Brazil's parliament descended into chaos on Tuesday as conservative lawmakers continued to push a law which would reduce the prison sentence of former president Jair Bolsonaro.

One left-wing lawmaker was forcibly removed by police after trying to disrupt proceedings, while footage showed scuffles breaking out as security tried to restore order.

Bolsonaro began a 27-year jail term in November for attempting to plot a coup following his 2022 election defeat.

His conservative allies in Congress have proposed a law which would reduce sentences for coup-related offences, as well as free dozens of Bolsonaro supporters who stormed government buildings shortly after he left office.

Meanwhile, court documents showed that Bolsonaro's legal team filed an official request asking a court to grant him permission to leave prison for surgery.

The appeal repeats a plea for the ex-president to be allowed to serve his sentence under house arrest on health grounds. Bolsonaro spent time in intensive care earlier this year following intestinal surgery, and was stabbed in the abdomen in 2018 during a rally.

The fate of Jair Bolsonaro, a right-wing populist who was narrowly beaten by leftist Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva three years ago, continues to be a divisive issue in Brazil, where his allies have explored several avenues to exonerate him.

The latest attempt to cut the 70-year-old's sentence has been to propose a law overhauling punishments for people in elected office, including significantly reducing sentences for the offences that Bolsonaro, and those convicted alongside him, were found guilty of.

One of the lawmakers behind the effort told AFP news agency it would see Bolsonaro's sentence cut to two years and four months in prison.

During Tuesday's heated debate on the proposal, leftist politician Glauber Braga briefly occupied the Speaker's chair, which he said was a protest against a "coup offensive".

The chamber had been due to vote on Braga's expulsion for his role in a previous altercation in Congress, one of a handful of removals proposed as part of a wider package of disciplinary reforms, including the changes to coup-related offences.

Police forcibly removed Braga amid a skirmish in the chamber. The TV feed was cut and reporters were removed from the chamber, a move condemned as censorship by a group representing journalists.

Braga later said he would not "accept as a done deal an amnesty for a group of coup plotters", AFP reported.

As of late Tuesday night, the law cutting Bolsonaro's sentence - which would require ratification by the legislature's second house - had not passed.

Bolsonaro was given a lengthy prison sentence in September after Supreme Court judges found he had proposed a coup to military leaders, and said that he knew of a plot to assassinate his rival Lula.

While a military coup did not materialise, his supporters launched a violent assault on government buildings in Brasília in January 2023, after which thousands were detained.

Several senior military figures, two former defence ministers and an ex-intelligence chief were also convicted as part of the coup investigation.

Bolsonaro and his supporters have long dubbed the investigation a "witch hunt".

His Liberal Party remains the largest in Congress, where conservative parties outnumber groupings sympathetic to Lula.

Lawmakers loyal to Bolsonaro previously launched an attempt to secure an amnesty, though that floundered in the face of national protests, with a significant cut to sentences now proposed as a compromise.

The Prince of Wales has paid tribute to pioneering elephant conservationist Iain Douglas-Hamilton, who died aged 83 at his home in Nairobi on Monday.

Douglas-Hamilton spent his life studying and campaigning to protect African elephants, becoming a world-leading expert on their behaviour in the wild.

His groundbreaking research exposed the devastating effects of poaching - often at great risk to his own safety - and was instrumental in the banning of the international ivory trade.

Prince William praised the zoologist as "a man who dedicated his life to conservation and whose life's work leaves lasting impact on our appreciation for, and understanding of, elephants".

"The memories of spending time in Africa with him will remain with me forever," added Prince William, who is a royal patron for the African wildlife conservation charity, Tusk, of which Douglas-Hamilton was an ambassador.

"The world has lost a true conservation legend today, but his extraordinary legacy will continue," the charity's founder Charles Mayhew said in a statement.

Born in 1942 to an aristocratic British family in Dorset, England, Douglas-Hamilton studied biology and zoology in Scotland and Oxford before moving to Tanzania to research elephant social behaviour.

It was there at Lake Manyara National Park that he began documenting every elephant he encountered, eventually becoming so familiar with the herds he could recognise them by the unique shapes of their ears and wrinkles on their skin.

"The thing about elephants is that they have a lot in common with human beings," he said in a 2024 documentary about his work, A Life Among Elephants.

Friend and fellow conservationist Jane Goodall, who died in October, was featured in the documentary, and said he had shown the world that elephants are capable of feeling just like humans.

"I think his legacy will be one of a man who did so much to help people understand how majestic, how wonderful elephants are, and to learn more about their way of life," Goodall said.

But that work did not always come easy: he was charged at by elephants, almost killed by a swarm of bees and shot at by poachers. In 2010, a flood destroyed his research facility in Kenya and years of work was lost.

Despite the hardships, Douglas-Hamilton remained steadfast in his mission to raise awareness of the plight of African elephants, becoming one of the leading voices to alert the world of the ivory poaching crisis, which he described as "an elephant holocaust".

He later campaigned for an international ban on the commercial trade in ivory, and in 1989 the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species was signed, an international agreement between governments.

After the agreement failed to wipe out the trade completely, Douglas-Hamilton turned his attention to China and the US, the two main markets for ivory. Chinese President Xi Jinping and then-US President Barack Obama agreed to a near-total ban on its import and export in 2015.

Douglas-Hamilton established Save the Elephants in 1993, a charity dedicated to safeguarding the animals and deepening human understanding of their behaviour.

The organisation's CEO Frank Pope, who is also his son-in-law, said: "Iain changed the future not just for elephants, but for huge numbers of people across the globe. His courage, determination and rigour inspired everyone he met."

In his own words, Douglas-Hamilton expressed optimism for the future of his life's work.

"I think my greatest hope for the future is that there will be an ethic developed of human-elephant coexistence," he once said.

Iain Douglas-Hamilton is survived by his wife Oria, children Saba and Dudu, and six grandchildren.

An Australian man who was jailed in Singapore and deported for charging at pop star Ariana Grande has been ejected from a Lady Gaga concert in his home country.

Johnson Wen said on Instagram that he was "kicked out" of the Suncorp Stadium in Brisbane on Tuesday night before the Lady Gaga show had started.

The 26-year-old, who has a history of disrupting concerts and celebrity events, was sentenced to nine days in jail by a Singapore court last month for grabbing Grande during the Asian premiere of Wicked: For Good.

Wen, who told the Singaporean judge in mitigation that he would "not do it again", had not disrupted the performance in Brisbane, but was removed because of his history of public nuisance.

Videos on social media showed security guards holding Wen by the arm and leading him out of the venue as the crowd both cheered and booed. The BBC has contacted Suncorp Stadium for comment.

In a statement to the Sydney Morning Herald, the venue said it was made aware that "a known serial offender may attempt to attend and disrupt" the concert by Lady Gaga, who is around halfway through her Mayhem World Tour.

"In the interest of the artist's safety, this individual was deemed a person of interest and not to be allowed to attend," it said.

Wen has gained notoriety since grabbing Grande at the Wicked: For Good premiere in the South East Asian city state, which is known for its strict laws, including on public behaviour.

"You seem to be attention-seeking, thinking only of yourself and not the safety of others when committing these acts," Singaporean judge Christopher Goh reportedly told Wen.

Wen was also banned from Singapore following the incident.

Other videos on Wen's social media accounts show him jumping on stage and disrupting performances by global stars like Katy Perry and The Weeknd.

The incident with Grande sparked outrage in Singapore. Fans accused Wen of "re-traumatising" the pop star and actress.

Grande has spoken of experiencing post-traumatic stress disorder after a suicide bomb attack at her May 2017 concert in Manchester, killing 22 people and injuring hundreds.

President Donald Trump has told a campaign-style rally that consumer prices are falling "tremendously" as he sought to allay voter anxiety about the US cost of living.

In a speech at a casino in the battleground state of Pennsylvania, the president told supporters he had "no higher priority than making America affordable again".

But while gas and egg prices have fallen, other food is more expensive and Americans remain unhappy about the cost of housing, childcare and healthcare.

Democrats have capitalised on Trump's political vulnerability on the economy in recent off-cycle votes, leaving many Republicans uneasy about next year's midterms elections.

Tuesday's event in a swing district of Pennsylvania was the first of what the White House says will be a series of campaign-like rallies aimed at bringing its economic message to voters.

But at one point in his remarks, the Republican president again portrayed concerns about affordability as a Democratic "hoax".

In recent weeks, his administration has removed tariffs from dozens of food products and touted its rollback of fuel efficiency standards and Trump-branded retirement accounts for children as cost-of-living fixes.

In an excerpt from an interview with Politico released on Tuesday, Trump was asked what grade he would give the economy.

"A plus-plus-plus-plus-plus," he said.

In a sign the policy pivot might be cutting through, Trump's approval rating rose three points to 41% in a new Reuters/Ipsos poll.

But many Americans remain downbeat on the economy.

Alaina Hunt, 37, who lost her job as a designer at a construction company in Oklahoma City, told the BBC her position was in part a casualty of Trump's tariffs on steel and aluminium.

The construction sector "really took a hard hit very early on", she said. Ms Hunt says she has applied for at least 75 jobs in web design and development since April, to no avail, amid a broader slowdown in hiring.

She says rising grocery bills - about $25 extra per week - have added to the strain.

"I was able to scrape by a lot easier in years before," said Ms Hunt, who voted for Kamala Harris. "I don't think that the federal government is listening at all."

Economic data paints a mixed picture.

US consumer confidence fell in November to its lowest level since the spring.

But the stock market continues to hover near record highs. And forecasters expect the economy to expand by 1.9% this year, slower than last year's 2.8% but still better than expected.

Some recent data also indicate the job market may be picking up, after a significant hiring slowdown earlier this year.

As of September, inflation stood at 3%, the same rate as in January when the president took office and stubbornly above the Federal Reserve's 2% target.

It is still way below a peak of 9.1% under former President Joe Biden when the US faced its worst inflation in four decades.

Overall prices have surged 25% over the last five years, generating widespread frustration, despite wage growth over that period.

Beth Richardson, a 45-year-old from Kansas, said she had been floored by some of the prices at the grocery store near her, recalling a pack of Mentos gum she picked up recently that rang up to almost $5 with tax.

"I'm like, I'm just going to go die now because this cannot be," she said.

Ms Richardson was laid off from her job in sales support at a tech-related company in late 2023, after the firm shifted jobs overseas. She voted for Kamala Harris last year.

She said while she knew presidents were often blamed for economic forces over which they had little control, she felt in this case Trump and his policies, like tariffs, were "shooting ourselves in the foot".

On Tuesday night, Trump called tariffs his "favourite word", pointing to hundreds of billions of dollars of US revenue from import taxes.

The White House blames Biden and the Fed, arguing high interest rates are hurting the economy.

The US central bank has twice reduced rates to about 3.9% and may cut them again on Wednesday.

Many Trump supporters have said they still back the president, despite feeling the pinch themselves.

John Mohring, 60, of Kenosha, Wisconsin, has backed Trump since 2016, though rising prices worry him.

Mr Mohring, who works in construction and has lived alone since his wife died three years ago, said grocery prices started rising before Trump returned to the White House "and it doesn't seem like it's going down".

He now typically spends $100 on groceries just for himself, even when avoiding buying meat and sticking with cheaper items.

Still, Mr Mohring said he backed the Trump administration's sweeping tariffs on imported goods and his border policies.

"I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt," Mr Mohring added.

Brad Smith, a corn and soybean farmer in north-western Illinois, was hurt earlier this year when China, previously a major buyer of US soybeans, froze its purchases amid a trade war with Washington.

But the market, he said, had been gradually recovering since late October, when the two countries reached a trade agreement and China resumed some purchases.

Trump on Monday also announced a $12bn aid package for US farmers.

Mr Smith said he still believed in Trump's plans for the economy, despite being getting caught in the crossfire.

"There's probably bigger things at play other than just the soybean and corn market," Mr Smith said.

"The whole America First idea is good."

Russia's full-scale war on Ukraine will soon enter its fifth year. Mysterious incidents of so-called "hybrid warfare" are mounting in Europe, increasing tensions. And in the UK, military chiefs have warned we must prepare for war if we want to avoid it. But if the unthinkable happened, and war with Russia broke out, could the UK fight for more than just a few weeks?

Listen to Frank reading this article

"We are not planning to go to war with Europe. But if Europe wants to, and starts, we are ready right now." So said Russian President Vladimir Putin on 2 December, accusing European countries of hindering US efforts to bring peace in Ukraine.

To be clear, it is extremely unlikely that the UK would ever find itself in a war with Russia on its own, unsupported by Nato allies.

But Putin's words were an uncomfortable reminder that a war between Russia and Nato countries, including the UK, was not as remote as people hoped.

How war could look in the tech-age

"Well that's odd. I've got no signal on my phone." "Me neither. I'm offline. What's going on?" That scenario, hypothetically, is just one way we could know that a war with Russia had begun, or was about to. (I should add that there can also be other, perfectly benign, reasons for a loss of signal.)

That signal interruption could be followed by an inability to make bank payments for essentials like food and fuel.

Food distribution would be disrupted, electricity supplies compromised.

There are many ways of fighting a war, and not just the physically destructive wave of drones, bombs and missiles so tragically familiar to the citizens of Ukraine.

Our modern, tech-driven society is highly dependent on the network of undersea cables and pipelines that connect the UK to the rest of the world, carrying data, financial transactions and energy.

Covert activity by Russian spy vessels, such as the Yantar, is widely believed to have scoped out these cables for potential sabotage in a time of war, which is why the Royal Navy has recently invested in a fleet of underwater drones equipped with integrated sensors.

In a war, these hidden, unseen actions, combined with an almost inevitable attempt to "blind" Western satellites in space, would seriously hamper the UK's ability to fight, as well as potentially wreaking havoc on civil society.

At a recent conference in London entitled Fighting the Long War, organised by the Royal United Services Institute (Rusi), a Whitehall think tank, military and political figures came together to discuss whether the UK's current armed forces would be in a position to sustain a protracted conflict before they ran out of everything from troops, to ammunition to spare parts.

"There remains little evidence that the UK has a plan to fight a war lasting more than a few weeks," argues Rusi's Hamish Mundell. "Medical capacity is limited. Reserve regeneration pipelines are slow… The British plan for mass casualty outcomes appears to be based on not taking casualties."

With classic British understatement, he says: "This could be considered an optimistic planning assumption."

He adds that to fight a long war you need proper back-up. "It demands a second and even third echelon; personnel, platforms and logistics chains that can absorb losses and continue the fight. Yet this depth is notably absent from current British force design."

Russia's 'low quality' army

"There are shortfalls in ammunition, artillery, vehicles, air defence, and people, with limited to no ability to regenerate units or casualties," says Justin Crump, CEO of Sibylline, a private intelligence company.

Two of the biggest military lessons to come out of the Ukraine war are firstly, that drones are now integral to modern warfare, at every level, and secondly, that "mass", or sheer volume of personnel and military hardware, matters.

Russia's army is generally of a very low quality. Its soldiers are poorly equipped, poorly led and poorly fed. Their life expectancy in the deadly "drone zone" of eastern Ukraine is short.

UK Defence Intelligence estimates that since the start of the full-scale invasion in February 2022 Russia's army has suffered more than 1.1 million casualties – that is killed, wounded, captured or missing.

Even conservative estimates put the number of Russians killed at 150,000. Ukraine has also suffered catastrophic casualties but numbers are hard to ascertain.

But Russia has been able to draw on such a massive pool of manpower that it has so far been able to replace its estimated 30,000 monthly battlefield casualties with fresh blood.

Russia's economy has also been on a war footing for more than three years now: an economist has been placed in charge of the Defence Ministry, while its factories churn out ever more supplies of drones, missiles and artillery shells.

According to a recent report by the Kiel Institute for the World Economy, Russia has been producing each month around 150 tanks, 550 infantry fighting vehicles, 120 Lancet drones and more than 50 artillery pieces.

The UK, and most of its Western allies, are simply not anywhere near this point.

Analysts say it would take years for Western Europe's factories to come close to matching Russia's mass-production of weapons.

"The land war in Ukraine has shown beyond doubt that mass is absolutely vital for anybody that is going to face Russia on land," says Keir Giles, a Russia expert at Chatham House think tank.

"And having deep reserves vastly greater in number than the standing regular armed forces has been shown to be essential."

How national service conversations backfired

France and Germany have both recently moved to revive a system of voluntary military service for 18-year-olds.

The UK's former Head of the Army, Gen Sir Patrick Sanders, suggested in 2024, the year he retired, that the UK should train what he called "a citizen army" to fight a land war in the future. The idea was shot down by No. 10.

"I think it's a cultural thing within the UK," says Ed Arnold, senior research fellow at Rusi.

"So if you look at the states that are now looking towards [military service] - like Sweden, Germany and France - they are states who culturally still have an institutional memory of when they had that system.

"We haven't had national service since the 1960s and attempts to have that national conversation around it have pretty much backfired."

"The reality is, our armed forces cannot survive on a diet of government spin, over-the-horizon spending commitments and hollow rhetoric," Sir Ben Wallace, who was Defence Secretary in the Conservative government from 2019 to 2023, told the BBC.

Responding to this, a spokesperson for the current Labour Defence Secretary, John Healey, told me: "This characterisation is baseless.

"We increased defence spending by £5bn this year alone, signed 1,000 major contracts since the election and increased MOD spending with British businesses by 6% above inflation in the last year."

He points to a new defence agreement with Norway, a £300m new investment in the Royal Navy's laser weapon and a £9bn investment into armed forces housing, adding: "We're a government investing in the transformation of our forces, investing in our British service personnel... to create jobs and growth in Britain's communities."

But this is not about party politics. It's about whether UK defence has been under-funded for so long that it has now reached the point where the country is dangerously vulnerable in several areas, notably air defence.

There are also problems of timing and inefficiency.

Defence contracts often take years to come to fruition. Billions of pounds have been spent on Ajax, an overdue armoured vehicle project still beset with problems. Meanwhile, Nato officers have been warning Russia could be in a position to launch an attack on a Nato country within three to five years.

At the end of the Cold War (between Nato and the Soviet Union) in 1990, when I was a young infantry Captain in the Army Reserves, the UK was spending 4.1% of GDP on defence.

The following year it deployed over 45,000 troops to help evict Iraq President Saddam Hussein's invading army from Kuwait in operation Desert Storm.

Today, with multiple pressures on the economy, the government is striving to meet a target of 2.5% of GDP by 2027, while Russia spends close to 7%.

On paper, the British Army numbers around 74,000 but Rusi's Ed Arnold points out that once you subtract medically non-deployable soldiers, defence attaches around the world and others not part of formed units, then its actual deployable strength is only 54,000. That is less than the average number of casualties Russia takes in two months in Ukraine.

In the event of a war, says Justin Crump of Sibylline, on land the (British) Army would most likely be degraded – incapable of fighting effectively - within weeks, once committed, though he adds "much depends on the form of the conflict".

Suggestions the UK is already 'at war'

Some commentators have suggested that the UK is already "at war" with Russia. They are referring to what is known as "hybrid" or "grey-zone" warfare, which includes events that are often deniable, such as cyber-attacks, disinformation and the alleged launching of drones close to airports and military bases in Nato countries.

But worrying as these are, they pale compared to the crisis that would be triggered by a Russian military attack on a Nato country, especially if it involved seizing territory and people being killed.

There are several potential flashpoints here, where Nato military chiefs fear that Putin, if he were allowed to achieve his aims in Ukraine, could eventually move on to seek new targets for aggression.

One potential target is the Suwalki Gap, a 60-mile (100km) stretch of border between Poland and Lithuania, both Nato countries. This is all that separates Russian ally Belarus from the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad on the Baltic coast.

Seizing that border and opening up a route along it would, in theory, give Moscow direct access to its strategic base on the Baltic.

The Baltic states themselves are other potential flashpoints. Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania were all once part of the Soviet Union and were ruled from Moscow.

They all voted for independence and have since joined Nato, but all have Russian-speaking minorities and hence there is a risk that Mr Putin could be tempted to send his troops across the border "to protect them from persecution".

The eastern Estonian town of Narva, for example, is an obvious potential target here, as the majority of its population speak Russian and it sits just across the river from the giant Russian fortress of Ivangorod.

A UK battle group comprising some 900 British military personnel has been stationed in Estonia, about 80 miles west of Narva, since 2017.

In the event of war, the plan goes, it would be hurriedly reinforced to brigade strength of around 3,000 or more.

Another possible flashpoint is the Arctic archipelago of Svalbard, which is administered by Norway but where Moscow already has a toehold in the coal mining town of Barentsburg.

Litvinenko, Skripal and hostile acts on UK soil

The UK may well be Putin's enemy number one, having been one of Ukraine's staunchest allies, and having pushed for more powerful weapons to be delivered to help its defence.

Hostile acts on UK soil that have been linked to President Putin include the murder with radioactive Polonium-210 of former KGB officer Alexander Litvinenko in London in 2006 - a public inquiry concluded that Putin "probably" approved his assassination - and the attempted murder of former Russian military intelligence officer turned MI6 agent Sergei Skripal in Salisbury in 2018, using the nerve agent, Novichok.

Dawn Sturgess, a mother-of-three, later died after she sprayed the Novichok, disguised as perfume, on her wrists. Putin was "morally responsible" for her death, an inquiry concluded last week.

Lord Anthony Hughes, the inquiry chair, said: "I have concluded that the operation to assassinate Sergei Skripal must have been authorised at the highest level, by President Putin."

Russia, which has always denied involvement in the attacks and suggested more than 20 different possible explanations for Ms Sturgess's death, described the report's findings as "tasteless fairy tales".

But the UK is also a core member of the Nato alliance. While questions are certainly raised in private over the reliability of the current US administration in the White House, it is hard to envisage the UK ever having to fight Russia on its own.

"A pure UK-Russia conflict is not likely and can be disregarded, practically," says Mr Crump. "We would definitely fight with allies, although Russia would most likely only launch a conflict if it felt Nato would break."

The wild card here is US President Donald Trump.

While the chairman of Nato's Military Committee, Adm Cavo Dragone recently assured me that the US president was absolutely committed to defending the Nato alliance, others are not so sure.

Would Trump, for example, go to war to defend the Estonian town of Narva?

"There is no one-size-fits-all answer to what the United Kingdom is actually capable of," concludes Keir Giles of Chatham House, "because there are so many different situations under which it could be challenged by Russia."

As a society, the UK – unlike Poland, Finland and the Baltic States – is unquestionably not ready for war. Even serious preparations for such an eventuality would be both expensive, unpopular and politically risky.

But Mr Giles of Chatham House offers some sobering advice to the British public: "Recognise that the rights and freedoms and prosperity that they take for granted are in fact under threat and that freedom does not come for free."

"And understand that lives will have to change. And this is not the fault of the current government or even its predecessors — it's their fault that it is so expensive, but the root cause of the problem is in Moscow."

Top image credit: Ministry of Defence /PA Wire/ Getty Images. Picture shows soldier in non-combat scenario

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. You can now sign up for notifications that will alert you whenever an InDepth story is published - click here to find out how.