This week's G7 summit in Canada will be dominated by war - only not one of those that the world leaders had expected.

High on the agenda had been Russia's war against Ukraine and Donald Trump's tariff war against America's trading partners.

Instead the three-day gathering in the Rocky Mountains of Alberta will inevitably be focused on war in the Middle East.

Israel's decision to attack Iran will force the Group of Seven western powers to spend less time on other issues and instead discuss ways of managing the conflict.

Like so many of their discussions, that will involve Britain, France, Germany and Italy - along with Canada and Japan - seeking to influence the United States.

For although Israel might have launched these strikes without explicit American support, the US president is the only leader with real leverage over Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

• Follow latest on Israel-Iran attacks
• What are the worst-case scenarios?

The G7 leaders, due to arrive in Canada on Sunday, know the global security and economic risks if this conflict escalates, dragging in other countries, sending oil prices soaring.

Yet they may struggle to achieve a common position. Some, such as UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer and President Emmanuel Macron of France, have called for restraint and de-escalation.

But others such as Japan's Prime Minister, Shigeru Ishiba, have condemned Israel's attack as "intolerable" and "extremely regrettable". For his part, Mr Trump praised Israel's strikes as "excellent".

Hiding the divisions

All this is a long way from what Mark Carney, the new Canadian Prime Minister, had planned for the talks in the wilderness retreat of Kananaskis. He wanted a summit to mark the G7's 50th birthday that avoided rows with Mr Trump.

Much of his agenda was non-controversial, about energy security, protecting mineral supply chains, accelerating the digital transition and tackling forest fires.

There was little mention of issues such as climate change, on which Mr Trump is a sceptic. Canadian officials even decided not to have a summit communique to avoid textual disputes dominating the gathering.

Instead, world leaders will agree a number of "short, action-oriented statements" that maintain consensus and ignore divisive issues.

• Starmer heads to Canada for G7

Canadians well remember the last time they hosted a G7 gathering in 2018 when there was a row over - yes - Donald Trump's trade tariffs. The president stormed out early and, on the plane home, withdrew his support for the summit communique after watching Justin Trudeau, the then Canadian Prime Minister, give a press conference Mr Trump described as "very dishonest and weak".

This summit Mr Carney may arrange a visit to Kananaskis golf club to try to keep Mr Trump onside.

An awkward family gathering

Beneath this caution lingers a fundamental question about whether these annual gatherings are still worth it, given Mr Trump's clear disdain. He prefers bilateral dealmaking to multilateral consensus-building.

This is the president's first such foray onto the world stage since his inauguration and his six partners will be looking anxiously to see whether he wants to pick a fight - or look statesmanlike - for voters back home.

• Who's who in famous G7 photo from 2018

Max Bergmann, director of the Europe, Russia and Eurasia Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said: "The question now is not so much 'is this an awkward family gathering?' That's almost a given. I think the question is: 'is this still a family?'"

In one respect, the dramatis personae in Kananaskis helps. There are several new faces around the table - Sir Keir Starmer, Chancellor Merz of Germany, Mr Ishiba and Mr Carney himself. The more veteran G7 leaders - President Macron and Prime Minister Meloni of Italy - get on well with the US president.

Other leaders also attending the summit, from Mexico, India, Australia, South Africa, South Korea and Brazil, are not expected to pick a fight.

Tackling Trump over tariffs

The most obvious test of the G7's existential tensions will be Mr Trump's trade war.

This club of some of the world's richest industrial nations was set up in the 1970s to discuss global economic crises. And yet now the G7 finds itself dealing with damaging tariffs imposed by one of its members.

The argument world leaders will make to Mr Trump is that if he wants them to help him counter longer-term threats, economic or otherwise, from China, then it makes little sense for him to punish his allies. They will want to make explicit that there is a trade-off between putting America First and taking on Beijing.

Josh Lipsky, senior director, Atlantic Council's GeoEconomics Center, said: "If the question is how we coordinate on China, how we coordinate on technology, how we coordinate on Russia and Ukraine - how can we have this kind of alliance between advanced-economy democracies if we're also creating economic hardship on our countries by something that's coming from another member?"

Pressing Russia over Ukraine

Key to that debate will be Ukraine. President Zelensky will join the discussions on Tuesday. His aim, along with other leaders, will be to assess the current state of President Trump's thinking towards Russia.

Ukraine's allies want to put more pressure on President Putin to come to the negotiating table. To do that, they want to hit his economy harder.

First, they want to reduce the price much of the world pays for Russian oil.

They already agreed in December 2022 to cap the price of Russian crude oil at $60 a barrel, making that a condition of access to western ports and shipping insurance and port. But this has been rendered less effective by falling energy prices.

The European Commission wants a cap at $45. Ukraine wants it even lower, at $30. What is not clear is where Mr Trump's thinking is on this. Already some officials say allies may have to lower the cap without US support.

Second, Ukraine's western allies also want a tough new package of economic sanctions.

The European Commission has already proposed a fresh round of penalties aimed at Moscow's energy revenues, banks and military industry.

US senators, led by Lindsay Graham, are also pushing tough new sanctions that that would impose steep tariffs on countries that buy cheap Russian oil, most particularly China and India.

It used to be said the G7 was a kind of "steering committee" for the free world. This week may reveal whether the club's driving days are over

Doctors in India say 270 bodies have been recovered from the site of Thursday's plane crash in Ahmedabad.

The London-bound aircraft crashed into a residential area shortly after take-off killing all but one of the 242 passengers, a 40-year-old British man.

Officials have been trying to establish how many people were killed on the ground and have been continuing the slow process of matching DNA samples to confirm the victims' identities.

Vigils honouring the dead have taken place across India and the UK.

The man accused of being responsible for holding the missing American journalist Austin Tice has claimed that ousted Syrian President Bashar al-Assad ordered his execution, security sources have told the BBC.

Major General Bassam Al Hassan is a former commander in the Republican Guards who was part of President Assad's inner circle.

He was also the Chief of Staff of the National Defence Forces (NDF), the paramilitary group that a BBC investigation uncovered was responsible for holding Mr Tice after his abduction in 2012.

The discovery was made as part of an upcoming BBC Radio 4 podcast about the disappearance of Austin Tice.

The American journalist vanished near the Syrian capital of Damascus in August 2012, just days after his 31st birthday.

He had been working as a freelance journalist and was leaving Syria when he was abducted.

The fallen regime consistently denied knowing of his whereabouts - the BBC investigation showed that was false and that Mr Tice was being held in Damascus.

Al Hassan, who is subject to UK, EU, Canadian and US sanctions, oversaw the facility where Mr Tice was held.

Earlier this year, he is said to have met with US law enforcement at least three times in Lebanon.

Sources claim that at least one of those meetings was in the US embassy complex.

During these conversations, he is said to have told investigators from the FBI and CIA that the now-ousted President Assad ordered the execution of missing American journalist Austin Tice.

Sources familiar with the conversations told the BBC that Al Hassan claims to have initially tried to dissuade President Assad from killing Mr Tice, but that he eventually passed on this order and that it was carried out.

Al Hassan is also understood to have provided possible locations for the journalist's body. Sources familiar with the FBI investigation have said that efforts to confirm the validity of Al Hassan's claims are ongoing, and that a search is intended to happen of the sites where Mr Tice's body could be.

Western intelligence sources familiar with the details of Al Hassan's claim that President Assad gave the order to kill Mr Tice are sceptical that he would directly give such an instruction, as he is known for having mechanisms for distancing himself from such actions.

The BBC accompanied Mr Tice's mother, Debra, to Beirut as the 13th anniversary of her son's disappearance approaches. Upon finding out that Bassam al Hassan had spoken to US officials, Debra Tice attempted to meet with Al Hassan herself and contacted the US embassy requesting assistance.

She told the BBC: "I just want to be able to speak to him as a mother and ask him about my son." Her attempt to meet with Al Hassan was unsuccessful.

When asked about the claims by Al Hassan, she said her feeling was that he "fed the FBI a story that they wanted to hear" to help them close the case.

Debra Tice has led a tireless and determined campaign to bring her son home and remains committed to finding him. She told the BBC: "I am his mother, I still believe that my son is alive and that he will walk free."

Separately, a former member of the NDF with intimate knowledge of Austin Tice's detention told the BBC "that Austin's value was understood" and that he was a "card" that could be played in diplomatic negotiations with the US.

Bassam Al Hassan was considered one of President Assad's most trusted advisors. After the Syrian regime's collapse in December, Mr Al Hassan had fled to Iran.

Sources close to him have told the BBC that while in Iran, Al Hassan received a phone call and was asked to come to Lebanon to meet with US officials. It is believed that he was given assurances that he would not be detained.

For years, consecutive US presidents have said that Mr Tice, a former US Marine captain, who served in Iraq and Afghanistan and was a law student at the prestigious Georgetown University in Washington, was alive.

In December 2024, then President Joe Biden told reporters at the White House that "we believe he's alive," and that "we think we can get him back, but we have no direct evidence of that yet".

Protests against President Donald Trump have taken place in towns and cities across the US, organised by a group called "No Kings".

The demonstrations were held to counter a rare military parade hosted by Trump in Washington DC, and came after days of protests in Los Angeles and elsewhere over his immigration policies.

Lawmakers, union leaders and activists gave speeches in cities including New York, Philadelphia and Houston to crowds waving American flags and placards critical of Trump.

The military parade on Saturday evening, also Trump's birthday, was timed to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the US Army. He warned that any protests at the parade would be met with "heavy force".

Organisers said there were hundreds of protests with millions of participants.

In Philadelphia, people gathered in Love Park. "I just feel like we need to defend our democracy," Karen Van Trieste, a 61-year-old nurse, told the Associated Press.

She said Trump's staffing cuts to public health agencies were one of the reasons why she turned out.

One of the larger crowds was in Los Angeles where leaders and law enforcement have been on high alert during days of protests, sometimes violent, against a series of deportation raids.

Trump sent in the state's National Guard a week ago against the wishes of Governor Gavin Newsom and to the anger of local officials.

On Saturday, Jose Azetcla, a member of the civil rights group the Brown Berets, told the BBC in Los Angeles that it was immigration that brought him out on to the streets.

"It's not harsh, it's evil. You don't separate families," he said.

There were confrontations between protesters and National Guard soldiers near the Federal Building and tear gas was fired to disperse the crowds.

But a block or two away, hundreds of protesters continued marching peacefully.

Despite the largest outpouring of protests since Trump was re-elected, opinion polls indicate his immigration policies remain broadly popular with the public.

A CBS/YouGov survey last week found 54% of Americans approved of his policy to deport immigrants who are in the US illegally - 46% disapproved.

A plurality of Americans (42%) said Trump's programme was making them safer and 53% said he was prioritising the deportation of dangerous criminals.

The "No Kings" name of the protests refers to criticism that Trump has overstepped the limits of presidential power in his second term.

The president stood to salute as some of the thousands of uniformed soldiers taking part in the parade marched past, alongside dozens of tanks and military vehicles, plus marching bands.

He spoke briefly to thank those present for their service.

"Our soldiers never give up. Never surrender and never, ever quit. They fight, fight, fight. And they win, win, win."

Some politicians and former military leaders have criticised the event as a costly vanity project. The price tag is between $25m and $45m (£18.4m to £33.2m), according to the Army.

But many of those attending told the BBC that for them it was about celebrating the military, to which some of them held a deep connection.

When Melvin Graves returned from fighting in Vietnam, he got no parade, he said, so this was as close as he would come to one.

Mr Graves acknowledged politics played a part in the event but added: "This is about honouring these men and women who served, to thank them for their service."

The last US military parade was held by President George HW Bush in June 1991, celebrating the US-led victory in the Gulf War.

A crowd of 200,000 people attended the parade to cheer on veterans, peaking at 800,000 who watched the fireworks display, the LA Times reported at the time.

The numbers at Saturday's event was well below that, partly due to wet conditions and the forecast of heavy rain.

For younger veterans, the parade was something they never saw during their time in service.

Brian Angel, a former infantryman from Virginia who served in the Army between 2014 and 2017, including a stint at the border between South and North Korea, told the BBC he wanted to see more of this.

"Every branch should get some sort of parade or recognition."

Some experts saw an uneasy juxtaposition between US soldiers marching through the capital while troops had been deployed by the president to deal with protests in LA.

Security expert Barbara Starr told the BBC: "Because of that polarisation right now over this immigration debate and the use of troops in uniforms carrying weapons, I think it does overhang this parade in a way that was perhaps not originally envisioned by the army."

• Hiding in fields - farm workers in California fear deportation

Some of the "No Kings" demonstrations in the state of Minnesota were cancelled by organisers after flyers for the event were found in the car of the man accused of fatally shooting a state politician and her husband.

Governor Tim Walz urged people not to attend protests until the suspect had been arrested but that did not stop thousands turning out.

The homes of two Minnesota state lawmakers have been targeted in shootings early on Saturday morning, CBS News, the BBC's US news partner, reported.

They were the homes of State Senator John Hoffman and Minnesota House Speaker Emerita Melissa Hortman, both from the Democratic-Farmer-Labour (DFL) Party, in Champlin and Brooklyn Park, neighbouring cities near Minneapolis.

It is unclear who was shot in the homes or their condition, CBS reported.

Minnesota Governor Tim Walz earlier said "targeted shootings" had taken place.

Brooklyn Park Police Department has issued a shelter-in-place order for a three-mile (4.8 km) radius of Edinburgh Golf Course.

Zach Lindstrom, the mayor of nearby Mounds View, said elected officials had received a "safety alert".

Authorities are warning people in the area not to answer their door for a police officer unless there are two officers together, local outlet Fox 9 reported.

Mayor Lindstrom said on X that he had heard the suspect was someone impersonating an "officer and they haven't been caught".

Walz said on X that authorities are "monitoring the situation closely" and he has activated a State Emergency Operations Center - used for managing disasters or emergencies.

On the frozen frontline in the east of Zaporizhzhia, a Ukrainian soldier surveyed the fallout from a Russian assault. It was the middle of January 2024 and the ground was covered in ice. Two weeks earlier, an 18-strong Russian assault team had broken through the line and seized three positions, killing five Ukrainians and losing 10 Russians before ceding the thin stretch of land back to the Ukrainians just hours later. The three positions that had changed hands were each just a few foxholes in the ground –⁠ dots on a devastated landscape of craters and shredded trees.

The Ukrainian soldier filmed as he looked over the remains of his fallen comrades. "This is Vitas, the small one," he said, using the dead man's callsign. He examined another body. "A silver ring, this is Grinch," he said. With difficulty, he turned over another frozen body. It was in bad condition, but the face was recognisable. The soldier sighed. "What can I find to cover you, so that you won't get cold," he said to the dead man. He picked up a nearby helmet and placed it over the damaged face. "We have found the Penguin," he said.

A year later, in January 2025, a Russian soldier was frog-marched down the corridor of a rundown local courthouse in Zaporizhzhia flanked by five Ukrainian soldiers and a large rottweiler trained on the Russian's scent and straining at its leash to attack him. Dmitriy Kurashov, callsign 'Stalker', was about to go on trial for the alleged battlefield execution of Vitalii Hodniuk, a veteran 41-year-old Ukrainian soldier known by the callsign 'Penguin'.

The trial was to be the first of its kind. According to Ukrainian authorities, Russian troops have executed at least 124 prisoners of war on the battlefield since the full-scale invasion began, but Kurashov is the first person to be brought to trial in Ukraine for the crime. His case is one of a tiny number among the tens of thousands of open war crimes cases where a suspect has been captured and can be made to stand in the dock. Adding to the unprecedented nature of the event, three members of Kurashov's own unit had agreed to testify against him.

In the bright, boxy courtroom, Kurashov was locked in a glass-enclosed dock. Short in stature, his head often bowed, he cut a subdued figure. When he did look around, he was forced to swivel his head because he had lost one eye to a grenade at the front. It was not Kurashov's first time in the dock; he had been jailed twice before in Russia, and was among the thousands of prisoners freed by the state to take part in the war.

The prosecutor read the charges. Kurashov was accused of shooting Hodniuk execution style as the Ukrainian soldier attempted to surrender – a violation of the laws of war. Kurashov had intially pleaded not guilty, during the pre-trial phase, but now in court he switched his plea to guilty. Informally, he maintained his innocence, and was making the switch purely to speed up the process, he said.

According to the UN, battlefield executions by Russians have increased at an alarming rate over the past year. In a February report, the UN human rights mission in Ukraine said it had found evidence of 79 executions by Russian forces since August 2024, as well as evidence of three illegal killings by Ukraine using first-person drones. The UN also said it had found at least three calls by Russian public officials ordering or approving executions, and according to Ukraine there is evidence of Russian battlefield commanders ordering executions up and down the frontline.

The assault on the front by Kurashov's unit was to be his first proper operation, just a few weeks after joining the war. The unit was part of "Storm-V", a detachment of the 127th motorised rifle division made up almost entirely of freed prisoners. The Storm-V units have been used by Russia as cannon fodder, sent to stage assaults on the worst parts of the frontline. They are a grim echo of similar units formed by Stalin, characterised principally by their extremely high rate of attrition.

The operation began early on the morning of 6 January 2024 under a dense fog. The 18-strong Storm-V team approached the frontline in two armoured vehicles and a tank and the assault began. Kurashov was directed towards the small cluster of foxholes where Hodniuk and others were hiding, following a Russian artillery barrage.

This is where Kurashov's account diverges from that of the prosecution and the Russian soldiers testifying against him. They say Kurashov called into a foxhole for those inside to surrender and Hodniuk emerged unarmed and kneeled on the ground, only for Kurashov to shoot him with a burst from his AK-47. Kurashov says that it was not him who fired the shots but another Russian, a medic with callsign "Sedoy", who was later killed.

The Russians could not hold the position for long. Overpowered by Ukrainian forces just hours later, Kurashov and the other survivors crawled out of the foxholes and surrendered. They were marched away from the front to a Ukrainian armoured vehicle and taken as prisoners of war. Ukrainian soldiers who saw Hodniuk's body told the country's state security service, the SBU, that it lay face down with no weapon nearby.

The SBU could not access the scene, because it was too close to the contact line, but the agency began what would become an extensive remote investigation. At an SBU location in Zaporizhzhia last month, the officer in charge – who spoke on condition of anonymity because of his work in the security service – drew a map of the scene and explained how they put Kurashov in the dock.

"The first step was interrogating the eight prisoners of war," he said. "They were questioned as witnesses and later their identities were fully confirmed via social networks, mobile phones, and partial radio intercepts that preceded the event. The entire unit in that sector was tracked."

Initially, there were two suspected executions. Another Ukrainian, callsign 'Grinch', had been beaten to death with a shovel, one witness said. But the SBU couldn't prove it. "The polygraph didn't confirm the information and when the bodies were eventually recovered from the battlefield, none of them had such injuries," the investigator said. "My opinion, after examining all the facts, is that this was made up."

It was, he said, an example of Ukraine's ability to investigate and prosecute war crimes impartially, despite being the victim and under an ongoing state of war from the aggressor. "Look, we have one suspect on trial for an execution," the SBU investigator said, referring to Kurashov. "I signed it and sent it to court because we've gathered enough evidence that points to guilt. If our goal was simply to suspect anyone and send them to court we would have ten prisoners passing through every day."

The seriousness with which Ukraine is treating this criminal prosecution is apparent. The SBU investigation produced more than 2,000 pages of evidence. Each of the witnesses was put through filmed reconstructions of the event on a Ukrainian army shooting range. In court, all efforts have been made by the prosecutor and the judges to ensure that Kurashov understands his rights, that he can understand his translator, and is given the opportunity to cross examine witnesses against him – an opportunity he has so far declined. (Kurashov's state-appointed lawyer declined to speak to the BBC. She has spoken only briefly in court, on administrative matters and to clarify some descriptions of the event by witnesses.)

The three Russian witnesses all testified on the first day of Kurashov's trial – three former prisoners who like Kurashov had gambled on surviving the war to gain their freedom. One had been serving 25 years to life for killing two drug dealers, another nine years for grievous bodily harm for killing a man with a brick in a fight, a third eight years, also for grievous bodily harm.

• Families of Ukraine's missing fear peace will not return them
• Ukraine's front-line soldiers eye Russia talks with hope
• How Ukraine carried out daring 'Spider Web' attack

They gave evidence via video link from an adjacent courtroom, so they could be locked in their own dock. Dmitry Zuev, 44, was to be the key witness. He told the court that he saw Kurashov call for the Ukrainians to come out of the foxhole and surrender, after which Hodniuk emerged and knelt with his hands up. Then there were more gunshots and explosions, Zuev said, and he saw Hodniuk fall face down into the mud. Zuev also told the court that he personally knew the medic, Sedoy, who Kurashov has accused of the killing, and Sedoy was not there.

Oleg Zamyatin, 54, testified that Hodniuk was not holding a gun when he emerged from the foxhole. Zamyatin did not see Kurashov fire the alleged shots, he said, because there were explosions at the same moment.

"But I can say that it was him," Zamyatin told the court. "Because there was no one else at that spot except him."

Konstantin Zelenin, 41, the commander of Kurashov's small assault group, told the court he was hiding in a crater when he saw Hodniuk exit the foxhole on the right side with his hands up.

"Then, just a split second later, as the shelling began again, I heard a burst from an automatic rifle," Zelenin said.

"On the right side was Stalker, and he was there alone."

In the dock, Kurashov sat largely mute as his former unit mates testified against him, speaking only occasionally to his lawyer through a slim gap in the enclosure's door. It is not clear yet if he will testify on his own behalf. The day after one of his hearings, he agreed to talk to the BBC about how he had ended up on trial in Ukraine.

The interview was co-ordinated by the SBU and conducted at a derelict building in Zaporizhzhia being used as a kind of safe house by the service, which confirmed the basic facts of Kurashov's life. Kurashov appeared in good condition and said he had agreed freely to take part. The lead judge in his case permitted the interview, for which an SBU press officer was present some of the time. Kurashov's remarks to the BBC will not be admissible in court.

His journey to that miserable stretch of front where Hodniuk died – to becoming Stalker – began in an orphanage in Gremyachinsk, a decayed old coal town about a thousand miles from Moscow on the way to Siberia. Orphaned at birth, Kurashov was raised in a group home. As a teenager, he got into a fight with a police officer and was imprisoned for assault. He served four years, but on his release he had no family, friends or place to live, so he became a vagrant. He began robbing summer houses and shops for food and money, he said, resulting in another imprisonment, this time in a remote penal colony alongside men serving life sentences for the some of the most brutal crimes.

Six months into that sentence, representatives from the Russian military came to the penal colony and told the convicts they had an opportunity to turn a new page in their lives. Kurashov still had five years to serve. "They told us you can have a clean slate, become a clean person," he said. "Just sign this contract and go."

"Go" meant to the "special military operation" in Ukraine. Kurashov knew little about it, he said, but he thought anything was better than five more years in the penal colony or being turned out into the streets at the end of his sentence. So he signed, and was taken immediately to a training camp in occupied territory in Ukraine.

Kurashov described his unit as made up entirely of "people who had been pushed down by life and rejected by society, who were outside of society". They were given 21 days training, he said, during which they were drunk almost all the time. "They did not want to study or train," he recalled. "They all said they were just there to die."

There was no training on the Geneva Convention, to which Russia and Ukraine are both signatories, and which prohibits the killing of people who have surrendered or no longer pose a threat. In fact, the trainers told them the opposite, Kurashov said. "The ones who taught us how to take positions told us not to take any prisoners," he said. His description matches accounts from his unit mates, who told Ukrainian investigators they were instructed to execute prisoners and throw grenades into dugouts even if the enemy had surrendered.

It also matches accounts from other Russian prisoners of war. "I don't recall training on international humanitarian law," a Russian POW told the UN recently. "During our military training and later, commanders told us not to take [Ukrainian soldiers] as prisoners of war. It is logistically cumbersome."

According to Kurashov, the unit were told they would be carrying out logistical operations like digging trenches, but instead found themselves headed immediately for battle. During the brief assault on the Ukrainian position, Kurashov's impression was not one of an able military unit at war. "What I saw was people who just laid down and died," he said. Within hours, 10 of the 18-strong assault team were dead and the remaining eight were in captivity.

Within a fortnight, the incident had become one of Ukraine's many thousands of war crimes cases. Ukraine has no specialist war crimes courts, so the cases generally fall to whichever court is local to the offence. In this case, the Zavodskyi District in Zaporizhzhia.

Prior to the full scale invasion, 32-year-old Zavodskyi District prosecutor Mykyta Manevskyi had taken on a range of civil crimes like robbery, vandalism and fraud, plus two murder cases, but never a war crime. "When you're working with an ordinary murder case, it has difficulties but it's pretty simple," Manevskyi said. "You know where the murder took place, you can collect DNA and fingerprints, you can find the murder weapon. You have almost immediate access to the body. You can conduct forensic tests."

In this case, Manevskyi's murder scene was on the contact line. "We could not even extract the body for two months," he said. "It made it difficult to perform any kind of forensic examination. The body was too long under the sun, the rain and snow, and it was harmed by artillery strikes."

That made it difficult to ascertain anything concrete about the nature of the shots that killed Hodniuk. "This is not the level of detail, unfortunately, that we need when investigating a murder," Manevskyi said. "So we had to focus more on working with the witnesses we had."

In fact, the prosecution is relying almost totally on the testimony of the Russian soldiers. There are no other eyewitnesses, no drone footage of the actual event and the physical evidence is circumstantial, much of it badly degraded by the battlefield conditions which persisted for weeks before the bodies could be recovered.

But the testimony is not without its complications. The witnesses are all POWs, being held by the nation prosecuting the case. They were each interrogated up to 10 times by the Ukrainian state security service, during which time some of their stories evolved. One bore a grudge against Kurashov from their time together in training, he told investigators. Another said he resented the defendant for, in his view, getting them caught.

"It is a tricky area," said Sergey Vasiliev, a professor of international law at the Open University of the Netherlands. "POWs are a particularly vulnerable category of witnesses, any evidence they give should be taken with a grain of salt." There was nothing inherently wrong with POWs testifying, Vasiliev said, but various factors could have affected their decision to appear for the prosecution. "Maybe they are expecting better treatment in Ukrainian custody, maybe they expect to be prioritised in a prisoner swap," he said. "They could have various incentives to lie."

Kurashov maintains his story about the medic, Sedoy. He told the BBC he had pleaded guilty because he believed the sooner the trial was over the sooner he could be exchanged back to Russia.

But if Kurashov is found guilty, he is no longer a prisoner of war. He is simply a prisoner in Ukraine's civil legal system. Yuriy Belousov, the head of the war crimes department of Ukraine's Office of the Prosecutor General, told the BBC that Russian soldiers convicted of war crimes would go to prison in Ukraine and stay there. "We prosecute on behalf of the victims and their relatives and they should feel justice has been done," Belousov said.

In the end, it may not be that simple. Russia has captured many thousands of civilians during its full scale invasion of Ukraine and is effectively holding them hostage in Russian prisons. If the Kremlin decides it wants Kurashov back, it may have leverage to get him.

"That is less of a legal and more of an ethical issue," Belousov said. "If, let's say, 100 people would be offered to exchange for this one, then yes maybe. It is our obligation to prosecute on behalf of victims, but it is also our obligation to save our people who have been kept in Russia."

Belousov and his colleagues are aiming at bigger fish than Kurashov. Their goal for this year and next is to bring cases against middle and higher level Russian command, he said. According to the testimony from the captured Russians in Kurashov's unit, their senior commander issued an order directly before the assault that no prisoners should be taken.

According to Belousov, similar evidence has been found up and down the frontline. Grim video evidence, sometimes shared on Russian social media, appears to bear that out. Russia has in turn accused Ukrainian troops of extra-judicial killings, and Ukraine has launched several investigations into its own forces (the exact number is unclear). But the number of allegations against Russia far outweighs that against Ukraine. Russia has previously denied committing war crimes in the conflict.

The UN has also documented several cases of Russian public figures calling for executions. Last July, after Ukraine's Azov Brigade posted a social media video showing one of its members shooting a Russian soldier in a dugout, the deputy head of Russia's Security Council, Dmitry Medvedev, called for "total executions" of Ukrainian servicemen.

"No words about mercy. No humanity. No pardon. They have no right to life. Execute, execute and execute," Medvedev wrote on the Telegram social media platform.

Medvedev's words will not cost him anything. Instead they run downhill until they reach the level of Vitalii Hodniuk, Dmitry Kurashov, and all the other Russian and Ukrainian men killing each other in service of the war's obscure goals. In this case, one of those men stands accused of breaking the laws of the killing he had been sent to do – laws he may well have been ordered to disregard.

If found guilty, Kurashov faces up to life in prison. At the end of his conversation with the BBC, he said that he had no real vision for the future, other than a desire to return to Russia. "At least I will have a disability," he said, referring to the loss of his eye, and the anticipated benefits it would draw. "I won't have to be a vagrant anymore."

Vitalii Hodniuk cannot return home, of course. It was two months before his body could even be recovered. His family did not want to speak publicly about his passing, but they did assist in the SBU in its investigation. Hodniuk's record shows that he was an experienced soldier who defended Ukraine against Russian-backed forces from 2015 to 2020 and joined up to fight again in 2022.

Last May, six months after he died, the Penguin was brought back to his village to be buried. On a bright morning, just a stone's throw from where he grew up and went to school, people lined the street on their knees to watch his coffin pass by.

Kurashov's trial continues.

Daria Mitiuk contributed to this report. Photographs by Joel Gunter.

In a sign of Greenland's growing importance, French President Emmanuel Macron is visiting the Arctic island today, in what experts say is a show of European unity and a signal to Donald Trump.

Stepping foot in the capital Nuuk this morning, Macron will be met with chilly and blustery weather, but despite the cold conditions, he'll be greeted warmly.

"This is big, I must say, because we never had visits from a president at all, and it's very welcomed," says veteran Greenlandic official, Kaj Kleist.

Nuuk is a small city of less than 20,000 people, and the arrival of a world leader and his entourage, is a major event.

"I think that people will be curious, just hearing about it," says consultant and podcast host Arnakkuluk Jo Kleist. "I think they'll be interested in, what his message is going to be."

"He's the president of France, but he's also an important representative of Europe. It's a message from the European countries that they're showing support, that Greenland is not for sale, and for the Kingdom of Denmark," says Arnakkuluk Jo Kleist.

"These last months have created some questions about what allies we need, and also about what allies do we need to strengthen cooperation with," she says.

France's president is the first high-profile leader to be invited by Greenland's new prime minister, Jens-Frederik Nielsen. Talks will focus on North Atlantic and Arctic security as well as climate change, economic development and critical minerals, before Macron continues to the G7 summit in Canada.

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen is also attending, and called the French president's visit "another concrete testimony of European unity" amid a "difficult foreign policy situation in recent months".

For several months Greenland, which is a semi-autonomous Danish territory with 56,000 people, has come under intense pressure as US President Donald Trump has repeatedly said he wants to acquire the vast mineral-rich island, citing American security as the primary reason and not ruling out using force.

"Macron is not coming to Greenland just for Greenland's sake, it's also part of a bigger game, among these big powers in the world," says Kleist.

France was among the first nations to speak up against Mr Trump, even floating an offer of deploying troops, which Denmark declined. Only a few days ago at the UN's Oceans conference in Nice, Macron stressed that "the ocean is not for sale, Greenland is not for sale, the Arctic and no other seas are for sale" - words which were swiftly welcomed by Nielsen.

"France has supported us since the first statements about taking our country came out," he wrote in a Facebook post. "It is both necessary and gratifying."

That Macron is coming is a strong message itself, reckons Ulrik Pram Gad, a senior researcher at the Danish Institute for International Studies.

"The vice presidential couple weren't really able to pull it off," he says, referring to JD Vance and his wife Usha's scaled-back trip in March and lack of public engagements. "That, of course, sends a message to the American public, and to Trump."

It also highlights a shift, as Greenland's leaders consolidate relations with Denmark and the EU, "because we have to have allies in these problems," says Kaj Kleist, alluding to US pressure.

"I think it's a good time for Macron to come through here," Kleist adds. "They can talk about defence of the Arctic before the big NATO meetings… And hear what we are looking for, in terms of cooperation and investment."

However, opposition leader Pele Broberg thinks Greenland should have hosted bilateral talks with France alone. ""We welcome any world leader, anytime," he says "Unfortunately, it doesn't seem like a visit for Greenland this time. It looks like a visit for Denmark."

Relations between the US and Denmark have grown increasingly fractious. US Vice President JD Vance scolded the Nordic country for underinvesting in the territory's security during his recent trip to an American military base in the far north of Greenland. Last month Denmark's foreign minister summoned the US ambassador in Copenhagen, following a report in the Wall Street Journal alleging that US spy agencies were told to focus efforts on Greenland.

Then, at a congressional hearing on Thursday, US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth appeared to suggest under tense questioning that the Pentagon had prepared "contingency" plans for taking Greenland by force "if necessary".

Denmark, however, has treaded cautiously. Last week its parliament green-lighted a controversial bill allowing US troops to be stationed on Danish soil, and is spending another $1.5bn (£1.1bn) to boost Greenland's defence. That heightened military presence was on show this weekend as a Danish naval frigate sailed around Nuuk Fjord and helicopters circled over the town.

"Denmark has been reluctant to make this shift from having a very transatlantic security strategy to a more European strategy," assesses Gad, but that's changed in recent months.

With rising tensions and increased competition between global powers in the Arctic, the EU is also stepping up its role. Earlier this month the trade bloc signed a deal investing in a Greenland graphite mine - a metal used in batteries - as it races to secure supplies of critical minerals, as well as energy resources, amid China's dominance and Russia's war in Ukraine.

For France, the visit to Greenland ties into its policy to boost European independence from the US, suggests Marc Jacobsen, associate professor at the Royal Danish Defence College.

"This is about, of course, the changed security situation in North Atlantic and the Arctic," he explains. "It's a strong signal. It will show that France takes European security seriously."

The paternity leave offer for new dads in the UK is "one of the worst in the developed world", according to a new report published this week.

The government says the system needs to be "improved" and has promised to review parental leave. But how does the situation in the UK compare to elsewhere?

BBC News spoke to dads across Europe about how much time they can take off work after the birth of their children - and how that has changed fatherhood for them.

When Jamie's daughter Kiara was born three years ago, he says it was "incredibly difficult".

"I had to watch my partner struggle looking after our child," Jamie says. "The biggest thing I remember was the crying. My daughter clearly needed support and my wife was noticeably struggling and exhausted."

A few weeks after Kiara was born, Jamie's mother-in-law flew from Zimbabwe to support the family, because Jamie was only entitled to statutory paternity leave.

Rules in the UK allow new fathers and second parents in full-time employment to take up to two weeks off work. That applies to all partners, regardless of gender, after the birth, surrogacy or adoption of a baby, but not those who are self-employed or dads earning less than £123 a week.

Those eligible receive £187.18 a week, or 90% of their average earnings, whichever is lower. This works out as less than half of the National Living Wage.

Jamie, from Ashford in Kent, says the statutory pay "was frankly pennies".

He and his partner are now expecting their second child, in August - something they began saving for before Jamie's wife Zanele even fell pregnant.

Jamie says his "frustration" about paternity pay led him to attend the world's first "dad strike" earlier this week, when fathers from across the country protested outside the government's Department for Business and Trade in Westminster.

"Seeing things change relatively recently in other countries... why are we not keeping up?" Jamie says.

For Octavio, spending four months at home with his daughter Alicia has made "a tremendous difference".

He split his paternity leave into two parts - six weeks - which was mandatory -immediately after Alicia was born, and the remaining 10 weeks when his wife went back to work.

"The extended quality time with Alicia allowed us to develop a strong bond that I believe wouldn't have formed as deeply otherwise," says Octavio, a computer engineer from Seville.

Over the past few years, Spain has increased the amount of time given to new fathers. In 2019, dads were entitled to five weeks off work. But from 2021, that was extended to 16 weeks at full pay, including for those who are self-employed. There is no cap on the salary paid. It means parental leave is now equal between mums and dads in Spain.

"These changes have truly made a significant difference," says Octavio.

France has also made progressive steps on paternity leave in recent years.

Antoine is an architect who lives on the outskirts of Paris, and has benefitted from the changes. When his son Thibault was born five years ago, Antoine, who works full-time, was entitled to two weeks paternity leave.

But in September 2020 paternity leave in France doubled, meaning Antoine got four weeks off work when his second child was born in 2023.

"It allowed me to support my wife and children," he says. "Fathers should be allowed to be more present during these family life periods that enrich all relationships and allow them to fully take their place as full-time parents."

France's paternity leave rules mean dads - including those who are self-employed - must take a week off work immediately after their child is born. Pay is covered by the employer for the first three days, but after that is state-funded.

The remaining 21 days, which can be split into two chunks, are optional and can be taken anytime within the next six months. Pay is capped at €3,428 (£2,921) a month.

André, who was born in Portugal and spent nine years living in England, says the prominent role played by dads in Denmark was one of the first things he noticed when he moved there.

"You see dads strolling around with their kids and young babies," André says. "I was like: 'Wow, I'm not used to this.'"

Dads in Denmark, including those who are self-employed, can take up to 24 weeks off work at full pay by the state.

After eleven weeks, the remaining 13 can be transferred to the birth partner if wanted, so they can use them as extra maternity leave. One of the parents can postpone up to 13 weeks of parental until their child is aged nine.

André decided to split his parental leave - taking two weeks immediately after his baby Miro was born and saving the remaining 11 weeks - so he can look after his nine-month-old son when his partner returns to work.

"In Denmark, it's expected that the partner is more present," André says. "You're not only connecting with your child, but you want to develop the family as a whole together."

Dads with full-time jobs in Poland are entitled to two weeks of paternity leave. But unlike in the UK, the salary is paid at 100%, which Kamil says was "great".

Shortly after his daughter Marianna's first birthday, Kamil took another nine weeks of non-transferable parental leave, which must be taken in the first year. This is available to both parents, as long as they are employed, and is paid at 70% of a full-time salary.

"For many families, the 70% nine weeks is very low," Kamil says, "but... when I took the leave my wife started going back to work. I earned 30% less, but she started earning more, so it was beneficial for our family."

Kamil says those extra nine weeks alleviated a lot of "stress" as his wife transitioned back into work after a year off on maternity leave.

"I was confident," Kamil says. "I felt as though I was doing a good job - and my daughter felt good with me."

Mattias, from Stockholm, says comforting his three-month-old son is "the best feeling I've ever experienced".

Mattias is able to take advantage of one of the most generous paternity leave policies in the world. Parents in Sweden, including those who are self-employed, can share up to 480 days of parent leave, with 90 days reserved specifically for each parent.

Ringfencing time off for dads was first introduced in Sweden in 1995, with the introduction of a "daddy month" - 30 days just for fathers. This use-it-or-lose-it model increased to 60 days in 2002, and 90 days in 2016.

The first 390 days for each parent are paid at 80% by the government, up to a monthly salary cap of SEK47,750 (£3,590). After that, there's a daily statutory compensation of SEK180 (£14).

Mattias took six weeks off when Otto was born and will use another nine months of parental leave from November.

"We could share the load in the beginning when everything was new," Mattias says. "Those six weeks allowed us to be parents together - that made a huge difference. "

Paternity leave - the view from the UK

Some companies, both in the UK and abroad, pay out of their own pocket for enhanced paternity leave policies beyond the statutory minimum. But research from 2023 showed just 12% of fathers from low-income households had access to their full entitlement of employer-enhanced parental leave and pay.

Alex Lloyd-Hunter, co-founder of The Dad Shift, says "money is the single biggest barrier" to dads taking time off work and wants the government to fund better paternity leave for all dads.

A report, published this week by the Women and Equalities Committee (WEC) said statutory pay in the UK was "completely out of kilter with the cost of living". It suggested the government should consider increasing paternity pay to 90% or more and paternity leave to six weeks in a phased approach.

The report also looked at shared parental leave, introduced in 2014, which allows parents to share up to 50 weeks of leave and up to 37 weeks of pay after the birth or adoption of a child. The review found many families considered it "unnecessarily complex". It is used in fewer than 2% of all births and a report from 2023 suggests almost half (45%) of dads were not even aware shared parental leave was an option.

"We know the parental leave system needs to be improved," a spokesperson for the Department for Business and Trade said, adding the government would review maternity leave, paternity leave and shared parental leave.

They also pointed to changes which mean dads will soon no longer have to be employed by a company for 26 weeks to be entitled to statutory paternity leave.