tribute of sorts to a way of life that is rapidly disappearing, particularly in a district once frequented by philosophers such as Jean-Paul Sartre and Simone de Beauvoir. “People used to do their shopping in small shops. It was a village, there were small markets everywhere, butchers and fish shops. Everyone was local, everyone knew each other,” said Akbar. “Nowadays its different. Every day there’s a new face.” On Wednesday, Macron praised the journey that had landed Akbar at the Élyséé Palace. “Before becoming an icon of Parisian life, you grew up in Pakistan, on the streets of Rawalpindi. As a child, you had to face the worst: poverty, forced labour, violence. You dream of only one thing: leaving. Escaping poverty, getting an education. Earning enough money to buy your mother a beautiful house,” said Macron. “You cross Afghanistan, Iran, Turkey, Greece. You experienced a clandestine life, destitution and constant fear. But you persevere.” In the lead up to the ceremony, Akbar said it was an honour to receive the distinction. He told the broadcaster Franceinfo it was a balm for the many wounds he had racked up in his lifetime. Even so, he said he had no plans to give up selling newspapers, insisting he would continue zigzagging the city’s streets and cafes as long as he had the energy. “Retirement will have to wait until the cemetery,” he joked.

Threat of US-Iran war escalates as Trump warns time running out for deal

The threat of war between the US and Iran appeared to loom closer after Donald Trump told Tehran time was running out and that a huge US armada was moving quickly towards the country “with great power, enthusiasm and purpose”. Writing on social media, the US president said on Wednesday that the fleet headed by the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln was larger than the one sent to Venezuela before the removal of Nicolás Maduro earlier this month and was “prepared to rapidly fulfil its missions with speed and violence if necessary”. Trump said: “Hopefully Iran will quickly ‘Come to the Table’ and negotiate a fair and equitable deal – NO NUCLEAR WEAPONS – one that is good for all parties. Time is running out, it is truly of the essence! “As I told Iran once before, MAKE A DEAL! They didn’t, and there was ‘Operation Midnight Hammer,’ a major destruction of Iran. The next attack will be far worse! Don’t make that happen again.” It was the starkest indication yet from Trump that he intends to mount some kind of military strike imminently if Iran refuses to negotiate a deal on the future of its nuclear programme. The post also reflects a remarkable shift in the White House’s stated rationale for sending a carrier strike group to the region, moving away from outrage over the death of protesters to the fate of Tehran’s nuclear programme. Trump urged Iranians to keep protesting earlier this month, telling them “help is on its way”, but he later backtracked on the grounds that “the killing has stopped”. There is speculation that he actually held back because he did not have enough military assets in the area, Gulf States had urged restraint and Israel had counselled it needed more time to prepare for likely reprisals from Iran. Activists say more than 30,000 people were killed during the recent unrest. The US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, told the Senate on Wednesday that thousands had been killed and said the Iranian government was “probably weaker than it has ever been” since the 1979 revolution. Iranian missiles and drones could still pose a threat to US personnel in the region though, he added. About 30,000 US military personnel were “within the reach of an array of thousands of Iranian one-way UAVs and Iranian short-range ballistic missiles that threaten our troop presence,” Rubio said. “We have to have enough personnel in the region … to defend against that possibility.” Trump would also maintain the “preemptive defensive option” of striking Iran if there were indications that it was planning an attack on US troops, he said. “They certainly have the capability because they’ve amassed thousands and thousands of ballistic missiles that they’ve built.” European diplomats had been expecting a crisis to develop over the weekend and detected signs of Israeli nervousness about the scale of possible Iranian reprisals. In a social media post written in Hebrew, Ali Shamkani, a senior adviser to the Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, said: “Any military action by America, from any source and at any level, will be considered the beginning of a war, and the response will be immediate, comprehensive and unprecedented, directed at the aggressor, at the heart of Tel Aviv and at all its supporters.” The Gulf States and Turkey have been speaking to both sides, trying to find common ground between Iran and the US, but Tehran has said it will not negotiate under duress or with preconditions. Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff said at the World Economic Forum in Davos that a deal with Iran ought to happen. He told CNBC: “Obviously, the deal has to do with missiles. It has to do with enrichment. It has to do with non-state actor proxies. It has to do with [Iran’s stockpile of nuclear] material.” It has become clear in recent days that Trump is interested in curbing not just the remains of Iran’s already shattered nuclear programme but also its ability to fire long-range missiles, always seen as the centrepiece of Iranian military projection. In recent weeks Trump has also suggested Khamenei must leave the world stage, a demand Iran will reject. Asked by Senator John Cornyn about the potential for a change of regime in Iran, Rubio said: “You’re talking about a regime that’s been in place for a very long time … So that’s going to require a lot of careful thinking, if that eventuality ever presents itself. I don’t think anyone can give you a simple answer to what happens next in Iran if the supreme leader and the regime were to fall.” Some will see the sudden escalation of the threat as a useful piece of distraction at a time when Trump is under domestic political pressure over the violence administered by homeland security officers in Minnesota. The Iranian mission at the UN in New York said: “The last time the US blundered into the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, it wasted $7tn, and over 7,000 American lives were lost. Iran stands ready for dialogue based on mutual respects and interests but if pushed it will defend itself and respond like never before.” Iran’s foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, said he was not prepared to negotiate under threats but he was willing to talk without preconditions, terms he had relayed via numerous intermediaries to Witkoff. “Our brave Armed Forces are prepared – with their fingers on the trigger – to immediately and powerfully respond to ANY aggression against our beloved land, air, and sea,” he posted on X on Wednesday night. “At the same time, Iran has always welcomed a mutually beneficial, fair and equitable NUCLEAR DEAL – on equal footing, and free from coercion, threats, and intimidation – which ensures Iran’s rights to PEACEFUL nuclear technology, and guarantees NO NUCLEAR WEAPONS.” In the last 24 hours, Araghchi and the Iranian president, Masoud Pezeshkian, have between them spoken to diplomats from Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Egypt. All three Arab states will be feverishly exploring ways to reopen talks without Iran having to accept a preconditioned result. They were critical in persuading Trump to hold back from mounting an attack three weeks ago, but Trump now has greater flexibility of military options and seems more focused on a nuclear deal rather than punishing Iran for the bloody suppression of street protests. There is deep suspicion in Tehran about talking to the US since the two sides were in the middle of talks last June when Israel was given clearance by the US to mount an attack on Iran designed to decapitate its leadership and destroy its civil nuclear sites. Hakan Fidan, the Turkish foreign minister, urged the US to detach its wider demands about Iran’s missile programme and support for militia in the region from the nuclear file. He said he thought that if Witkoff insisted on putting all items on to the table at once, Iran would not respond. Trump has insisted that Iran abandon its domestic nuclear enrichment programme, permit UN nuclear inspectors to return and hand its stockpile of highly enriched uranium to a third party, most likely Russia. Iran has always held out against abandoning its domestic capacity to enrich uranium but has been willing to set rigid limits on its stockpile. Since the last round of negotiations ended with an Israeli and US attack killing 1,000 people and severely damaging its key nuclear sites, Iran has been weakened further by a plunging currency and rampant inflation. With the nuclear sites already damaged, the key targets in any attack would likely be Iran’s leadership. June’s attack revealed Israel had near total dominance of the skies above Iran. Almost all the Gulf states, fearful of Iranian reprisals, have said they are not willing to allow the US to use their airspace or bases to mount an attack on Iran. Iranian officials said: “We will target the same base and the same point from which air operations against us are launched, and we will not attack countries because we do not consider them to be enemy countries. We will increase our level of defence readiness against the US military buildup to the highest level. If the Americans want negotiations without pre-determined outcomes, Iran will accept it.”

Chagos Islands’ pristine ecology must be protected | Letter

Ending the pristine state of the Chagos region is arguably a greater loss of biodiversity than the extinction of the dodo, yet is often neglected in discussions of the transfer to Mauritius (What are the Chagos Islands – and why is the UK returning them to Mauritius?, 20 January). No other large tropical ecosystem on Earth has been so well protected, and its value to the science of ecology is correspondingly immense. It is not species richness or abundance that singles the Chagos out: it is the ecosystem’s near-natural functioning. Mauritian plans for fishing and other exploitation are not compatible with protection of the last great tropical wilderness area – which is currently teaching us how to repair and protect others. If politicians could vote to save the dodo, one hopes they would. Yet watching them voting for a legacy of irreversible destruction means any future claims they make regarding biodiversity conservation will ring as hollow as a dodo’s bones. Clive Hambler Lecturer in biological and human sciences, University of Oxford • Have an opinion on anything you’ve read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.