The US and Ukraine have signed a deal that will give Washington access to some of the war-torn country's natural resources.

Months in the making, it sets up an investment fund that Ukraine hopes will cement US assistance as the country struggles to repel Russia three years after the invasion.

The BBC has seen a draft of the deal but not the final text. Based on that and the public statements from both sides, here are seven key takeaways.

No Ukrainian payback to US

Trump has previously demanded that Ukraine pay back the $350bn (£264bn) of aid that he claims has been provided by the US during the war - a condition that Zelensky rejected.

But Washington appears to have made a concession. Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal said the agreement did not dictate that his country pay back any supposed "debt".

• Follow reaction to deal as it happens
• What minerals does Ukraine have?

Trump has styled the agreement as a win for his side as well, saying his country will get back "much more in theory" than the billions that were provided to Ukraine by his predecessor Joe Biden.

Tougher tone from US towards Putin

The language used by the US in announcing the deal is notably harsher towards Russia than is usually the case from the Trump administration.

A statement by the US Treasury Department refers to "Russia's full scale invasion" and adds that "no state or person who financed or supplied the Russian war machine will be allowed to benefit from the reconstruction of Ukraine".

This will hearten Kyiv, which has demanded more pressure be placed on Russia in talks between Moscow and Washington discussing a possible ceasefire.

Oil and gas included alongside minerals

Despite the fact that much of the talk around the deal relates to Ukraine's mineral wealth, the agreement also includes provisions for new oil and gas projects, and related infrastructure.

In all cases, the resources stay in Ukrainian ownership, even though the US will get joint access.

This has been seen as a softening of the Ukrainian position, since it was not in earlier drafts of the deal.

No hindrance to Kyiv's EU ambitions

Ukraine has long aspired to join the European Union and accession talks formally began last June.

There were some concerns in Kyiv that the resources deal could hinder Ukraine's ability to join the EU, if it gave preferential treatment to US investors, as Kyiv and Brussels already have a strategic partnership on raw materials.

But the deal's text says that the US acknowledges Ukraine's intention to join the EU and the need for this agreement not to conflict with that.

It also says that if Ukraine needs to revisit the terms of the deal because of "additional obligations" as part of joining the EU, then the US agrees to negotiate in good faith.

Additionally, Kyiv says the US will support additional transfers of investment and technology in Ukraine, including from the EU and elsewhere.

Profits to be reinvested in Ukraine for 10 years

Another intriguing element of the deal is that, for the first decade of the reconstruction investment fund, profits will be "fully reinvested in Ukraine's economy".

This is potentially significant if there is no financial benefit for the US for 10 years. Ukraine says it expects that any money that comes into the fund will go towards rebuilding the country and new projects.

After that initial period, profits may be distributed between the partners. US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told Fox News that the deal was a signal to the American people that "we have a chance to participate, get some of the funding and the weapons, compensation for those and be partners with the success of the Ukraine people".

A US military commitment back on table...

The US has framed the deal as an essential one to sign if Ukraine is to continue to receive its military assistance.

Ukrainian First Deputy Prime Minister Yulia Svyrydenko - who flew to Washington DC to sign the deal - said it envisaged the US contributing new assistance in the future, such as air defence systems.

• How much has US given to Ukraine?

This, too, would mark a change in strategy for Trump - who has sought to wind down military support for Ukraine since returning to the White House.

One outstanding question is what the accord will ultimately mean for the state of the war. The Kremlin has not yet responded to the agreement.

...but US can still walk away any time

It appears there are no concrete security guarantees from the US, which is something Ukraine and Europe have long been pushing the White House to provide.

Trump has long been reluctant to give the same military commitment that Biden had given.

Instead, his interest in staying the course with US support for Ukraine is more implicit, due to the economic commitments set out in this deal.

That means there would still be a fragility about the commitment of Ukraine's most important ally.

The US has urged India and Pakistan to work together to "de-escalate tensions" after a deadly militant attack in Indian-administered Kashmir last week killed 26 civilians.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio held separate talks with India's foreign minister and Pakistan's prime minister on Wednesday and called on them to "maintain peace and security in South Asia".

India accuses Pakistan of supporting militants behind the 22 April attack at a scenic meadow near the resort town of Pahalgam. Islamabad rejects the allegations.

On Wednesday India also announced the closure of its airspace for all Pakistani aircraft, in the latest of a series of tit-for-tat measures taken by both sides.

The "perpetrators, backers and planners" of the Pahalgam attack "must be brought to justice", Indian Foreign Minister S Jaishankar wrote on X after speaking to his US counterpart by telephone, as Rubio expressed his sorrow and reaffirmed Washington's support in India's fight against terrorism.

Meanwhile, the top US diplomat expressed the need to "condemn the terror attack" in his talks with Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif.

He urged Islamabad to co-operate "in investigating this unconscionable attack".

During the call, Sharif rejected "Indian attempts to link Pakistan to the incident", a statement issued by his office read. The Pakistani prime minister also urged the US to "impress upon India to dial down the rhetoric and act responsibly".

The phone calls come after Pakistan's information minister warned that they had "credible intelligence" suggesting India might launch military action against the country in the next 24-36 hours. Delhi has not publicly commented on these claims.

There has been speculation over whether India will respond with military strikes against Pakistan, as it did after deadly militant attacks in 2019 and 2016. Islamabad has warned of retaliation in case of military action from India's side.

Amid mounting tensions Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has held back-to-back meetings with senior state and defence officials in Delhi this week.

On Wednesday, India's cabinet committee on security, led by Modi, met for the second time since the attack.

This came a day after the prime minister, in his meeting with India's top defence officials, gave the armed forces a free hand to decide on the "timing, targets and mode" in their response to the Pahalgam attack, according to Indian news outlets citing unnamed sources.

Troops from both sides have traded intermittent small-arms fire across the border for the past few days.

On Tuesday India "strongly objected" to multiple ceasefire violations by Pakistan during a weekly call between senior army officials of both countries, Indian news outlets reported.

A day later, India announced that it would not allow any Pakistani aircraft - commercial or military - to fly over its airspace, responding to a similar move by Pakistan.

Last week, India suspended most visas given to Pakistani nationals and asked them to leave the country within days, the deadline for which has since passed. It also suspended a key water-sharing agreement with Pakistan.

Islamabad further retaliated with similar visa cancellations and by suspending a 1972 peace treaty with Delhi.

Since the measures were announced, 786 Pakistani citizens have left India and 1,465 Indians have returned from Pakistan, media reports say.

Meanwhile, the Instagram accounts of a number of Pakistani film actors and celebrities have been blocked in India.

Searches for some celebrity accounts now come up as unavailable.

"This is because we complied with a legal request to restrict this content," an Instagram notification reads.

India has not officially commented on why the accounts were taken offline. More than a dozen Pakistani news channels were also banned in India earlier this week for spreading what was described as provocative content, media reports say.

Kashmir, which India and Pakistan claim in full but administer only in part, has been a flashpoint between the two nuclear-armed countries since they were partitioned in 1947.

Indian-administered Kashmir has seen an armed insurgency against Indian rule since 1989, with militants targeting security forces and civilians alike.

India has not officially named any organisation it suspects carried out the attack, but it was initially reported that a group called the Resistance Front was behind the attack. The group, however, denied involvement in a statement issued days later. It is reportedly affiliated with Lashkar-e-Taiba, a Pakistan-based militant group, which India classifies as terrorist.

Indian police have named three of four suspected attackers. They said two were Pakistani nationals and one a local man from Indian-administered Kashmir. There is no information on the fourth man.

Many survivors said the gunmen specifically targeted Hindu men.

The attack, the deadliest attack on civilians in two decades in the disputed territory, has sparked widespread anger across India.

Modi has vowed to exact revenge against the perpetrators.

"India will identify, track and punish" the people behind the attack in a way "beyond their imagination", Modi said in a fiery speech days after the killings last week.

Follow BBC News India on Instagram, YouTube, Twitter and Facebook.

The estranged husband of a woman who served a poisonous mushroom lunch to her family says it was "very rare" for her to hold social gatherings at home.

Simon Patterson was invited to the fatal meal prepared by Erin Patterson - but decided not to attend the day before.

Mr Patterson is the first witness in the trial of Ms Patterson - who is charged with the murder of three relatives and the attempted murder of another, with the case centring on a beef wellington lunch at her house in July 2023.

Ms Patterson, 50, has pleaded not guilty and her defence team says she "panicked" after unintentionally serving poison to family members she loved.

Three people died in hospital in the days after the meal, including Ms Patterson's former in-laws, Don Patterson, 70, and Gail Patterson, 70, as well as Gail's sister, Heather Wilkinson, 66. Local pastor Ian Wilkinson survived after weeks of treatment in hospital.

The jury has been shown text messages exchanged between Simon and Erin Patterson the day before the deadly mushroom lunch.

Mr Patterson said he felt "too uncomfortable" about attending the lunch.

Erin Patterson responded: "That's really disappointing. I've spent many hours this week preparing lunch for tomorrow... It's important to me that you're all there tomorrow and that I can have the conversations that I need to have."

The prosecution alleges Ms Patterson invited the group to lunch "on the pretence she'd been diagnosed with cancer".

The court in Morwell, regional Victoria, heard that between the couple's marriage in 2007 and separation in 2015, there were a number of periods of separation and reconciliation - including Erin Patterson leaving her husband and their baby son in the middle of a road trip across Australia in 2009.

Mr Patterson had to drive from Townsville to Perth - a distance of about 5,000 km (3,100 miles) - alone with the child, he told the court.

The couple met in 2002, while both working at Monash City Council, where Mr Patterson was a civil engineer.

Asked about his wife, Mr Patterson said: "Erin is very intelligent.

"Some of the things that attracted me to her in the first place is definitely her intelligence. She's quite witty and can be quite funny."

Asked about how his wife got on with his parents, Don and Gail Patterson, Mr Patterson said: "She especially got on with dad. They shared a love of knowledge and learning in the world."

With his voice faltering, Mr Patterson added: "I think she loves his gentle nature."

He said Ms Patterson held a university degree in business and accounting, and was also qualified as an air traffic controller having worked at Melbourne's Tullemarine airport.

Mr Patterson painted a picture of a relationship peppered with periods of separation - the first within the first two years of marriage - at one point becoming emotional and asking for tissues.

After the final separation there was a lot of communication by text message he said, including "banter" and talk about politics, he said.

But there was a change in the relationship in 2022 when Ms Patterson was "upset" when her husband listed himself as separated on his tax return.

The "chatty nature" of their relationship "pretty much stopped" after this, Mr Patterson said - with communication now only about the "practical management" of their family life.

Wearing a navy suit, white shirt and purple tie, he told that Ms Patterson received a "substantial inheritance" from her grandmother which Mr Patterson estimated at A$2m ($1.3m; £964,000) - though it was not paid in a lump sum and was "dribbled out" by the executors of the estate.

The jury has heard that there is no dispute that the lunch of beef wellington, mashed potatoes and green beans contained death cap mushrooms and caused the guests' illnesses.

Whether Ms Patterson intended to kill or cause very serious injury is the main issue in the case, the judge has told the jury.

The court heard the couple had married in 2007 and had two children together - though separated permanently in 2015 .

They had remained "amicable" including sharing family holidays, though there was a falling out over child support payments in 2022, the jury was told.

During the prosecution's opening statement on Wednesday, lead defence barrister Nanette Rogers said the jury would hear evidence that Ms Patterson had travelled to a location, near her home in Leongatha, where death cap mushroom sightings had been logged on a naturalist website.

And in the days after the lunch, she took a number of steps to "conceal" what she had done, the prosecution alleged.

There'd be evidence that she lied to investigators about the source of the mushrooms in the dish - saying some had come from Asian grocery in Melbourne and she'd never foraged wild ones. And she made a trip to a local dump to dispose of a food dehydrator prosecutors say she used to prepare the toxic meal.

Ms Patterson's barrister has said she did not deliberately serve poisoned food to her guests.

"The defence case is that she panicked because she was overwhelmed by the fact that these four people had become so ill because of the food she had served them."

One of Japan's busiest bullet train lines came to a halt after a snake tangled itself in a power line, causing a power outage.

Tokaido Shinkansen trains running between Tokyo and Osaka were suspended from around 17:25 local time on Wednesday.

Services resumed at around 19:00 local time, operator Central Japan Railway Company said, according to local media.

Japan is currently in one of its busiest holiday seasons, Golden Week, which consists of four national holidays in seven days, and will see trains, airports and holiday hotspots hit their peak.

Osaka is also hosting the World Expo this year, which will see millions of foreign and domestic visitors flock to the city until it ends in October.

The snake entanglement occurred between Gifu-Hashima and Maibara stations, which suspended Tokyo-bound trains between Shin-Osaka and Nagoya, and the Osaka-bound trains between Shin-Osaka and Tokyo, according to Japanese news agency Kyodo News.

While authorities worked to get power restored, passengers reportedly gathered around staff at one station while large queues formed at ticket machines.

One frequent shinkansen traveller, who was returning to Tokyo, said it was the first time he had experienced this.

"I use the shinkansen several times a month, but this is the first time I have experienced suspensions due to a power outage," Satoshi Tagawa, 46, told Kyodo News.

But 26-year-old Kazutoshi Tachi, said he was "fed up with the troubles" to services.

"I want them to run on time," he added.

This is not the first time a snake has brought the shinkansen service to a halt.

In April 2024, there was a 17-minute hold-up while authorities removed a 16 inch (40.6cm) snake from the train between Nagoya and Tokyo, according to CBS News, BBC News's US partner.

The estranged husband of a woman who served a poisonous mushroom lunch to her family says it was "very rare" for her to hold social gatherings at home.

Simon Patterson was invited to the fatal meal prepared by Erin Patterson - but decided not to attend the day before.

Mr Patterson is the first witness in the trial of Ms Patterson - who is charged with the murder of three relatives and the attempted murder of another, with the case centring on a beef wellington lunch at her house in July 2023.

Ms Patterson, 50, has pleaded not guilty and her defence team says she "panicked" after unintentionally serving poison to family members she loved.

Three people died in hospital in the days after the meal, including Ms Patterson's former in-laws, Don Patterson, 70, and Gail Patterson, 70, as well as Gail's sister, Heather Wilkinson, 66. Local pastor Ian Wilkinson survived after weeks of treatment in hospital.

The jury has been shown text messages exchanged between Simon and Erin Patterson the day before the deadly mushroom lunch.

Mr Patterson said he felt "too uncomfortable" about attending the lunch.

Erin Patterson responded: "That's really disappointing. I've spent many hours this week preparing lunch for tomorrow... It's important to me that you're all there tomorrow and that I can have the conversations that I need to have."

The prosecution alleges Ms Patterson invited the group to lunch "on the pretence she'd been diagnosed with cancer".

The court in Morwell, regional Victoria, heard that between the couple's marriage in 2007 and separation in 2015, there were a number of periods of separation and reconciliation - including Erin Patterson leaving her husband and their baby son in the middle of a road trip across Australia in 2009.

Mr Patterson had to drive from Townsville to Perth - a distance of about 5,000 km (3,100 miles) - alone with the child, he told the court.

The couple met in 2002, while both working at Monash City Council, where Mr Patterson was a civil engineer.

Asked about his wife, Mr Patterson said: "Erin is very intelligent.

"Some of the things that attracted me to her in the first place is definitely her intelligence. She's quite witty and can be quite funny."

Asked about how his wife got on with his parents, Don and Gail Patterson, Mr Patterson said: "She especially got on with dad. They shared a love of knowledge and learning in the world."

With his voice faltering, Mr Patterson added: "I think she loves his gentle nature."

He said Ms Patterson held a university degree in business and accounting, and was also qualified as an air traffic controller having worked at Melbourne's Tullemarine airport.

Mr Patterson painted a picture of a relationship peppered with periods of separation - the first within the first two years of marriage - at one point becoming emotional and asking for tissues.

After the final separation there was a lot of communication by text message he said, including "banter" and talk about politics, he said.

But there was a change in the relationship in 2022 when Ms Patterson was "upset" when her husband listed himself as separated on his tax return.

The "chatty nature" of their relationship "pretty much stopped" after this, Mr Patterson said - with communication now only about the "practical management" of their family life.

Wearing a navy suit, white shirt and purple tie, he told that Ms Patterson received a "substantial inheritance" from her grandmother which Mr Patterson estimated at A$2m ($1.3m; £964,000) - though it was not paid in a lump sum and was "dribbled out" by the executors of the estate.

The jury has heard that there is no dispute that the lunch of beef wellington, mashed potatoes and green beans contained death cap mushrooms and caused the guests' illnesses.

Whether Ms Patterson intended to kill or cause very serious injury is the main issue in the case, the judge has told the jury.

The court heard the couple had married in 2007 and had two children together - though separated permanently in 2015 .

They had remained "amicable" including sharing family holidays, though there was a falling out over child support payments in 2022, the jury was told.

During the prosecution's opening statement on Wednesday, lead defence barrister Nanette Rogers said the jury would hear evidence that Ms Patterson had travelled to a location, near her home in Leongatha, where death cap mushroom sightings had been logged on a naturalist website.

And in the days after the lunch, she took a number of steps to "conceal" what she had done, the prosecution alleged.

There'd be evidence that she lied to investigators about the source of the mushrooms in the dish - saying some had come from Asian grocery in Melbourne and she'd never foraged wild ones. And she made a trip to a local dump to dispose of a food dehydrator prosecutors say she used to prepare the toxic meal.

Ms Patterson's barrister has said she did not deliberately serve poisoned food to her guests.

"The defence case is that she panicked because she was overwhelmed by the fact that these four people had become so ill because of the food she had served them."

Tesla has denied reports that it has contacted recruitment firms to launch a search for a replacement for Elon Musk as chief executive.

The Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday that the electric car firm's board began looking for a successor to Mr Musk last month.

It said this was because of frustration around Mr Musk's focus on his job in US President Donald Trump's administration and Tesla's sinking share price.

However, in statement on Thursday, Tesla said the report was "absolutely false", adding "the board is highly confident in [Mr Musk's] ability to continue executing on the exciting growth plan ahead".