Danish polls to close shortly as Greenland PM says election is most important in territory’s history – Europe live
It’s almost time! Who will celebrate, and who will have a difficult night?
Middle East crisis live: Trump claims Iran has agreed ‘never’ to have a nuclear weapon as US reportedly sends thousands more troops
Trump has claimed Iran badly wants to make a deal. Speaking in the Oval Office, he said: “We’re actually talking to the right people and they want to make a deal so badly, you have no idea how badly they want to make a deal,” Trump said of the Iranians.
Russia fires nearly 1,000 drones in one of its largest aerial attacks on Ukraine
Russia has launched a huge wave of nearly 1,000 drones at Ukraine, killing at least seven people, as Moscow appears to be stepping up a spring offensive intended to break Ukrainian resistance along the front. Ukrainian officials said Moscow fired nearly 400 long-range drones and 23 cruise missiles overnight, followed by another 556 drones in an unusual daytime assault on Tuesday, hitting cities across the west of the country. Taken together, the barrage marks one of the largest aerial bombardments of Ukraine since the start of the full-scale invasion more than four years ago. One Russian drone struck the Bernardine monastery, a 16th-century church in Lviv’s Unesco-listed medieval centre, causing damage, local authorities said. Dramatic footage circulating online showed a large kamikaze drone hitting a busy street in Lviv. The Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, said the barrage had caused damage in 11 regions and he renewed calls for allies to urgently supply Kyiv with more air defence munitions. He has said repeatedly that Ukraine, which relies on the US for systems capable of intercepting ballistic missiles, faces looming shortages as Washington’s attention remains focused on the US-Israeli conflict with Iran. Neighbouring Moldova also said a key power line linking it to Europe had been damaged in overnight Russian strikes, and urged citizens to reduce electricity use during peak hours. After enduring a winter of widespread power and heating cuts, Ukraine is braced for a renewed Russian push. Moscow’s war of attrition typically intensifies in the spring as weather conditions improve. Russian forces, who outnumber Ukrainian troops by roughly three to one, are seeking to make gains along the eastern and southern fronts. Russian troops have continued a slow advance in the eastern Donetsk region during the winter, edging closer to the key city of Sloviansk from the north and east. They hold positions about 12 miles (20km) from its outskirts. Open-source analysts also report Russian gains near Zaliznychne in the Zaporizhzhia region. The Kremlin had moved heavy equipment and additional troops to the frontline, the Institute for the Study of War said late on Monday. Michael Kofman, an analyst at the Carnegie Endowment in Washington DC, said: “Usually there is a Russian wave of mechanised assaults around April, and they once again prove costly and ineffective.” He said Ukrainian defences had been “optimised for defeating mechanised assaults”, with much of the fighting now focused on suppressing or displacing opposing drone units. Ukraine has also had a notable boost on the battlefield this year, retaking roughly 150 sq miles of territory in southern Zaporizhzhia, where Russian forces had previously been advancing. February was the first month since 2023 in which Kyiv regained more territory than it lost, according to military analysts. The counteroffensive was aided by Elon Musk’s decision in February to switch off Russian forces’ access to Starlink internet connections, disrupting a key line of communication for the troops. Ukraine is still in a precarious position, however, with much of the world’s attention focused on the war in the Middle East, raising concerns that US Patriot missile interceptors, the backbone of the country’s air defences, could run out. Ukrainian and US delegations held two days of talks in Florida over the weekend intended to find a path to ending Russia’s full-scale invasion, but no breakthrough was reported. A key sticking point remains the Donbas, which Moscow wants Kyiv to cede in full. On Tuesday Zelenskyy wrote on X: “We had a detailed discussion on the outcomes of the meetings in the United States. It is telling that while our negotiators were reporting, Russia launched a new wave of ‘shahed’ drones against Ukraine. “The geopolitical situation has become more complicated due to the war against Iran, and unfortunately, this is emboldening Russia.” The well-sourced outlet Ukrainska Pravda reported that the US had put pressure on Ukraine to withdraw its troops from the Donetsk region during the Florida talks, saying Washington could step back from peace negotiations and shift its focus further to the military operation in Iran. Zelenskyy has repeatedly said any discussion of a voluntary withdrawal would only be possible if Ukraine first received ironclad security guarantees from the west. The Kremlin, which has benefited from an unexpected economic windfall driven by a surge in global energy prices, said last week that talks between Washington, Moscow and Kyiv on ending the war in Ukraine were on a “situational pause” because of the conflict in Iran.
Israel says it will seize parts of southern Lebanon as ‘defensive buffer’
Israel said on Tuesday it would seize parts of southern Lebanon to create what it called a “defensive buffer”, while Benjamin Netanyahu vowed to continue striking Iran, dimming hopes of de-escalation even as Donald Trump talked up the prospects of a deal to end the conflict. During a meeting with the military chief of staff, Israel defence minister Israel Katz said Israeli forces would “control the remaining bridges and the security zone up to the Litani”, a river in Lebanon that meets the Mediterranean about 30km (20 miles) north of Israel’s border. Katz’s remarks appeared to suggest the presence of Israeli troops could become prolonged, with Hezbollah, the powerful Iran-backed armed group, calling the move an “existential threat” to the Lebanese state. Katz added all bridges over the Litani river, which he said had been used by Hezbollah to move operatives and weapons into southern Lebanon, “have been blown up and the IDF will control the remaining bridges”. The previous day, Bezalel Smotrich, Israel’s far-right finance minister, said Israel should and “apply sovereignity” areas in southern Lebanon, signalling an expansionist vision that has alarmed critics at home and abroad. The news of Israel taking control of areas in southern Lebanon comes as tensions between the Lebanese government and Hezbollah escalated on Tuesday after the government expelled Iran’s ambassador, Mohammad Reza Shibani, declaring him persona non grata and ordering him to leave by Sunday. The unprecedented move reflects a break from decades of Iranian influence. Prime minister Nawaf Salam urged Hezbollah to halt attacks on Israel, saying avenging Iran’s leadership “has nothing to do with us”. Hezbollah condemned the decision as serving Israel and deepening divisions, as fears grow of renewed internal conflict in the country amid escalating regional war. Lebanon has found itself pulled further into the regional conflict with Iran as Israel bombs the country and fights Hezbollah in the south. On Tuesday afternoon, residents of the northern city of Jounieh emerged from their homes confused as explosions rang out along the coastal area. An Iranian missile heading towards Cyprus had been intercepted by a “foreign naval boat” over north Lebanon, according to Reuters, littering the Lebanese coast with debris and damaging streets. Meanwhile, a fresh wave of Israeli airstrikes battered Iran on Tuesday, after Netanyahu vowed to press ahead with military action against Tehran. “There’s more to come,” Netanyahu said in remarks that appeared to corroborate those of three Israeli officials who told Reuters they thought it was improbable that Iran would accept US demands in any new round of negotiations. In a statement released on Tuesday, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps said it would launch heavy missile and drone attacks at Israeli troops in northern Israel and the area near Gaza “without restraint” unless Israel ceased attacks in Lebanon and Palestine. Israel said it carried out an extensive series of strikes on Iranian “production sites”, without providing more information. In Tehran, a massive blast was heard in northern neighbourhoods and another in the city centre. Iran also fired at least 10 waves of missiles at Israel. A thick plume of smoke rising over Tel Aviv’s skyline on Tuesday morning reinforced a sense that the end of the war remained distant. Police said an Iranian munition carrying a substantial explosive payload struck the central city, causing widespread damage to buildings and vehicles. At least six people were lightly injured. Several buildings were damaged across Tel Aviv, with emergency services reporting casualties at one of the impact sites. One building and the adjacent road were heavily affected, with cars set ablaze. Fragments from intercepted missiles also fell in Rosh Ha’ayin, causing minor damage but no reported injuries. The strikes were the latest in a cycle of retaliation after Israeli operations announced on Monday. About 40 minutes after Trump said he would delay action against Iran’s power infrastructure, Israel said on X that it had “just begun another wave of strikes targeting infrastructure of the Iranian terror regime across Tehran”. The Israel Defense Forces said energy facilities would be spared, suggesting that Israel may be aligning with Washington in suspending attacks on Iranian power plants and related sites. Since US-Israeli bombs started falling on Iran, estimates of total deaths (military and civilian) in the country have exceeded 1,500, with some rights groups reporting figures as high as 3,230 as of 21 March. In recent weeks, Israel’s military claims to have eliminated more than 70% of Iran’s ballistic missile launchers, and says it has come close to establishing near-total control of Iranian airspace. Even so, Tehran has continued to penetrate Israel’s defences.
Walid Khalidi obituary
Walid Khalidi, who has died aged 100, was the first professional historian to demonstrate how 750,000 Arab refugees had fled or been forced from their homes in what is now Israel in the wars of 1947 and 1948, in the face of advancing Jewish military forces. This overturned a founding Israeli myth, namely that most Palestinians left in the Nakba (disaster) because they were ordered to do so by Arab leaders. As a scholar and resolutely independent-minded public intellectual of wide and deep erudition, with a distinguished academic career in Lebanon, the US and Britain, Khalidi was also active in politics and diplomacy for much of his life. He played a pivotal and pioneering role in the Palestinian national movement’s acceptance – and the eventual international espousal – of a two-state solution to the conflict. Among Khalidi’s 40-plus books and many more articles, Before Their Diaspora (1984), a photographically illustrated account of Palestinian life from 1876 to 1948, and All That Remains (1992), an exhaustively documented account of 400 villages destroyed or depopulated in 1948, are still two of the most widely read texts on the history of his people and the roots of the still unfulfilled struggle for Palestinian national rights. In 1963, he co-founded the Institute of Palestine Studies in Beirut, which continues to be a leading and independent research centre for analysis of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He was its general secretary until 2016. The institute’s Journal of Palestinian Studies, founded in 1971, remains the major academic publication in its field. In more than two decades as a university professor in Beirut – punctuated by spells at Harvard and Princeton – he influenced generations of students, many of whom became leaders in public life across the Arab world. With a lively sense of humour and a commanding, if sometimes stern, presence, he was a notable raconteur, as at ease with Arab and western leaders as he was with his students. Instinctively a pan-Arabist who believed that Arab states could have a vital role in furthering the Palestinian cause, Khalidi had achieved a rapport with Egypt’s president Gamal Abdel Nasser when he met him in the late 1950s. But he was also an early interlocutor with prominent Israelis ranging from the former general Matti Peled to Abba Eban. An early believer that US pressure on Israel was key, he sought in the 70s and 80s to open channels between the US and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) through his contact with leading American figures such as Zbigniew Brzezinski and George Shultz. Khalidi was one of five siblings, born in Jerusalem into one of the city’s oldest, leading and best-connected families – dating back to pre-Crusader times. His father, Ahmad Samih Khalidi, a dedicated educationist, was the principal of the Arab College, the leading Palestinian educational institution during the British mandate, to which he strove to recruit bright students from poorer rural families as well as more prosperous urban ones. Walid’s mother, Ihsan Aql, died during his early childhood. His cultivated and upper-class stepmother, Anbara Salam, whom his father married in 1929, was a leading Lebanese feminist who had caused a sensation – which temporarily forced her into hiding – as the first woman in Beirut to unveil herself in public while lecturing on women’s rights in 1927. Growing up in a highly cultured home that was a meeting place for leading Palestinians, Jews and westerners, Khalidi was tutored in English by Jerome Farrell, the British mandate’s director of education. His lifelong fluent English and perfect classical Arabic were reflected in bedtime reading ranging from Abbasid poetry to PG Wodehouse. A pupil at St George’s school in Jerusalem, he then graduated with an external degree in classics from London University in 1945. In the same year he married Rasha Salam, the much younger sister of his father’s second wife. In 1951, he took an MLitt at Oxford University with a dissertation on religious life in 17th and 18th-century Syria. But before that he was caught up in political ferment, culminating in his direct experience of the Arab defeat by Israel in 1948. Working in the Arab League’s Jerusalem office, he helped the academic Albert Hourani to prepare the Palestinian case to the 1946 Anglo-American Committee of Enquiry set up in a vain effort to prevent the mounting Arab-Jewish confrontation in Palestine. After gaining his master’s, Khalidi taught Arabic in what was then the faculty of oriental studies at Oxford. But in 1956 he resigned, outraged by the doomed UK-Israeli-French assault on Egypt in the Suez crisis, and left for Beirut. Appointed to the American University in Beirut, he soon became a political science professor – while embroiled in Lebanon’s internal politics, advising his brother-in-law, the Arab nationalist politician (and later prime minister) Saeb Salam. During the 1958 civil conflict in Beirut he was lightly wounded when Salam’s house came under attack. In 1959, Khalidi began to publish his seminal articles on the exodus of 1948, including Why Did the Palestinians Leave?, first published in Middle East Forum, which exposed the absence of any order by Arab leaders to civilians to abandon their homes. He was the first scholar to highlight “Plan D”, a scheme by the Zionist paramilitary organisation Haganah (later the IDF) to seize Palestinian cities and destroy villages outside as well as inside the territory assigned to the Jewish state by the 1947 UN partition plan. The argument that the vast majority of Palestinians who fled did so because the Zionist military offensive compelled them to do so, foundational in establishing the Palestinian narrative, has not since been seriously challenged, and was later reinforced by the “new” Israeli historians. In Beirut Khalidi maintained relations with several Palestinian factions, but after Israel’s victory over Jordan, Syria and Egypt in the 1967 six-day war, he became close to Yasser Arafat, the leader of Fatah, the dominant component of the PLO, which, after the 1973 Yom Kippur war, started to contemplate compromising on its founding goal of an Arab state on the whole of mandatory Palestine. In this Khalidi played a decisive part, when in 1978 he published in Foreign Affairs – courageously, given the adverse reaction of more rejectionist Palestinian leaders, though with the private blessing of Arafat – an article entitled Thinking the Unthinkable. It made the first detailed case for a Palestinian state on Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem, side by side with Israel. This helped to pave the way – after back-channel discussions in which Khalidi was active – for the historic 1988 PLO decision to endorse such a state and for the US finally to recognise the PLO as the representative Palestinian body. In 1979 Khalidi took a permanent post at Harvard, where he published much of his most important work. There he and Rasha maintained, as they had in Beirut, a salon for politicians, diplomats, academics and journalists. And he continued in both private and public diplomatic roles. Khalidi took a notably independent stand against Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait. At the US-convened 1991 Madrid conference, which appeared to offer hope of a just resolution to the conflict but from which the PLO was excluded, Khalidi joined the Jordanian delegation and participated in the subsequent first round of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations in Washington, which were then eclipsed by the secret talks between the PLO and Israel that led to the Oslo accords in 1993 and 1995. Despite the concerted and conscious efforts to prevent a two-state solution by the governments of Benjamin Netanyahu, whom he described in 2014 as the “the most dangerous political leader in the world today”, Khalidi continued to argue for and believe in two states until his death. Rasha died in 2004. Khalidi is survived by his son, Ahmad, and daughter, Karma, and by his half-brother Tarif. • Walid Ahmad Samih Khalidi, political scientist, historian and adviser, born 16 July 1925; died 8 March 2026
There’s nothing sinister about Muslims praying | Letters
As a young British Muslim, I was troubled to see public prayer described as an “act of domination” by the shadow justice secretary, Nick Timothy (Report, 19 March). To characterise a few minutes of prayer in this way is simply unjust. Britain stands for fairness and equal treatment. If other faiths can gather in public spaces, Muslims should be afforded the same right. To single out one community undermines that principle. Events such as open iftars are not about imposing beliefs, but about bringing people together. We are often encouraged to integrate, yet when Muslims do so visibly and peacefully, they are criticised. Such language and behaviour are deepening division and making Young British Muslims feel unwelcome in their own country. Sarmad Anwar Bradford, West Yorkshire • While I welcome Keir Starmer and senior politicians condemning Nick Timothy’s remarks, the underlying issue remains deeply troubling. There is a clear contradiction in demanding that Muslims “integrate” while condemning them when they visibly participate in public life. Equality cannot be conditional. If Christians, Jews, Hindus and Sikhs may hold occasional events in Trafalgar Square, Muslims must be afforded the same right. Anything less is discrimination. Peaceful acts such as breaking the fast or offering a short prayer do not amount to domination. There is no evidence of Muslims imposing their beliefs on others. On the contrary, Islam upholds the principle “for you your religion, and for me my religion”. To portray Islamic practices, including the call to prayer, as threatening is not only false but irresponsible. Such rhetoric fuels division and risks making Muslims targets of abuse. The principle is simple: the law must apply equally to all faiths. Anything else erodes the very foundation of justice. Dr Maleeha Mansur Raynes Park, London • I wonder why the sight of people lined up for prayer at Trafalgar Square seemed unfamiliar to Nick Timothy, as people of other faiths have congregated at the same place for years to mark their religious days. Perhaps his fear of domination arises from a lack of understanding. A prayer is only an act of communion between a believer and God, regardless of whether it’s in private or public. I feel particularly saddened to see even a remote threat to religious freedom in Great Britain. I had the pleasure of inviting a friend to a recent iftar event in Scunthorpe. She wished to join us in the female prayer area to see how we pray and asked for the translation in English. I gave her a translation of the full salat prayer. I encourage the same for anyone who shares Mr Timothy’s views. Mariam Sohail Brigg, Lincolnshire • While Kemi Badenoch and Nigel Farage revive old English norms of persecuting minorities, faced by Catholics and Jews for centuries, most British citizens respect religious freedom and tolerance. We need to show which norms we uphold via the ballot box in May. Titus Alexander Galashiels, Scottish Borders • It’s a funny thing how “British values” include monks and nuns praying separately – not to mention wearing weird head coverings and baggy, sexless clothing. It’s only when non-Christians get do it that it becomes controversial. Sylvia Rose Totnes, Devon • 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.
It doesn’t take a miracle to cut infant deaths, just basic care | Letter
Your coverage of Unicef’s child mortality report (18 March) paints a stark picture. Progress is plateauing and most childhood deaths in 2024 were preventable. This burden is not felt equally; over 80% of under-five deaths occur in sub-Saharan Africa and south Asia. Neonatal conditions account for over a third of deaths in children under five. Too often, public birth facilities in fragile systems fail when mothers and babies need them most, leaving survival to chance. The barriers are tragically consistent: delays in deciding to seek care, reaching a facility, receiving timely adequate care and recognition of complicated cases with prompt referral. To stop preventable deaths, we don’t need “miracle” inventions, we need to fix the most dangerous gaps in basic care. A modern delivery room is useless if the doors are locked at night, and a stockroom full of medicine is pointless if there isn’t a professional to administer them. Even the best-equipped clinic can’t function if the lights won’t turn on. When these basics are consistently in place, we can ensure reliable protection for mothers and babies. Pakistan provides a powerful example of this approach. In 2012, one in 11 children in Punjab died before their fifth birthday. By getting the basics right, with our support, the government increased facility deliveries by over 350,000 annually in just three years – the total volume surpassed even the NHS. This contributed to a 35% reduction in infant mortality rates by 2024. Similar success in Sindh has seen delivery rates at public facilities more than double since 2017. This transformation came from doing the basics well, consistently. This report must serve as a wake-up call. No woman should depend on luck to survive childbirth – and no baby should die for lack of the basics we already know how to deliver. Dr Farhana Zareef Acasus, Toronto, Canada
Arizona’s guns are feeding the bloodshed in Mexico’s cartel war
When war broke out within the Sinaloa cartel, one of Mexico’s most powerful criminal organisations, people hoped it would last just a few months. But more than a year and a half later it is still going, fuelled by a flow of firearms from the US – specifically from Arizona, which has surged past Texas to become the top source of guns seized in Mexico and traced to a recent US purchase. “We have an enormous problem with gun trafficking by the Mexican drug cartels from Arizona down into Mexico,” Arizona’s attorney general, Kris Mayes, told the Guardian. “There is no doubt in my mind about that.” When Mexican authorities recover guns, they can submit the serial numbers to be traced by their US counterparts. And according to the most recent available data, 62% of the guns seized in Mexico in 2024 and traced to a US purchase less than a year earlier – a key indicator they were bought to be trafficked – came from Arizona. This coincides with the eruption of conflict in Sinaloa after Ismael “El Mayo” Zambada, who founded the Sinaloa cartel with Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán, was detained along with one of Guzmán’s sons after a small plane touched down in the US in July 2024. Zambada accused Guzmán’s son of betrayal. Now a faction led by Zambada’s son is waging war against another led by the two sons of El Chapo who remain free in Mexico. “We don’t know what their inventory of guns, ammunition, men and vehicles is,” said Miguel Calderón, coordinator of Sinaloa’s state council on public security, in December 2024. “I imagine they’re pulling together everything they have. This is the mother of all battles.” Roughly 5,000 people are now dead or missing. And the factions show no signs of running out of guns. Since the war broke out, Mexican security forces have seized almost 5,000 firearms in Sinaloa, which is roughly 20% of all the guns seized in the country in that time. Mexico itself has strict gun laws and just two legal gun shops, where the weapons are sold by the Mexican military, meaning that its criminal groups look for their firepower abroad – and mostly in the US. “The traced guns [from 2024] with a short ‘time to crime’ are very concentrated in the county where Phoenix is located,” said John Lindsay-Poland, coordinator of the Stop US Arms to Mexico project. “Others are coming from Tucson, and others from Texas. But the majority are now coming from Arizona.” This is reflected in the fact that the Mexican state with the second highest number of gun seizures in 2025, after Sinaloa, is Sonora – which lies just over the border from Arizona. “This is a change, because for many years, Tamaulipas on the Gulf coast was by far the state with most guns recovered,” said Lindsay-Poland. “And Texas was also dominant in the number of guns sold and then found in Mexico with a short time to crime.” Like Texas, Arizona is a state where it is relatively easy to buy a firearm. Cartel associates often recruit Americans to be “straw purchasers”, sending them into stores to buy them guns in return for a commission, before those guns are trafficked south over the border. Mayes, the attorney general, recently announced the indictment of one gun-trafficking ring involving 20 people that bought more than 330 firearms, many of which ended up in Mexico, but she suspects “this is just the tip of the iceberg”. According to Mayes’ office, the markup for trafficked guns – and especially rifles such as the AR-15 and the AK-47 – has spiked in Mexico, feeding through into higher commissions for straw purchasers in Arizona, possibly reflecting demand driven by cartel infighting. The Mexican government has an ongoing lawsuit against five Arizona gun shops it has accused of facilitating gun trafficking, while Claudia Sheinbaum, Mexico’s president, has also called on Donald Trump to help stem the flow of illegal firearms to Mexico. But for now the border between Arizona and Sonora – which is also where most seizures of fentanyl coming into the US take place – is a focal point for trafficking. “Arizona is the fentanyl funnel for the rest of the [US], and it’s also where firearms are being funnelled down into Mexico,” said Mayes. “So this is a twin problem.”