US President Donald Trump will host Volodymyr Zelensky on Monday for their first meeting since the pair's heated exchange in the White House earlier this year - but this time the Ukrainian president is bringing European allies.

Nato Secretary General Mark Rutte and UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer are among leaders who will join Zelensky in Washington for talks on how to end the war with Russia.

It follows Trump's summit with Russian leader Vladimir Putin in Alaska that resulted in the US president dropping a demand for a ceasefire and calling instead for a permanent peace deal.

A US envoy said on Sunday that Putin had agreed to a possible Nato-like security pact for Ukraine.

"BIG PROGRESS ON RUSSIA. STAY TUNED!" Trump posted on his Truth Social platform, without elaborating.

Also heading to Washington for Monday's meeting are French President Emmanuel Macron, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Finnish President Alexander Stubb and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. It is unclear how many of them will go to the White House.

• What handing Donbas to Putin would mean for Ukraine
• Washington talks could prove more vital than Trump-Putin summit
• In maps: War-ravaged Ukrainian territories

For so many heads of state to travel with such little notice across the Atlantic to what is essentially a wartime crisis meeting appears without precedent in the modern era, underscoring the sky-high stakes.

Diplomatic sources say European officials are concerned that Trump may try to press Zelensky to agree to terms, after the Ukrainian leader was excluded from the Trump-Putin meeting on US soil last Friday.

But US Secretary of State Marco Rubio told the BBC's US partner CBS that any suggestion Zelensky might be bullied by Trump into accepting a peace deal was a "stupid media narrative".

Nato leaders also appear eager to avoid a repeat of Zelensky's February trip to the Oval Office that ended abruptly after an argument with Trump and US Vice-President JD Vance.

The altercation - which saw Trump accuse Zelensky of "gambling with World War Three" - left Washington-Kyiv ties in tatters.

But European leaders have been working diligently behind the scenes since then to mend the relationship. The Ukrainian leader has been coached to talk in terms of deal-making - language that resonates with Trump.

In April, Ukraine signed a minerals agreement that gave the US a financial stake in the country, and Trump and Zelensky spoke privately at the Vatican before Pope Francis's funeral. Ukraine made clear it was willing to pay for US weapons.

By July, the two leaders had a phone call that the Ukrainian president described as "the best conversation we have had".

Meanwhile, Trump had begun to express exasperation with Russia's unrelenting onslaught in Ukraine. He called Putin "absolutely crazy", drastically shortened his deadline for a peace deal, and threatened economic sanctions on Moscow.

As these deliberations grind on, Russian forces continue to advance on the battlefield. They now occupy almost a fifth of Ukraine since Moscow launched its full scale invasion in February 2022.

A virtual summit was held on Sunday between Zelensky and the so-called coalition of the willing - a group of nations including the UK, France and Germany that have pledged to protect peace in Ukraine once it is achieved.

Afterwards, Emmanuel Macron told reporters their plan was to "present a united front" for Monday's talks with Trump.

Zelensky and the Nato leaders said they were keen to learn more after US envoy Steve Witkoff told US television that Putin had agreed on Friday to "robust security guarantees that I would describe as game-changing".

Witkoff said such an agreement could see Europe and the US protect Ukraine from further aggression with a Nato-like defence agreement.

"We were able to win the following concession: that the United States could offer Article 5-like protection, which is one of the real reasons why Ukraine wants to be in Nato," Witkoff told CNN on Sunday.

Putin has long opposed Ukraine joining Nato, and Witkoff said the arrangement could be an alternative if the Ukrainians "can live with it".

Article 5 is a principle at the heart of the 32-member transatlantic military alliance that says its members will come to the defence of an ally that is under attack.

Witkoff also told CNN that Russia made "some concessions" around five heavily contested regions of Ukraine.

In talks with European allies after the Alaska summit, Trump said Putin had reiterated that he wants the key Donetsk and Luhansk regions that make up Donbas, eastern Ukraine, according to European officials.

But at Sunday's virtual summit with Nato leaders, Zelensky stressed that the Ukrainian constitution makes it impossible to give up territory - and that this should only be discussed by the leaders of Ukraine and Russia at a trilateral summit with the US.

The US secretary of state, meanwhile, sought to temper hopes that a deal to end Europe's deadliest conflict for 80 years could be imminent.

"We're still a long ways off," America's top diplomat said on Sunday.

US President Donald Trump will host Volodymyr Zelensky on Monday for their first meeting since the pair's heated exchange in the White House earlier this year - but this time the Ukrainian president is bringing European allies.

Nato Secretary General Mark Rutte and UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer are among leaders who will join Zelensky in Washington for talks on how to end the war with Russia.

It follows Trump's summit with Russian leader Vladimir Putin in Alaska that resulted in the US president dropping a demand for a ceasefire and calling instead for a permanent peace deal.

A US envoy said on Sunday that Putin had agreed to a possible Nato-like security pact for Ukraine.

"BIG PROGRESS ON RUSSIA. STAY TUNED!" Trump posted on his Truth Social platform, without elaborating.

Also heading to Washington for Monday's meeting are French President Emmanuel Macron, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Finnish President Alexander Stubb and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. It is unclear how many of them will go to the White House.

• What handing Donbas to Putin would mean for Ukraine
• Washington talks could prove more vital than Trump-Putin summit
• In maps: War-ravaged Ukrainian territories

For so many heads of state to travel with such little notice across the Atlantic to what is essentially a wartime crisis meeting appears without precedent in the modern era, underscoring the sky-high stakes.

Diplomatic sources say European officials are concerned that Trump may try to press Zelensky to agree to terms, after the Ukrainian leader was excluded from the Trump-Putin meeting on US soil last Friday.

But US Secretary of State Marco Rubio told the BBC's US partner CBS that any suggestion Zelensky might be bullied by Trump into accepting a peace deal was a "stupid media narrative".

Nato leaders also appear eager to avoid a repeat of Zelensky's February trip to the Oval Office that ended abruptly after an argument with Trump and US Vice-President JD Vance.

The altercation - which saw Trump accuse Zelensky of "gambling with World War Three" - left Washington-Kyiv ties in tatters.

But European leaders have been working diligently behind the scenes since then to mend the relationship. The Ukrainian leader has been coached to talk in terms of deal-making - language that resonates with Trump.

In April, Ukraine signed a minerals agreement that gave the US a financial stake in the country, and Trump and Zelensky spoke privately at the Vatican before Pope Francis's funeral. Ukraine made clear it was willing to pay for US weapons.

By July, the two leaders had a phone call that the Ukrainian president described as "the best conversation we have had".

Meanwhile, Trump had begun to express exasperation with Russia's unrelenting onslaught in Ukraine. He called Putin "absolutely crazy", drastically shortened his deadline for a peace deal, and threatened economic sanctions on Moscow.

As these deliberations grind on, Russian forces continue to advance on the battlefield. They now occupy almost a fifth of Ukraine since Moscow launched its full scale invasion in February 2022.

A virtual summit was held on Sunday between Zelensky and the so-called coalition of the willing - a group of nations including the UK, France and Germany that have pledged to protect peace in Ukraine once it is achieved.

Afterwards, Emmanuel Macron told reporters their plan was to "present a united front" for Monday's talks with Trump.

Zelensky and the Nato leaders said they were keen to learn more after US envoy Steve Witkoff told US television that Putin had agreed on Friday to "robust security guarantees that I would describe as game-changing".

Witkoff said such an agreement could see Europe and the US protect Ukraine from further aggression with a Nato-like defence agreement.

"We were able to win the following concession: that the United States could offer Article 5-like protection, which is one of the real reasons why Ukraine wants to be in Nato," Witkoff told CNN on Sunday.

Putin has long opposed Ukraine joining Nato, and Witkoff said the arrangement could be an alternative if the Ukrainians "can live with it".

Article 5 is a principle at the heart of the 32-member transatlantic military alliance that says its members will come to the defence of an ally that is under attack.

Witkoff also told CNN that Russia made "some concessions" around five heavily contested regions of Ukraine.

In talks with European allies after the Alaska summit, Trump said Putin had reiterated that he wants the key Donetsk and Luhansk regions that make up Donbas, eastern Ukraine, according to European officials.

But at Sunday's virtual summit with Nato leaders, Zelensky stressed that the Ukrainian constitution makes it impossible to give up territory - and that this should only be discussed by the leaders of Ukraine and Russia at a trilateral summit with the US.

The US secretary of state, meanwhile, sought to temper hopes that a deal to end Europe's deadliest conflict for 80 years could be imminent.

"We're still a long ways off," America's top diplomat said on Sunday.

It is quite possible that Monday's meeting in the White House could prove even more crucial to the future of Ukraine - and for all of Europe's security - than last Friday's US-Russia summit in Alaska.

On the surface, that Putin-Trump reunion seemed to live down to every expectation.

There was no ceasefire, no sanctions, no grand announcements.

Were Ukraine and Europe about to get cut out of a deal cooked up behind closed doors by the world's two foremost nuclear powers?

Not, apparently, if Ukraine and its partners can prevent it.

The presence of Sir Keir Starmer, President Macron, Chancellor Merz and other leaders alongside President Zelensky in Washington is about more than making sure he does not get ambushed in the Oval Office again, in the way he did on 28 February.

They are determined to impress upon Donald Trump two things: firstly, that there can be no peace deal for Ukraine without Ukraine's direct involvement and secondly, that it must be backed by 'cast-iron' security guarantees.

Above all, Europe's leaders want the US President to see that Ukraine and Europe present a united front and they are eager to ensure he is not being swayed by his obvious personal rapport with Vladimir Putin into giving in to the Russian leaders' demands.

This is where the Sir Keir Starmer's diplomatic skills will be sorely tested.

Trump likes Starmer and listens to him, and in a month's time Trump will be coming to the UK on a state visit.

He also likes Mark Rutte, the NATO Secretary-General who will be in attendance, a man who is sometimes called 'the Trump Whisperer'.

The US President appears to be less fond of President Macron and the White House was sharply critical recently of his intention to unconditionally recognise a Palestinian state at the next UN General Assembly.

For a peace deal in Ukraine to have any chance of working, something has to give.

European leaders have said frequently that international borders cannot be changed by force and President Zelensky has said time and time again he will not give up land and besides, Ukraine's constitution forbids it.

But Putin wants the Donbas, which his forces already control around 85 per cent of, and he has absolutely no intention of ever handing back Crimea.

Yet as the former Estonian PM and now Europe's top diplomat Kaja Kallas once said to me: victory for Ukraine in this war does not have to be exclusively about reconquering occupied land.

If Ukraine can obtain the sort of Article 5-type security guarantees now being talked about, sufficient to deter any future Russian aggression and thereby safeguard its independence as a free and sovereign state, then that would be a form of victory.

It does now appear that what the US and Russia have been discussing is a proposal that broadly trades some Ukrainian land for security guarantees that it won't have to give up any more to Russia.

But the question marks are huge.

Could Ukraine accept a deal that ends the war but costs it land, especially when so many thousands have died trying to save that land?

If it is asked to give up the remaining 30 per cent of Donetsk Oblast that Russia has yet to occupy then does that leave the path westwards to Kyiv dangerously under-defended?

And what of Starmer's much-vaunted Coalition of the Willing?

Earlier talk of deploying tens of thousands of boots on the ground have since been scaled back.

Now it's more about 'safeguarding skies and seas' while helping Ukraine to rebuild its army.

But even if peace does break out on the battlefield we are still in dangerous territory.

Every military expert I have spoken to believes that the moment the fighting stops Putin will reconstitute his army, build more weapons, until he is in a position, perhaps in as little as three to four years, to grab more land.

If and when that happens it will be a brave Typhoon or F35 pilot who is prepared to fire that first missile on an advancing Russian column.

"Skibidi", "tradwife" and other slang terms popularised on social media are among thousands of new words to be added to the Cambridge Dictionary this year.

Skibidi is a gibberish term coined by the creator of a viral animated video series on YouTube, while tradwife is a shortening of "traditional wife" – a married mother who cooks, cleans and posts on social media.

More than 6,000 new words are included, including those that relate to remote working and tech giants.

"Internet culture is changing the English language and the effect is fascinating to observe and capture in the dictionary," said lexical programme manager Colin McIntosh.

Skibidi is defined in the dictionary as "a word that can have different meanings such as 'cool' or 'bad', or can be used with no real meaning as a joke". An example of its use is "What the skibidi are you doing?"

Reality TV star Kim Kardashian revealed her familiarity with the phrase when she posted a video on Instagram showing a necklace engraved with "skibidi toilet" – the name of the YouTube series.

As well as new phrases, some shortened versions of existing terms have been added, including "delulu" – a play on the word "delusional", with a similar definition: "believing things that are not real or true, usually because you choose to".

An increase in remote working since the pandemic has seen "mouse jiggler" – a device or piece of software used to make it seem as though you are working when you are not – gain its place in the dictionary.

Some composite terms such as "broligarchy" have also been added. Merging "bro" and "oligarchy", it means "a small group of men, especially men owning or involved in a technology business, who are extremely rich and powerful, and who have or want political influence".

It was used to describe tech leaders Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg attending Donald Trump's inauguration in January.

Follow Cambridgeshire news on BBC Sounds, Facebook, Instagram and X.

Warning: This article contains strong language

The video opens with some white cliffs and a politician standing on a beach. This isn't Dover, and it's not Nigel Farage (although the echoes with Reform UK are deliberate). Rather, it's a campaign video for the Green Party's leadership hopeful, Zack Polanski.

Amid slick filming and a moody orchestral soundtrack, he delivers an animated and uncompromising message.

Small boats, he declares, are an "obsession that has gripped the country," blamed for a "crumbling" NHS and "obscene" rents, while people are told there's no money left.

"Well," he says, looking into the camera, "I call bullshit."

The real problem, he continues, are the "super-rich and their yachts".

The Green Party is on the brink of choosing its new leader. It usually does it once every two years and the contest can go fairly unnoticed.

Not this year.

Polanski, a former actor who is the party's deputy leader, has turbo-charged the race, the result of which will be announced on 2 September.

He calls his approach "eco-populism" and says it's about being "bolder" and more clearly anti-elite in communicating social and economic issues, as well as environmental ones.

This, he argues, is the style of messaging that the Green party needs to embrace.

He wants to "connect with people's anger" and then offer solutions, something the Greens are, in his view, often "too nice" to do.

He worries it leaves them looking "out of touch".

"I think far too often in the past we've equivocated or we've been too worried to challenge wealth and power in as blunt a way as possible. This isn't about shouting, it isn't about being louder, it's about being more effective."

Tried and tested vs a radical approach

The Greens had record success at the General Election last summer, going from one to four seats in Parliament and overturning large Labour and Conservative majorities.

Together with the Scottish Greens and the Green Party of Northern Ireland, they won 6.7% of the vote.

Now, the party is at a crossroads: does it stick with what it knows has worked or pick something more radical?

And, given the candidates don't really differ on policy, just how big a difference could new leadership make to the party's national chances?

Polanski, who is a member of the London Assembly, wants the Greens to replace Labour as the "party of the left".

But his opponents, the current co-leader Adrian Ramsay and new MP Ellie Chowns, who are running on a joint-ticket, believe Polanski would explode a winning formula that has brought them their greatest ever electoral success.

Ramsay and Chowns were elected to Parliament in last year's general election.

Their style is, mostly, less combative - they believe it's important that the Greens have broad appeal and that the party is seen to be at the heart of Westminster if it wants to bring about change.

Chowns says many voters already have a "generalised warm feeling" towards the Greens, they just need convincing they're a credible option.

"It's really the difference between populism and popularity," she says.

"What they need to know is that if they put their vote in the Green box on the ballot paper that's got a really, really good chance of electing somebody."

Time to capitalise on discontent?

Plenty of analysts, and Green party members themselves, have questioned why the party hasn't already capitalised more on left-wing discontent with Labour, or why it hasn't pitched itself more effectively as an alternative to the traditional parties, in the way Reform UK has.

Matt Zarb-Cousin, a former spokesperson for Jeremy Corbyn who joined the Greens in 2022, is a founding member of Greens Organise, a group that wants the party to take a more socialist stance.

He argues that it is "inexcusable" that the party hasn't made a breakthrough in the polls since the election.

Like Polanski, he believes that voters understand the party's environmental credentials and so it needs to highlight its policies on the cost of living, inequality and taxing wealth over work.

"It's not just about saying we support those things, it's about how you frame that argument: who are the enemies? Whose side are you on?"

Former Green party councillor Rupert Read, who is an environmental philosopher and a co-director of the campaign group Climate Majority Project, says a lot of Green party policy is left-wing, but adds that this is often the result of "making green policies that work for ordinary people".

"You need to come from a starting point that is not dogmatically and self-avowedly left. If you do there'll be a strict ceiling on the level of support which is possible."

Ramsay and Chowns make a similar argument. Ramsay says that Polanski is "about appealing to a narrow base of activists," which he and Chowns argue isn't enough to win in the UK's first past the past electoral system.

Chowns also believes that Polanski's approach is too similar to strategies that have failed in the past.

"We spent years as the Green party engaging in the sort of politics where we stood on street corners and told people why we were very passionate about things...

"It's all well and good but it's not the way to win people over."

Return of the 'Green surge'?

The Green Peer Baroness Bennett, who led the party between 2012 and 2016, said there had been "a level of excitement and interest around this leadership election more than I've ever seen before by a very large scale".

It is reporting a "significant increase" in members in the past few months, although it won't yet give an exact figure. (The cut-off date to join and be able to vote in the leadership contest was July 31.)

Baroness Bennett also points to "organic growth in the grassroots" since the general election.

The party has held 12 seats in council by-elections since 4 July 2024, and won another 14 - mostly at the expense of Labour, while losing four to the Conservatives.

This all marks a significant change from the past - the so-called "Green Surge" in 2015, under Baroness Bennett's leadership, saw the party's membership and vote share grow but still only returned Caroline Lucas to Parliament.

Prof Neil Carter from the University of York, a long-time observer of environmental politics, says he can see an argument for following Polanski's strategy, as the Greens have traditionally had the greatest success with "metropolitan, liberal-minded, young, professionals".

The sort of voters who are key to Chowns and Ramsay's approach could be harder to win over, he argues.

"The trouble is you can reach out to a sort of middle-class Tory rural voter to some extent, if you just talk Green, but as soon as you start to talk about all of those other issues that the Greens like to talk about, you're going to alienate those voters."

But Chowns, who, like Ramsay, won a formerly Conservative seat, says that's not her experience. "People across the political spectrum find a lot to like in what we stand for."

Attracting 'anti-system' voters

Getting noticed is often a struggle for smaller political parties. For that reason, Luke Tryl, who is UK director of the political research organisation More in Common, believes that Polanski's approach might be the Greens' quickest route to boosting its numbers.

"If you are trying to get 10 to 15%, it's probably what gets you noticed." But he argues it would net the party far fewer seats than the 40 that Polanski believes he can win.

He says that the party is rarely brought up in the focus groups which he runs outside of Green areas and that a charismatic leader could help the party cut through.

There is a segment of the population that is "anti-system", he says, to whom a more radical pitch from the Greens might appeal.

Mr Tryl, however, believes that while eco-populism could be a good way of getting known, the Greens would then need to "moderate" to become a "genuine mass movement party with potential for power".

On getting into government, he says: "The Adrian and Ellie approach is right because you need to win over more of the North Herefordshires and Waveney Valleys (Chowns' and Ramsay's seats) and actually places like the Isle of Wight - but they are a long way from that".

Where Corbyn's new party fits in

There is another challenge facing all candidates: the new party that will soon be launched by former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn and Zarah Sultana, a former Labour MP.

Both Prof Carter and Mr Tryl warn that Polanski's strategy could be crowded out by this new party that has yet to be named but which, according to Corbyn, had 600,000 people sign up by early August.

Ramsay goes further. He believes the new Corbyn party would blow Polanski's pitch "out of the water".

Research carried out in June by More in Common suggested that the establishment of a Corbyn led-party could cut the Green's nationwide vote share from 9% to 5%. (This did not take into account who would be leading the Greens).

Polanski has signalled he would be willing to co-operate with a possible Corbyn-led project and believes the Greens' position as an already established party will mean he can succeed.

It is Ramsay and Chowns who have secured what could be considered the "OG" of Green endorsements: the former MP Caroline Lucas.

The strategy they propose sticking with is based on the one she used to get elected as the first ever Green MP in 2010, and focuses on intensive local campaigning.

The question of who to target

Both leadership pitches include carrying on with local targeting but Polanski believes it can't be scaled up sufficiently to get large numbers of seats on its own.

Chowns dismisses this idea: "My vision at the next general election is that we will have multiple large numbers of target seats and definitely more than one in every region."

With either approach, the Greens face other obstacles, such as funding.

The party's principle of not being funded by large donors means they lack the financial resources of other political parties.

During the election period, the party raised just £160,000, compared with more than £1.6m for both Reform UK and the Liberal Democrats, and £9.5m by Labour.

The Green leader has also little direct control over policy, as it is set by the members - not that there is much difference between the candidates.

Polanski has gone further than current party policy by suggesting the UK should leave Nato, but there are only a few differences between the candidates' public positions.

Ultimately, whoever is chosen to lead the party this time will likely face re-election again before the next general election. The political landscape may have changed further but there is certainly an opportunity for the Greens if they land on the right strategy.

As Mr Tryl puts it, "In the age of very fragmented multi party politics, small vote shares can deliver outsized results".

Top picture credit: Dan Kitwood / Leon Neal via Getty

BBC InDepth is the home on the website and app for the best analysis, with fresh perspectives that challenge assumptions and deep reporting on the biggest issues of the day. And we showcase thought-provoking content from across BBC Sounds and iPlayer too. You can send us your feedback on the InDepth section by clicking on the button below.

A "neo-fascist Croatian Woodstock" or patriotic, anti-establishment fun?

Last month's mega-gig by the ultra-nationalist singer Thompson – the stage name of Marko Perkovic – has dramatically exposed the polarised divisions deep within Croatian society.

It shone a spotlight on wildly differing interpretations of both the country's struggle for independence in the 1990s, and the history of the Independent State of Croatia (NDH), a World War Two-era Nazi puppet state.

Nobody would argue that the concert was anything other than huge. Thompson's management claimed that more than half a million tickets for the show at Zagreb Hippodrome were sold. The actual attendance was considerably lower – but still in the hundreds of thousands.

That enormous crowd enthusiastically joined in when Thompson launched into his opening number, Čavoglave Battalion. To his cry of "Za dom" ("for homeland"), the audience roared back "Spremni!" ("ready!"). MPs from the governing HDZ party were among those chanting along.

This chant has outraged opposition parties and organisations working for human rights and ethnic and regional reconciliation. They point out that "Za dom, spremni" originated with the anti-Semitic, Nazi-allied Ustasha organization during World War Two – and that Croatia's Constitutional Court has ruled that the phrase "is an Ustasha salute of the Independent State of Croatia [which is] not in accordance with the Constitution of the Republic of Croatia".

"This has opened Pandora's box," says Tena Banjeglav of Documenta – Centre for Dealing with the Past, an organisation which focuses on reconciliation by taking a factual approach to both World War Two and the more recent war of independence.

"You've now got politicians in parliament screaming 'Za dom, spremni'. On the streets, kids are singing not only that song, but other songs Thompson used to sing which glorify mass crimes in World War Two," she says.

"The government is creating an atmosphere when this is a positive thing. It is creating a wave of nationalism which could explode into physical violence."

The government has in fact downplayed the chanting at the concert. Prime Minister Andrej Plenkovic described it as "part of Thompson's repertoire" and posed for a photo with the singer the day before the Zagreb gig.

Conservative commentator Matija Štahan believes that Thompson's time serving as a soldier during the war of independence gives him the right to use "Za dom, spremni" in his work.

"It is an authentic outcry for freedom against aggression," he says.

"Many journalists in the West say it's the Croatian version of 'Heil Hitler' – but it would be best to describe it as the Croatian version of [the Ukrainian national salute] 'Slava Ukraini'.

"Both rose to prominence in the context of World War Two – which was a war for many small nations who wanted their own independent states," Mr Štahan says.

"Symbols change their meaning – and just like 'Slava Ukraini', 'Za dom, spremni' also means something different. Today, it's an anti-establishment nationalist slogan. It's against the Croatian politically-correct post-communist political elite. Young people want to shout it as something that's subversive."

This interpretation cuts no ice with the Youth Initiative for Human Rights (YIHR), a regional organisation which works for reconciliation among the younger generations in the Western Balkans.

"It is clearly a fascist slogan," says YIHR's director in Croatia, Mario Mažić.

"As an EU member state, Croatia should be an example for the rest of the region, but it has not dealt with the past. It identifies with the losing side in World War Two, doesn't recognise it waged an unjust war in Bosnia and refuses to acknowledge systematic crimes against Serbs."

Thompson staged another huge show at the start of August in Krajina, the stronghold of Croatian Serbs during the war of independence. That performance was part of the celebrations for the 30th anniversary of Operation Storm – the military battle which ended Croatia's war of independence from Yugoslavia in the 1990s, but which also displaced hundreds of thousands of Serbs.

In recent years, the government had started to include commemorations for Serb victims. But reconciliation now appears to have a lower priority than promoting nationalist sentiment, with a military parade in Zagreb the showpiece of this year's events.

"All these things became more visible since the UK left the European Union – because when it comes to anti-fascist values, it can't be only up to Germany to protect them," says historian Tvrtko Jakovina.

Mr Jakovina believes this is convenient for a government which seems to have no answers to the numerous challenges facing contemporary Croatia.

"In the summer of 2025, we don't talk about the problems with our tourism, climate change, non-existent industry, higher education – or the demographic catastrophe that's looming," he says.

"Instead, we're talking about the military parade and two Thompson concerts."

Sign up for our morning newsletter and get BBC News in your inbox.

A recent court ban on feeding pigeons in public spaces in the western Indian city of Mumbai has become a major flashpoint between civic bodies, public health activists and bird lovers.

This month, hundreds of people clashed with police twice while protesting the closure of a decades-old pigeon feeding spot, or a kabutarkhana. (Kabutar is the Hindi word for pigeon.)

Some tore down the tarpaulin sheets covering the spot and threatened an indefinite hunger strike. Police briefly detained about 15 people at another protest, media reports said.

Authorities had imposed the ban due to concerns about health hazards due to pigeon droppings.

The problem is not unique to Mumbai. In Venice, feeding pigeons in historic squares is banned. Singapore imposes hefty fines, and New York and London have regulated feeding zones.

In India too, Pune and Thane cities in Maharashtra state - of which Mumbai is the capital - have imposed penalties on feeding pigeons. Delhi is mulling an advisory against feeding the birds in public spaces.

The crackdown has angered animal lovers and religious feeders, as pigeons are long woven into India's cultural fabric.

Films often use shots of grain-feeding pigeons to evoke cities like Mumbai and Delhi, where the birds are a familiar presence on balconies and air-conditioners.

Some of Mumbai's kabutarkhanas are iconic heritage structures and are said to have originated as charitable spaces where communities could donate grain.

There are religious sentiments involved as well. In Mumbai, the Jain community, which considers feeding pigeons a pious duty, has been vocal in their protests.

Elsewhere too, many share a bond with pigeons - seen as symbols of peace and loyalty .

In Delhi, Syed Ismat says he has been feeding the birds for 40 years and considers them his family.

"They are innocent. Perhaps the most innocent of all creatures. All they ask for is a little kindness," said Mr Ismat.

But these sentiments are pitted against studies which show that prolonged exposure to pigeon droppings poses risks of pulmonary and respiratory illnesses.

A boom in India's pigeon population in recent years has heightened this risk, prompting the restrictions.

Delhi-based biodiversity expert Faiyaz Khudsar says easy availability of food has led to overpopulation of pigeons in many countries.

In India, he said, the challenge is compounded by a decline in birds like the goraiya, commonly known as the house sparrow, which are increasingly being displaced by pigeons.

"With easy food and no predators, pigeons are breeding faster than ever. They are outcompeting other urban birds, creating an ecological loss," Mr Khudsar said.

• Inside the life of Old Delhi's only female pigeon keeper
• Using fake eggs to control pigeon populations

The 2023 State of India's Birds report says pigeon numbers have risen more than150% since 2000 - the biggest jump among all birds - leaving homes and public spaces with droppings, as each bird can produce up to 15kg (33lbs) a year.

Studies show these droppings contain at least seven types of zoonotic pathogens that can cause diseases such as pneumonia, fungal infections and even lung damage in humans.

Nirmal Kohli, a 75-year-old Delhi resident, started complaining of persistent cough and had trouble breathing a few years ago.

"Eventually, a CT scan showed that part of her lung had shrunk," says her son Amit Kohli. "The doctors said it was due to exposure to pigeon droppings."

Last year, an 11-year-old boy died in Delhi due to hypersensitivity pneumonitis - a disease that causes inflammation in lungs. Doctors said the reason was prolonged exposure to pigeon droppings and feathers.

RS Pal, a pulmonologist, told the BBC that such cases were common.

"Even if you don't directly feed pigeons, their droppings on window sills and balconies can cause hypersensitivity pneumonitis," he said.

"We also see bacterial, viral and fungal infections in people handling pigeons regularly."

These concerns are what led the Mumbai civic body to impose the feeding ban last month and launch a drive to demolish feeding centres.

Demolitions are on hold, but the Bombay High Court has dismissed a plea against the feeding ban, citing public health as "paramount" and ordering strict action on illegal feeding.

Delhi mayor Raja Iqbal Singh told the BBC that love for birds cannot come at the cost of people's well-being.

"Feeding spots often turn dirty, leading to foul smells, infections and pests. We are working to minimise feeding," he said.

But many animal lovers disagree.

Mohammad Younus, who supplies grains to a feeding spot in Delhi, argues that all animals can spread diseases if hygiene is not maintained.

"I have been surrounded by pigeons for the past 15 years. If something were to happen, it would have happened to me too," he said.

In Mumbai, a Jain monk told BBC Marathi that thousands of pigeons would die of hunger due to the feeding ban.

Megha Uniyal, an animal rights activist, pointed out that there was no clarity on how the ban on feeding pigeons would be implemented.

"As far as regulating pigeon feeding is concerned, it is a word thrown around by the authorities, but no one really understands what this could entail," she said.

Amid these competing contentions, efforts are on to find a middle ground.

Ujjwal Agrain, of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (Peta) India, suggests allowing pigeon feeding only during set morning and evening hours.

"That gives enough time for civic bodies to clean the place and maintain hygiene. This way, we respect both public health and emotional bonds," he said.

The Bombay High Court has set up an expert panel to suggest alternatives, and Mumbai civic officials say controlled, staggered feeding may be allowed based on its advice.

For Syed Ismat, the solution lies in rethinking the relationship between birds and urban spaces.

"Maybe it's time to reimagine how we share our cities, not just with pigeons but with all forms of life," he said.

Additional reporting by Sharanya Dayal in Delhi

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

US President Donald Trump will host Volodymyr Zelensky on Monday for their first meeting since the pair's heated exchange in the White House earlier this year - but this time the Ukrainian president is bringing European allies.

Nato Secretary General Mark Rutte and UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer are among leaders who will join Zelensky in Washington for talks on how to end the war with Russia.

It follows Trump's summit with Russian leader Vladimir Putin in Alaska that resulted in the US president dropping a demand for a ceasefire and calling instead for a permanent peace deal.

A US envoy said on Sunday that Putin had agreed to a possible Nato-like security pact for Ukraine.

"BIG PROGRESS ON RUSSIA. STAY TUNED!" Trump posted on his Truth Social platform, without elaborating.

Also heading to Washington for Monday's meeting are French President Emmanuel Macron, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Finnish President Alexander Stubb and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. It is unclear how many of them will go to the White House.

• What handing Donbas to Putin would mean for Ukraine
• Washington talks could prove more vital than Trump-Putin summit
• In maps: War-ravaged Ukrainian territories

For so many heads of state to travel with such little notice across the Atlantic to what is essentially a wartime crisis meeting appears without precedent in the modern era, underscoring the sky-high stakes.

Diplomatic sources say European officials are concerned that Trump may try to press Zelensky to agree to terms, after the Ukrainian leader was excluded from the Trump-Putin meeting on US soil last Friday.

But US Secretary of State Marco Rubio told the BBC's US partner CBS that any suggestion Zelensky might be bullied by Trump into accepting a peace deal was a "stupid media narrative".

Nato leaders also appear eager to avoid a repeat of Zelensky's February trip to the Oval Office that ended abruptly after an argument with Trump and US Vice-President JD Vance.

The altercation - which saw Trump accuse Zelensky of "gambling with World War Three" - left Washington-Kyiv ties in tatters.

But European leaders have been working diligently behind the scenes since then to mend the relationship. The Ukrainian leader has been coached to talk in terms of deal-making - language that resonates with Trump.

In April, Ukraine signed a minerals agreement that gave the US a financial stake in the country, and Trump and Zelensky spoke privately at the Vatican before Pope Francis's funeral. Ukraine made clear it was willing to pay for US weapons.

By July, the two leaders had a phone call that the Ukrainian president described as "the best conversation we have had".

Meanwhile, Trump had begun to express exasperation with Russia's unrelenting onslaught in Ukraine. He called Putin "absolutely crazy", drastically shortened his deadline for a peace deal, and threatened economic sanctions on Moscow.

As these deliberations grind on, Russian forces continue to advance on the battlefield. They now occupy almost a fifth of Ukraine since Moscow launched its full scale invasion in February 2022.

A virtual summit was held on Sunday between Zelensky and the so-called coalition of the willing - a group of nations including the UK, France and Germany that have pledged to protect peace in Ukraine once it is achieved.

Afterwards, Emmanuel Macron told reporters their plan was to "present a united front" for Monday's talks with Trump.

Zelensky and the Nato leaders said they were keen to learn more after US envoy Steve Witkoff told US television that Putin had agreed on Friday to "robust security guarantees that I would describe as game-changing".

Witkoff said such an agreement could see Europe and the US protect Ukraine from further aggression with a Nato-like defence agreement.

"We were able to win the following concession: that the United States could offer Article 5-like protection, which is one of the real reasons why Ukraine wants to be in Nato," Witkoff told CNN on Sunday.

Putin has long opposed Ukraine joining Nato, and Witkoff said the arrangement could be an alternative if the Ukrainians "can live with it".

Article 5 is a principle at the heart of the 32-member transatlantic military alliance that says its members will come to the defence of an ally that is under attack.

Witkoff also told CNN that Russia made "some concessions" around five heavily contested regions of Ukraine.

In talks with European allies after the Alaska summit, Trump said Putin had reiterated that he wants the key Donetsk and Luhansk regions that make up Donbas, eastern Ukraine, according to European officials.

But at Sunday's virtual summit with Nato leaders, Zelensky stressed that the Ukrainian constitution makes it impossible to give up territory - and that this should only be discussed by the leaders of Ukraine and Russia at a trilateral summit with the US.

The US secretary of state, meanwhile, sought to temper hopes that a deal to end Europe's deadliest conflict for 80 years could be imminent.

"We're still a long ways off," America's top diplomat said on Sunday.

It is quite possible that Monday's meeting in the White House could prove even more crucial to the future of Ukraine - and for all of Europe's security - than last Friday's US-Russia summit in Alaska.

On the surface, that Putin-Trump reunion seemed to live down to every expectation.

There was no ceasefire, no sanctions, no grand announcements.

Were Ukraine and Europe about to get cut out of a deal cooked up behind closed doors by the world's two foremost nuclear powers?

Not, apparently, if Ukraine and its partners can prevent it.

The presence of Sir Keir Starmer, President Macron, Chancellor Merz and other leaders alongside President Zelensky in Washington is about more than making sure he does not get ambushed in the Oval Office again, in the way he did on 28 February.

They are determined to impress upon Donald Trump two things: firstly, that there can be no peace deal for Ukraine without Ukraine's direct involvement and secondly, that it must be backed by 'cast-iron' security guarantees.

Above all, Europe's leaders want the US President to see that Ukraine and Europe present a united front and they are eager to ensure he is not being swayed by his obvious personal rapport with Vladimir Putin into giving in to the Russian leaders' demands.

This is where the Sir Keir Starmer's diplomatic skills will be sorely tested.

Trump likes Starmer and listens to him, and in a month's time Trump will be coming to the UK on a state visit.

He also likes Mark Rutte, the NATO Secretary-General who will be in attendance, a man who is sometimes called 'the Trump Whisperer'.

The US President appears to be less fond of President Macron and the White House was sharply critical recently of his intention to unconditionally recognise a Palestinian state at the next UN General Assembly.

For a peace deal in Ukraine to have any chance of working, something has to give.

European leaders have said frequently that international borders cannot be changed by force and President Zelensky has said time and time again he will not give up land and besides, Ukraine's constitution forbids it.

But Putin wants the Donbas, which his forces already control around 85 per cent of, and he has absolutely no intention of ever handing back Crimea.

Yet as the former Estonian PM and now Europe's top diplomat Kaja Kallas once said to me: victory for Ukraine in this war does not have to be exclusively about reconquering occupied land.

If Ukraine can obtain the sort of Article 5-type security guarantees now being talked about, sufficient to deter any future Russian aggression and thereby safeguard its independence as a free and sovereign state, then that would be a form of victory.

It does now appear that what the US and Russia have been discussing is a proposal that broadly trades some Ukrainian land for security guarantees that it won't have to give up any more to Russia.

But the question marks are huge.

Could Ukraine accept a deal that ends the war but costs it land, especially when so many thousands have died trying to save that land?

If it is asked to give up the remaining 30 per cent of Donetsk Oblast that Russia has yet to occupy then does that leave the path westwards to Kyiv dangerously under-defended?

And what of Starmer's much-vaunted Coalition of the Willing?

Earlier talk of deploying tens of thousands of boots on the ground have since been scaled back.

Now it's more about 'safeguarding skies and seas' while helping Ukraine to rebuild its army.

But even if peace does break out on the battlefield we are still in dangerous territory.

Every military expert I have spoken to believes that the moment the fighting stops Putin will reconstitute his army, build more weapons, until he is in a position, perhaps in as little as three to four years, to grab more land.

If and when that happens it will be a brave Typhoon or F35 pilot who is prepared to fire that first missile on an advancing Russian column.

A recent court ban on feeding pigeons in public spaces in the western Indian city of Mumbai has become a major flashpoint between civic bodies, public health activists and bird lovers.

This month, hundreds of people clashed with police twice while protesting the closure of a decades-old pigeon feeding spot, or a kabutarkhana. (Kabutar is the Hindi word for pigeon.)

Some tore down the tarpaulin sheets covering the spot and threatened an indefinite hunger strike. Police briefly detained about 15 people at another protest, media reports said.

Authorities had imposed the ban due to concerns about health hazards due to pigeon droppings.

The problem is not unique to Mumbai. In Venice, feeding pigeons in historic squares is banned. Singapore imposes hefty fines, and New York and London have regulated feeding zones.

In India too, Pune and Thane cities in Maharashtra state - of which Mumbai is the capital - have imposed penalties on feeding pigeons. Delhi is mulling an advisory against feeding the birds in public spaces.

The crackdown has angered animal lovers and religious feeders, as pigeons are long woven into India's cultural fabric.

Films often use shots of grain-feeding pigeons to evoke cities like Mumbai and Delhi, where the birds are a familiar presence on balconies and air-conditioners.

Some of Mumbai's kabutarkhanas are iconic heritage structures and are said to have originated as charitable spaces where communities could donate grain.

There are religious sentiments involved as well. In Mumbai, the Jain community, which considers feeding pigeons a pious duty, has been vocal in their protests.

Elsewhere too, many share a bond with pigeons - seen as symbols of peace and loyalty .

In Delhi, Syed Ismat says he has been feeding the birds for 40 years and considers them his family.

"They are innocent. Perhaps the most innocent of all creatures. All they ask for is a little kindness," said Mr Ismat.

But these sentiments are pitted against studies which show that prolonged exposure to pigeon droppings poses risks of pulmonary and respiratory illnesses.

A boom in India's pigeon population in recent years has heightened this risk, prompting the restrictions.

Delhi-based biodiversity expert Faiyaz Khudsar says easy availability of food has led to overpopulation of pigeons in many countries.

In India, he said, the challenge is compounded by a decline in birds like the goraiya, commonly known as the house sparrow, which are increasingly being displaced by pigeons.

"With easy food and no predators, pigeons are breeding faster than ever. They are outcompeting other urban birds, creating an ecological loss," Mr Khudsar said.

• Inside the life of Old Delhi's only female pigeon keeper
• Using fake eggs to control pigeon populations

The 2023 State of India's Birds report says pigeon numbers have risen more than150% since 2000 - the biggest jump among all birds - leaving homes and public spaces with droppings, as each bird can produce up to 15kg (33lbs) a year.

Studies show these droppings contain at least seven types of zoonotic pathogens that can cause diseases such as pneumonia, fungal infections and even lung damage in humans.

Nirmal Kohli, a 75-year-old Delhi resident, started complaining of persistent cough and had trouble breathing a few years ago.

"Eventually, a CT scan showed that part of her lung had shrunk," says her son Amit Kohli. "The doctors said it was due to exposure to pigeon droppings."

Last year, an 11-year-old boy died in Delhi due to hypersensitivity pneumonitis - a disease that causes inflammation in lungs. Doctors said the reason was prolonged exposure to pigeon droppings and feathers.

RS Pal, a pulmonologist, told the BBC that such cases were common.

"Even if you don't directly feed pigeons, their droppings on window sills and balconies can cause hypersensitivity pneumonitis," he said.

"We also see bacterial, viral and fungal infections in people handling pigeons regularly."

These concerns are what led the Mumbai civic body to impose the feeding ban last month and launch a drive to demolish feeding centres.

Demolitions are on hold, but the Bombay High Court has dismissed a plea against the feeding ban, citing public health as "paramount" and ordering strict action on illegal feeding.

Delhi mayor Raja Iqbal Singh told the BBC that love for birds cannot come at the cost of people's well-being.

"Feeding spots often turn dirty, leading to foul smells, infections and pests. We are working to minimise feeding," he said.

But many animal lovers disagree.

Mohammad Younus, who supplies grains to a feeding spot in Delhi, argues that all animals can spread diseases if hygiene is not maintained.

"I have been surrounded by pigeons for the past 15 years. If something were to happen, it would have happened to me too," he said.

In Mumbai, a Jain monk told BBC Marathi that thousands of pigeons would die of hunger due to the feeding ban.

Megha Uniyal, an animal rights activist, pointed out that there was no clarity on how the ban on feeding pigeons would be implemented.

"As far as regulating pigeon feeding is concerned, it is a word thrown around by the authorities, but no one really understands what this could entail," she said.

Amid these competing contentions, efforts are on to find a middle ground.

Ujjwal Agrain, of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (Peta) India, suggests allowing pigeon feeding only during set morning and evening hours.

"That gives enough time for civic bodies to clean the place and maintain hygiene. This way, we respect both public health and emotional bonds," he said.

The Bombay High Court has set up an expert panel to suggest alternatives, and Mumbai civic officials say controlled, staggered feeding may be allowed based on its advice.

For Syed Ismat, the solution lies in rethinking the relationship between birds and urban spaces.

"Maybe it's time to reimagine how we share our cities, not just with pigeons but with all forms of life," he said.

Additional reporting by Sharanya Dayal in Delhi

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

European leaders have said they will join Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky at his meeting with US President Donald Trump at the White House on Monday.

Those travelling include UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, French President Emmanuel Macron, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Nato Secretary-General Mark Rutte.

It comes after Trump failed to reach a deal on ending the war in Ukraine during a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday.

The US president has since said he wants to bypass securing a ceasefire in Ukraine in favour of a permanent peace agreement.

Securing a ceasefire in Ukraine had been one of Trump's core demands before meeting Putin, but afterwards posted on social media that they "often times do not hold up" and that it would be better "to go directly to a peace agreement".

European leaders have reacted with caution to the outcome of the Trump-Putin meeting, seeking not to criticise the change of direction despite their long-held support for a ceasefire.

Putin reportedly presented Trump with a peace offer that would require Ukraine withdrawing from the Donetsk region of the Donbas, in return for Russia freezing the front lines in Zaporizhzhia and Kherson.

Russia claims the Donbas as Russian territory, controlling most of Luhansk and about 70% of Donetsk. It also illegally annexed the Crimean peninsula in 2014, eight years before launching its full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

The BBC's US partner CBS has reported, citing diplomatic sources, that European officials were concerned Trump may try to pressure Zelensky into agreeing to the possible terms discussed in Alaska when they meet on Monday.

Ukraine's president has previously ruled out ceding control of the Donbas - composed of the Luhansk and Donetsk regions - saying it could be used as a springboard for future Russian attacks.

Von der Leyen, who is meeting Zelensky in Brussels on Sunday, wrote on X that she would join Zelensky at the White House at the Ukrainian president's request.

Macron, Rutte, Sir Keir, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Finnish President Alexander Stubb and Italian PM Giorgia Meloni all followed in quick succession.

Downing Street said in a statement that it "follows the Prime Minister commending President Trump's efforts to end Russia's illegal war in Ukraine, reasserting his position that the path to peace cannot be decided without President Zelensky".

Monday's White House meeting will be Zelensky's first since an acrimonious public exchange in the Oval Office in February, when Trump told him to be more "thankful" for US support and accused him of "gambling with World War Three" in front of the world's media.

In unprecedented scenes, Zelensky was told to leave the White House, but European leaders have since worked to repair the relationship.

The two leaders appeared to reconcile in April, in what the White House described as a "very productive" 15-minute meeting on the sidelines of Pope Francis's funeral.

Ukraine has also signed a minerals deal that gave the US a financial stake in the country, and Kyiv made it clear they were willing to pay for US arms.

But there will have been concern in Kyiv and other European capitals following the Trump-Putin meeting on Friday.

The Russian president, who is facing an International Criminal Court arrest warrant for alleged war crimes in Ukraine, stepped off his jet and onto a red carpet to be warmly received by Trump, who later said they had a "fantastic relationship".

Ukraine's ket demand has been a quick ceasefire so that talks on a longer-term settlement do not take place on the backdrop of continued fighting.

Zelensky said following the Alaska summit that a "real peace must be achieved, one that will be lasting, not just another pause between Russian invasions".

European leaders have managed to maintain good relations with Trump since his return to the White House, with Sir Keir building an especially warm relationship with the US president.

European leaders have said they will join Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky at his meeting with US President Donald Trump at the White House on Monday.

Those travelling include UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, French President Emmanuel Macron, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Nato Secretary-General Mark Rutte.

It comes after Trump failed to reach a deal on ending the war in Ukraine during a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday.

The US president has since said he wants to bypass securing a ceasefire in Ukraine in favour of a permanent peace agreement.

Securing a ceasefire in Ukraine had been one of Trump's core demands before meeting Putin, but afterwards posted on social media that they "often times do not hold up" and that it would be better "to go directly to a peace agreement".

European leaders have reacted with caution to the outcome of the Trump-Putin meeting, seeking not to criticise the change of direction despite their long-held support for a ceasefire.

Putin reportedly presented Trump with a peace offer that would require Ukraine withdrawing from the Donetsk region of the Donbas, in return for Russia freezing the front lines in Zaporizhzhia and Kherson.

Russia claims the Donbas as Russian territory, controlling most of Luhansk and about 70% of Donetsk. It also illegally annexed the Crimean peninsula in 2014, eight years before launching its full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

The BBC's US partner CBS has reported, citing diplomatic sources, that European officials were concerned Trump may try to pressure Zelensky into agreeing to the possible terms discussed in Alaska when they meet on Monday.

Ukraine's president has previously ruled out ceding control of the Donbas - composed of the Luhansk and Donetsk regions - saying it could be used as a springboard for future Russian attacks.

Von der Leyen, who is meeting Zelensky in Brussels on Sunday, wrote on X that she would join Zelensky at the White House at the Ukrainian president's request.

Macron, Rutte, Sir Keir, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Finnish President Alexander Stubb and Italian PM Giorgia Meloni all followed in quick succession.

Downing Street said in a statement that it "follows the Prime Minister commending President Trump's efforts to end Russia's illegal war in Ukraine, reasserting his position that the path to peace cannot be decided without President Zelensky".

Monday's White House meeting will be Zelensky's first since an acrimonious public exchange in the Oval Office in February, when Trump told him to be more "thankful" for US support and accused him of "gambling with World War Three" in front of the world's media.

In unprecedented scenes, Zelensky was told to leave the White House, but European leaders have since worked to repair the relationship.

The two leaders appeared to reconcile in April, in what the White House described as a "very productive" 15-minute meeting on the sidelines of Pope Francis's funeral.

Ukraine has also signed a minerals deal that gave the US a financial stake in the country, and Kyiv made it clear they were willing to pay for US arms.

But there will have been concern in Kyiv and other European capitals following the Trump-Putin meeting on Friday.

The Russian president, who is facing an International Criminal Court arrest warrant for alleged war crimes in Ukraine, stepped off his jet and onto a red carpet to be warmly received by Trump, who later said they had a "fantastic relationship".

Ukraine's ket demand has been a quick ceasefire so that talks on a longer-term settlement do not take place on the backdrop of continued fighting.

Zelensky said following the Alaska summit that a "real peace must be achieved, one that will be lasting, not just another pause between Russian invasions".

European leaders have managed to maintain good relations with Trump since his return to the White House, with Sir Keir building an especially warm relationship with the US president.

Hundreds of thousands of people have gathered in Israel to call for an end to the Gaza war and a deal to secure the release of hostages held by Hamas.

The largest crowd was seen in Tel Aviv's "Hostages Square" on Sunday, with the organisers saying the government's plans to seize control of Gaza City risked the lives of around 20 hostages still being held by Hamas.

A one-day national strike - part of wider protests - closed roads, offices and universities in some areas. Nearly 40 people were arrested during the day.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu criticised the protests, saying they would "harden Hamas's stance" and would only slow down the release of the hostages.

Far-right Israeli minister Bezalel Smotrich also denounced the protests, describing them as a "harmful campaign that plays into the hands of Hamas".

The national strike was demanded by the families of hostages and others opposed to the expansion of the war.

Einav Zangauker, mother of hostage Matan and a leading figure in the Hostage and Missing Families Forum, said the group demanded "a comprehensive and achievable agreement and an end to the war".

"We demand what is rightfully ours - our children," she told the crowd in Tel Aviv. "The Israeli government has transformed a just war into a pointless war."

She was speaking after a video was released of her son.

"My heart burns with longing. My whole heart is scorched because of my Matan. Matan, I, an entire nation, we are doing everything we can for you, for all the hostages," she said.

The protests came a week after Israel's war cabinet voted to occupy Gaza City, the territory's largest city, and displace its population, in a move condemned by the UN Security Council.

Thousands of residents have since fled Gaza City's southern Zeitoun neighbourhood, where days of continuous Israeli bombardment have created a "catastrophic" situation, the city's Hamas-run municipality told the BBC.

At least 40 people were killed by Israeli attacks across the territory on Saturday, Gaza's civil defence agency said.

Hamas said in a statement that Israeli forces had been carrying out a "sustained offensive in the eastern and southern neighbourhoods of Gaza City, particularly in Zeitoun".

The Israeli military said it would begin allowing tents to be brought into Gaza by aid agencies again.

"As part of the preparations to move the population from combat zones to the southern Gaza Strip for their protection, the supply of tents and shelter equipment to Gaza will resume," the Israeli military body Cogat said.

Israel plans to forcibly displace a million people from Gaza City to camps in the south but it has not provided an exact timetable of when its forces would enter Gaza City.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is reported to want the entire city under Israeli occupation from 7 October.

At least 1.9 million people in Gaza – or about 90% of the population – have already been displaced, according to the UN.

The international body has indicated there is widespread malnutrition in Gaza, with experts backed by the organisation warning last month in a report that the "worst-case scenario" of famine is playing out in the Strip.

The war in Gaza was triggered by Hamas's 7 October 2023 attack on Israel, which killed about 1,200 people and saw 251 others taken hostage.

Israel's offensive has killed more than 61,000 Palestinians, according to figures from the Hamas-run Gaza health ministry, which the UN considers reliable.

Three Republican-led US states will send members of their National Guard forces to Washington, DC to bolster the roughly 800 troops President Donald Trump has already deployed to the city.

West Virginia Governor Parick Morrisey said he would send 300-400 of the state's National Guard troops at Trump's request. South Carolina will send 200 troops, and Ohio will send 150 military police from their National Guard, their governors said.

Trump declared a "public safety emergency" on Monday, claiming the nation's capitol was gripped by "complete and total lawlessness."

Washington DC's elected officials have objected these claims, and hundreds of DC residents marched in protest on Saturday.

Agents from several federal law enforcement agencies have spent the week patrolling Washington's most populous and touristed areas alongside the National Guard troops.

Many in Washington DC, where 92% of residents voted for Vice President Kamala Harris in the 2024 election, have expressed frustration with Trump's enforcement policy.

Residents have taken to filming federal officers as they patrol and over the weekend, the frustration expanded into peaceful protests against the administration.

Marchers congregated in Dupont Circle, a central hub in the city, and marched through the streets chanting "Free DC!" Some banged drums and rang bells as they marched.

Residents in Washington, DC have expressed concerns about crime in surveys, and a former employee of the Trump administration's Department of Government Efficiency (Doge) was attacked and beaten in the city recently.

Trump has painted a portrait of the nation's capital as beset by "violent gangs and bloodthirsty criminals."

But Mayor Muriel Bowser has rejected Trump's claims about rampant crime in the city. She acknowledged there had been a spike in crime in 2023 that has since dropped off.

Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) data shows homicides dropped by 32% between 2023 and 2024 and reached their lowest level since 2019.

Preliminary data shows violent crime overall is down 26% so far in 2025, compared to the same point in 2024, according to MPD data. Robbery is down 28%, BBC Verify reports.

The Trump administration initially tried to take command of the city's Metropolitan Police Department using the District of Columbia Home Rule Act, but rescinded the order after city officials took them to court.

However, Judge Ana Reyes said that Mayor Bowser was required to follow White House directives.