US President Donald Trump has announced the US will send "top-of-the-line weapons" to Ukraine via Nato countries, while also threatening Russia with severe tariffs if a deal to end the war is not reached within 50 days.

"We want to make sure Ukraine can do what it wants to do," Trump said following a meeting with Nato chief Mark Rutte in Washington.

Rutte confirmed the US had decided to "massively supply Ukraine with what is necessary through Nato" and that the Europeans would foot the bill.

European countries will send Kyiv their own Patriot air defence systems - which Ukraine relies on to repel Russia's deadly air strikes - and replacements will then be issued by the US, Trump said.

Neither Rutte nor Trump elaborated on the weaponry that will be sent to Kyiv but Rutte said the deal included "missiles and ammunition".

However, the president did say "top-of-the-line-weapons" worth billions of dollars would be "quickly distributed to the battlefield" in order to support Ukraine.

"If I was Vladimir Putin today... I would reconsider whether I should not take negotiations about Ukraine more seriously," Rutte said, as Trump nodded.

On the tariffs front, Trump said that the US would impose 100% secondary tariffs targeting Russia's remaining trade partners if a peace deal with Ukraine was not reached within 50 days.

This would see any country that trades with Russia face the tax if they want to sell their products to the US.

For example, if India keeps buying oil from Russia, US companies that purchase Indian goods would have to pay a 100% import tax, or tariff, when the products reach American shores.

This would make the goods so expensive that US businesses would likely choose to buy them cheaper from elsewhere, resulting in lost revenue for India.

The intention is also to hobble Russia's economy. Theoretically, if Moscow was unable to generate money by selling oil to other nations it would also have less money to finance its war in Ukraine.

Given that oil and gas account for almost a third of Moscow's state revenue and more than 60% of its exports, 100% tariffs could make something of a dent Russia's finances.

Still, the Moscow Stock Exchange Index rose sharply following the announcement, likely as investors were expecting Trump - who last week teased a "major statement" on Russia - to pledge even harsher measures.

Although detail about both the tariffs and the Nato weapons deal was scant, Monday was the first time Trump pledged to make new military equipment to Ukraine since returning to the White House.

The briefing was also notable for the tone struck by US president, whose rhetoric on Vladimir Putin has become increasingly harsh.

Not for the first time, Trump implied Kyiv bore some responsibility for Russia's decision to launch its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

But he mostly appeared frustrated at the lack of progress in ending a conflict which he once seemed to believe could be easily solvable.

Asked about his relationship with Putin, Trump said that the two speak "a lot about getting this thing done" but voiced his displeasure at the fact that "very nice phone calls" with the Russian president are often followed by devastating air strikes on Ukraine - which have been growing in intensity and frequency.

"After that happens three or four times you say: the talk doesn't mean anything," Trump said.

"I don't want to call him an assassin but he's a tough guy. It's been proven over the years, he fooled a lot of people – Clinton, Bush, Obama, Biden," he added. "He didn't fool me. At a certain point talk doesn't talk, it's got to be action."

Two rounds of ceasefire talks between Russia and Ukraine took place earlier this year but no other meetings have so far been scheduled - something Moscow has blamed on Kyiv.

Ukraine's President Zelensky is currently hosting US envoy Keith Kellogg in Kyiv and earlier on Monday hailed a "productive meeting" - saying he was "grateful" to Trump for his support.

The Kremlin did not immediately comment on the announcement - but commentary trickling in from Moscow appeared to indicate a measure of relief.

Pro-Kremlin pundit and former Putin aide Sergei Markov called the tariffs announcement "a bluff" that indicated Trump had "given up on trying to achieve peace in Ukraine".

Senator Konstantin Kosachev argued that "if this is all Trump had to say about Ukraine today, then so far it's been much ado about nothing".

In 50 days a lot could change "both on the battlefield and in the moods of the powers that be in the US and Nato," Kosachev wrote.

Additional reporting by Dearbail Jordan

US President Donald Trump has announced the US will send "top-of-the-line weapons" to Ukraine via Nato countries, while also threatening Russia with severe tariffs if a deal to end the war is not reached within 50 days.

"We want to make sure Ukraine can do what it wants to do," Trump said following a meeting with Nato chief Mark Rutte in Washington.

Rutte confirmed the US had decided to "massively supply Ukraine with what is necessary through Nato" and that the Europeans would foot the bill.

European countries will send Kyiv their own Patriot air defence systems - which Ukraine relies on to repel Russia's deadly air strikes - and replacements will then be issued by the US, Trump said.

Neither Rutte nor Trump elaborated on the weaponry that will be sent to Kyiv but Rutte said the deal included "missiles and ammunition".

However, the president did say "top-of-the-line-weapons" worth billions of dollars would be "quickly distributed to the battlefield" in order to support Ukraine.

"If I was Vladimir Putin today... I would reconsider whether I should not take negotiations about Ukraine more seriously," Rutte said, as Trump nodded.

On the tariffs front, Trump said that the US would impose 100% secondary tariffs targeting Russia's remaining trade partners if a peace deal with Ukraine was not reached within 50 days.

This would see any country that trades with Russia face the tax if they want to sell their products to the US.

For example, if India keeps buying oil from Russia, US companies that purchase Indian goods would have to pay a 100% import tax, or tariff, when the products reach American shores.

This would make the goods so expensive that US businesses would likely choose to buy them cheaper from elsewhere, resulting in lost revenue for India.

The intention is also to hobble Russia's economy. Theoretically, if Moscow was unable to generate money by selling oil to other nations it would also have less money to finance its war in Ukraine.

Given that oil and gas account for almost a third of Moscow's state revenue and more than 60% of its exports, 100% tariffs could make something of a dent Russia's finances.

Still, the Moscow Stock Exchange Index rose sharply following the announcement, likely as investors were expecting Trump - who last week teased a "major statement" on Russia - to pledge even harsher measures.

Although detail about both the tariffs and the Nato weapons deal was scant, Monday was the first time Trump pledged to make new military equipment to Ukraine since returning to the White House.

The briefing was also notable for the tone struck by US president, whose rhetoric on Vladimir Putin has become increasingly harsh.

Not for the first time, Trump implied Kyiv bore some responsibility for Russia's decision to launch its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

But he mostly appeared frustrated at the lack of progress in ending a conflict which he once seemed to believe could be easily solvable.

Asked about his relationship with Putin, Trump said that the two speak "a lot about getting this thing done" but voiced his displeasure at the fact that "very nice phone calls" with the Russian president are often followed by devastating air strikes on Ukraine - which have been growing in intensity and frequency.

"After that happens three or four times you say: the talk doesn't mean anything," Trump said.

"I don't want to call him an assassin but he's a tough guy. It's been proven over the years, he fooled a lot of people – Clinton, Bush, Obama, Biden," he added. "He didn't fool me. At a certain point talk doesn't talk, it's got to be action."

Two rounds of ceasefire talks between Russia and Ukraine took place earlier this year but no other meetings have so far been scheduled - something Moscow has blamed on Kyiv.

Ukraine's President Zelensky is currently hosting US envoy Keith Kellogg in Kyiv and earlier on Monday hailed a "productive meeting" - saying he was "grateful" to Trump for his support.

The Kremlin did not immediately comment on the announcement - but commentary trickling in from Moscow appeared to indicate a measure of relief.

Pro-Kremlin pundit and former Putin aide Sergei Markov called the tariffs announcement "a bluff" that indicated Trump had "given up on trying to achieve peace in Ukraine".

Senator Konstantin Kosachev argued that "if this is all Trump had to say about Ukraine today, then so far it's been much ado about nothing".

In 50 days a lot could change "both on the battlefield and in the moods of the powers that be in the US and Nato," Kosachev wrote.

Additional reporting by Dearbail Jordan

Four people who died when a small plane crashed at London Southend Airport are believed to be foreign nationals, police have confirmed.

The airport has been closed since emergency services were called to the incident involving a Beech B200 Super King shortly before 16:00 BST on Sunday.

Witnesses described a "fireball" type explosion soon after the Netherlands-bound light aircraft had taken off.

All four people were killed in the crash - two pilots and two passengers - and Essex Police said in a press conference on Monday it believed they were foreign nationals.

The names of the four who died have not been released but officers are now working to confirm their identities.

Ch Supt Morgan Cronin said the victims would be "treated with the utmost respect and dignity".

The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) has put in place a significant air exclusion zone surrounding the crash site.

All flights to and from the airport on Monday have been rerouted, with passengers advised to check with their airline for advice.

The Beech B200 Super King Air plane was operated by Zeusch Aviation, based at Lelystad Airport in the Netherlands, which has confirmed it is "actively supporting the authorities with the investigation".

The plane had flown from the Greek capital Athens to Pula in Croatia on Sunday before heading to Southend. It was due to return to Lelystad on Sunday evening.

Detectives and forensic teams are working in parallel with the Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB), the Royal Air Force, Essex County Fire and Rescue Service and London Southend Airport to work out what happened.

Speaking at the press conference, Lisa Fitzsimons, a senior inspector at the AAIB, said it was "too early to speculate on what caused this tragic accident".

"If there are safety lessons that can be learned, we will make recommendations that will aim to prevent a similar accident occurring," she said.

Eight of its inspectors are now at the crash site.

A London Southend Airport spokesperson said: "Our thoughts are with those affected by [Sunday's] events and all passengers impacted by this disruption.

"We will restart flight operations as soon as possible and will continue to update the public on developments."

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

A man stabbed to death in Knightsbridge may have been the victim of a targeted attack, detectives have said.

Three men in their 20s have been arrested in connection with the murder of 24-year-old Blue Stevens, who was found with stab wounds in Seville Street on Wednesday evening.

Two of the men were arrested in Hounslow on 12 July; one on suspicion of conspiracy to murder, and the other on suspicion of murder. The third was arrested on Monday on suspicion of assisting an offender.

Mr Stevens, from Yateley in Hampshire, died at the scene.

Det Ch Sup Christina Jessah said the arrests "mark a significant milestone in this complex and unfolding murder investigation".

She said detectives were keeping open minds around motive, and they were considering if this "may have been a targeted attack" and there were increased police patrols in the Knightsbridge area as a result.

The incident happened near luxury hotel The Park Tower Knightsbridge but did not involve any guests or staff, according to a Marriott spokesperson.

Listen to the best of BBC Radio London on Sounds and follow BBC London on Facebook, X and Instagram. Send your story ideas to hello.bbclondon@bbc.co.uk

India's aviation regulator has ordered the country's airlines to inspect fuel control switches in Boeing aeroplanes, after their reported involvement in a fatal Air India crash that killed 260 people in June.

The Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) said the order follows Indian and international airlines already starting to carry out their own checks.

It comes after the US Federal Aviation Administration said on Monday that the fuel control switches in Boeing aeroplanes are safe.

The safety of the switches has become a key point of concern after a preliminary report on the disaster found fuel to the engines of the plane involved cut off moments after take-off.

The disaster involving London-bound Flight 171, a Boeing 787 Dreamliner, was one of the worst aviation incidents globally in almost a decade.

Since the publication of the preliminary report on Saturday a number of different stakeholders, both in India and internationally have taken action and issued statements in response to it.

In its order, India's aviation regulator has asked for checks to be carried out by 21 July, noting that "strict adherence to the timeline is essential to ensure continued airworthiness and safety of operations".

The checks being requested are in line with a 2018 advisory by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the US's aviation authority, which was referenced in the preliminary report.

The 2018 advisory urged - but did not mandate - operators of Boeing models to inspect the locking feature of the fuel cut-off switches to ensure they could not be moved by accident.

Air India had not carried out those inspections because they were not mandatory, the AAIB said in its preliminary investigation.

The DGCA has now ordered airlines to carry out the checks and report back.

In its response to the report, the FAA said the 2018 advisory was "was based on reports that the fuel control switches were installed with the locking feature disengaged" - but added that it does not believe this makes the planes unsafe.

• Boeing fuel switches safe, regulator says after Air India crash

Separately on Monday, a group representing Indian airline pilots defended the flight's crew.

The Indian Commercial Pilots' Association said staff on board had "acted in line with their training and responsibilities under challenging conditions and the pilots shouldn't be vilified based on conjecture".

The preliminary report, published by the India Aircraft Accident Investigation Branch (AAIB) on Saturday, said the switches on Flight 171 controlling fuel flow to the jet's engines had been moved from "run" to the "cut-off" position, hampering the thrust of the plane.

In recovered cockpit voice recordings, the report said one of the pilots can be heard asking "why did you cut off?" - to which the other pilot replied he "did not do so".

The preliminary report states its role is "not to apportion blame or liability".

Also on Monday, the Reuters news agency reported that South Korea was waiting to order all airlines in the country which operate Boeing jets to examine fuel switches.

Stokes conjures finale to slow-burning Test

England overcome brave Jadeja

India on brink

'England always seem to find a way' - reaction

The UK is to start processing Syrian asylum claims again, more than seven months after decisions were paused following the fall of the Assad regime.

Asylum minister Dame Angela Eagle said the Home Office had "worked to lift the pause as soon as there was sufficient information to make accurate and well-evidenced determinations".

The government has published updated guidance for officials to make decisions on Syrian claims.

Dame Angela said claims could now be processed, and returns to Syria conducted in line with this.

The UK paused decisions on Syrian claims for asylum and permanent settlement in December, after President Bashar al-Assad was overthrown by a rebel offensive led by the Islamist militant group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), following years of civil war.

In a written statement, Dame Angela said the pause "was a necessary step while there was no stable, objective information available to make robust assessments of risk on return to Syria".

However, the move left more than 7,000 Syrians waiting for a decision on an asylum claim in limbo.

The majority of these are living in government-funded accommodation, such as hotels.

The pause also applied to Syrians who had already been granted refugee status and were initially given the right to stay in the UK for five years before being able to apply for permanent settlement.

Campaigners say being left with this temporary status makes it harder for people to secure a job or housing.

Welcoming the move, Enver Solomon, chief executive of the Refugee Council charity, said: "We know the pause in decision making had left Syrian people trapped in further limbo, unable to work, move on with their lives and fearing for their future.

"However, the situation in Syria continues to be unstable, and we urge the government to ensure that every asylum application is assessed on a case-by-case basis, ensuring the safety and protection of Syrians who would face extreme risk if they are returned."

Figures affiliated with HTS - which is designated a terrorist group by the UK - now run the country, with HTS leader Ahmad al-Sharaa named as Syria's interim president earlier this year.

Under the United Nations Refugee Convention, an individual must have a "well-founded fear of persecution" to be granted asylum and refugee status.

The Home Office's updated guidance on Syria states that a "breakdown in law and order or uncertain security situations do not in themselves give rise to a well-founded fear of persecution".

"There are not substantial grounds for believing there is a real risk of serious harm in Syria because of a serious and individual threat to a civilian's life or person by reason of indiscriminate violence in a situation of international or internal armed conflict," it adds.

"All cases must be considered on their individual facts, with the onus on the person to demonstrate they face persecution or serious harm."

Ministers have previously suggested that the majority of Syrians who arrived in the UK before the fall of Assad were fleeing the regime, and some may now wish to return.

On the issue of returns, the guidance notes that following the change in government, opponents of the former Assad regime are "unlikely to be at risk upon return to Syria solely on that basis".

On the situation for religious minorities, it states that Kurds, Christians, Druze and Shia Muslims are "are unlikely to face a real risk of persecution or serious harm from the state" and "the onus is on the person to demonstrate otherwise".

However, it adds that Kurds in areas under de facto control of the Syrian National Army - a coalition of Turkish-backed rebel groups - "are likely to face a real risk of persecution or serious harm" based on their ethnicity or perceived political opinion.

It also says that although the new government has sought to assure members of the Alawite minority they will not be subject to violent reprisals, Alawites "are likely to face a real risk of persecution or serious harm from the state due to their religion and/or an imputed political opinion".

Many of the former Assad regime's political and military elite belonged to the Alawite sect.

The guidance notes that in March members of the Alawite minority were subject to a series of attacks which killed an estimated 800 people, with HTS-affiliated groups reported to have been involved.

Earlier this month, Foreign Secretary David Lammy met interim president al-Sharaa, as he became the first UK minister to visit Syria since the uprising that led to the country's civil war began 14 years ago.

The UK has also been gradually lifting sanctions on Syria.

Sign up for our Politics Essential newsletter to keep up with the inner workings of Westminster and beyond.

One report about failings in its programme-making is difficult for the BBC. Two on the same day could be catastrophic - and that's what BBC bosses woke up to on Monday morning.

The day has been about publicly apologising, announcing action plans and trying to turn a corner - on the Wallace misconduct story and on the failures over its Gaza documentary - after a deeply damaging few months.

But will it work?

On Wallace there are still questions about whether the BBC created a culture where presenters lived by different rules (something the recent culture review aims to get a grip on) and also whether there was enough active monitoring of what was going out on its platforms.

I think the BBC has a good case to say it did get a grip in the later years. Kate Phillips, now Chief Content Officer, warned Wallace about his behaviour in 2019 and after that, according to the report, no complaints were escalated to the BBC. If that is correct, the BBC can argue it thought the issue was sorted.

On the Gaza documentary about children in a warzone, with an investigation now launched by the regulator Ofcom into the BBC misleading audiences, it is by no means the end of the story.

But the review has on the face of it given the BBC a bit of breathing space. The culture secretary, who recently asked why nobody had been fired over the Gaza documentary, seems to have rowed back.

I understand that Director General Tim Davie and Chairman Samir Shah met with Lisa Nandy last week to reassure her. Her more conciliatory tone will have prompted a corporate sigh of relief after her recent pointed attacks directed at the BBC's leadership.

Questions still remain around whether anyone inside the BBC will lose their job. We know that the BBC team failed to get answers on the boy's family links, the investigation holds them partly responsible for the failures - and that the BBC says it is taking "fair, clear and appropriate action" to ensure accountability.

There is a question asked inside the BBC in situations where there have been failings. Will heads - or rather deputy heads - roll? It is a cynical take on whether there is real accountability at the top when something goes wrong. We still don't know the outcome here.

But more broadly, when it comes to Gaza, these past few months have been difficult.

When Davie gave evidence to MPs in March, a few weeks after he had pulled Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone from iPlayer, he told them he "lost trust in that film" once the fact that the child narrator was the son of a Hamas official became clear.

It is not an exaggeration to say that the ongoing war has led others to lose trust in the BBC and its coverage of what is happening in Gaza, where access by foreign journalists is prevented by Israel.

The corporation has been accused of antisemitism. Broadcasting a documentary without knowing that fact about the link to Hamas - and not informing the audience of it - opened it up to those accusations.

So did the BBC's failure properly to deal with the livestream from Glastonbury when the punk duo Bob Vylan chanted "Death to the IDF" and made other offensive comments.

There are people inside and outside the corporation who feel betrayed by the BBC's coverage. Some say it is biased against Israel and that the attacks on October 7th and the hostages have been forgotten. Some accuse the BBC of ignoring the plight of Gazans and Israel's actions in its coverage of the war.

It recently axed another documentary about the conflict, Gaza: Doctors Under Attack, because it said broadcasting it "risked creating a perception of partiality that would not meet the high standards that the public rightly expect of the BBC".

Less than two weeks ago, at a packed screening at London's Riverside Studios, hundreds watched it on the big screen, after it had been shown on Channel 4. I was there. The woman sitting next to me was in tears as the horrors unfolded on screen. She wasn't the only one.

The BBC has said it first delayed running the Gaza: Doctors Under Attack film in light of the investigation into the other documentary. It then dropped it, deciding it could not run after its presenter went on BBC Radio 4'sToday programme and called Israel 'a rogue state that's committing war crimes and ethnic cleansing and mass murdering Palestinians'.

The filmmakers at Basement Films have pushed back on that. On Monday they said "the film was never going to run on BBC News and we were given multiple and sometimes contradictory reasons for this, the only consistent theme for us being a paralysing atmosphere of fear around Gaza".

Whatever the true story about why it wasn't shown on the BBC, that claim - that the BBC's Gaza coverage is compromised by fear - is just as damaging. The BBC refutes it, but in some quarters, it appears to be taking hold.

In the screening room, Gary Lineker came onto the stage and said the BBC should "hang its head in shame" for not screening what he called "one of the most important films" of our time. He accused the BBC of bowing to pressure - and the audience noisily agreed.

Reporting the Israel-Gaza war has tested the BBC almost like never before. One insider said to me that neither side wants impartial reporting, what they want is partisan reporting. But, from all sides, the BBC has come under fire.

The BBC says it is "fully committed to reporting the Israel-Gaza conflict impartially, accurately and to the highest standards of journalism". It also says "We strongly reject the notion – levelled from different sides of this conflict – that we are pro or anti any position".

Two years ago the annual report was overshadowed by the Huw Edwards crisis, last year it was the Strictly allegations, this year it is not one but three stories.

The most important job for a director general is to secure charter renewal and the BBC has a strong story to tell and sell. But the difficulty for Tim Davie is that no matter how loud he bangs the drum for the BBC and its future, it is hard to be heard over with the din of crisis.

India's aviation regulator has ordered the country's airlines to inspect fuel control switches in Boeing aeroplanes, after their reported involvement in a fatal Air India crash that killed 260 people in June.

The Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) said the order follows Indian and international airlines already starting to carry out their own checks.

It comes after the US Federal Aviation Administration said on Monday that the fuel control switches in Boeing aeroplanes are safe.

The safety of the switches has become a key point of concern after a preliminary report on the disaster found fuel to the engines of the plane involved cut off moments after take-off.

The disaster involving London-bound Flight 171, a Boeing 787 Dreamliner, was one of the worst aviation incidents globally in almost a decade.

Since the publication of the preliminary report on Saturday a number of different stakeholders, both in India and internationally have taken action and issued statements in response to it.

In its order, India's aviation regulator has asked for checks to be carried out by 21 July, noting that "strict adherence to the timeline is essential to ensure continued airworthiness and safety of operations".

The checks being requested are in line with a 2018 advisory by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the US's aviation authority, which was referenced in the preliminary report.

The 2018 advisory urged - but did not mandate - operators of Boeing models to inspect the locking feature of the fuel cut-off switches to ensure they could not be moved by accident.

Air India had not carried out those inspections because they were not mandatory, the AAIB said in its preliminary investigation.

The DGCA has now ordered airlines to carry out the checks and report back.

In its response to the report, the FAA said the 2018 advisory was "was based on reports that the fuel control switches were installed with the locking feature disengaged" - but added that it does not believe this makes the planes unsafe.

• Boeing fuel switches safe, regulator says after Air India crash

Separately on Monday, a group representing Indian airline pilots defended the flight's crew.

The Indian Commercial Pilots' Association said staff on board had "acted in line with their training and responsibilities under challenging conditions and the pilots shouldn't be vilified based on conjecture".

The preliminary report, published by the India Aircraft Accident Investigation Branch (AAIB) on Saturday, said the switches on Flight 171 controlling fuel flow to the jet's engines had been moved from "run" to the "cut-off" position, hampering the thrust of the plane.

In recovered cockpit voice recordings, the report said one of the pilots can be heard asking "why did you cut off?" - to which the other pilot replied he "did not do so".

The preliminary report states its role is "not to apportion blame or liability".

Also on Monday, the Reuters news agency reported that South Korea was waiting to order all airlines in the country which operate Boeing jets to examine fuel switches.

At least 30 people have been killed in armed clashes between Sunni Bedouin tribal fighters and Druze militias in southern Syria, the country's interior ministry says.

The violence erupted in the predominantly Druze city in the province of Suweida on Sunday, two days after a Druze merchant was reportedly abducted on the highway to Damascus.

The interior ministry called the situation "a dangerous escalation" and said security forces were being deployed to try to restore calm.

It is the latest outbreak of deadly sectarian violence in the country since Islamist-led rebel forces overthrew President Bashar al-Assad in December.

Syria's many minority communities - including the Druze, whose religion is an offshoot of Shia Islam with its own unique identity and beliefs - have expressed concerns over the new authorities' pledges to protect them.

Sunday's clashes between Bedouin tribesmen and Druze militias began in the al-Maqwas neighbourhood of Suweida city.

The area, which is inhabited by Bedouin, was reportedly encircled and later seized by armed Druze fighters.

The fighting soon spread into other parts of Suweida province, with tribesmen reportedly launching attacks on Druze towns and villages on the city's western and northern outskirts.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR), a UK-based monitoring group, said the towns of Sumay and Mazraah were shelled, and that residents of the village of Tayrah fled after armed men entered the outskirts and set fire to several homes.

It reported that 37 people were killed - 27 Druze, including two children, and 10 Bedouin.

The interior ministry said: "This dangerous escalation comes in light of the absence of relevant official institutions, leading to worsening chaos, a collapse of the security situation, and the local community's inability to contain the crisis despite repeated calls for calm."

It added that interior ministry forces, in co-ordination with the defence ministry, would "begin direct intervention in the area to end the conflict and impose order".

The governor of Suweida, Mustapha al-Bakur, called on his constituents to "exercise self-restraint and respond to national calls for reform".

Several Syrian Druze spiritual leaders also appealed for calm.

On Sunday night, local activist-run news outlet Suwayda 24 said that mediation between Bedouin and Druze leaders aimed at de-escalating tensions had resulted in the release of people kidnapped by both sides during the clashes.

However, on Monday morning it reported that fighting had erupted in the western countryside of Suweida after drones attacked villages at the same time as government forces deployed in nearby areas of eastern Deraa province.

At the start of May, more than 130 people were reportedly killed in clashes between Druze gunmen, security forces and allied Sunni Islamist fighters in two suburbs of the capital Damascus and Suweida province.

In the wake of that fighting, the government reached an agreement with Druze militias to hire local security forces in Suweida province from their ranks.