Ukraine has agreed the terms of a major minerals deal with the US, a senior official in Kyiv has told the BBC.

“We have indeed agreed it with a number of good amendments and see it as a positive outcome,” the official said, without providing any further details.

Media reports say Washington has dropped initial demands for a right to $500bn (£395bn) in potential revenue from utilising the natural resources but has not given firm security guarantees to war-torn Ukraine – a key Ukrainian demand.

US President Donald Trump said he was expecting his Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelensky in Washington to sign the deal this week, after the two leaders exchanged strong words about each other.

Without confirming that an agreement had been reached, Trump said on Tuesday that in return for the deal Ukraine would get “the right to fight on”.

“They’re very brave,” he told reporters, but “without the United States and its money and its military equipment, this war would have been over in a very short period of time”.

Asked whether supplies of US equipment and ammunition to Ukraine would continue, he said: “Maybe until we have a deal with Russia… We need to have a deal, otherwise it’s going to continue.”

There would be a need for “some form of peacekeeping” in Ukraine following any peace deal, Trump added, but that would need to be “acceptable to everyone”.

Just last week, Trump described Zelensky as a “dictator”, and appeared to blame Ukraine – not Russia – for starting the war, after the Ukrainian leader rejected US demands for $500bn in mineral wealth and suggested that the American president was living in a “disinformation space” created by Russia.

Trump has been pushing for access to Ukraine’s minerals in return for previous military and other aid to the country since Moscow launched a full-scale invasion three years ago.

Zelensky argued nowhere near that much American aid had been provided, adding: “I can’t sell our state.”

On Tuesday, Trump said the US had given Ukraine between $300bn and $350bn.

“We want to get that money back,” he said. “We’re helping the country through a very very big problem… but the American taxpayer now is going to get their money back plus.”

Ukraine’s Deputy Prime Minister Olha Stefanishyna told the Financial Times – which first reported the minerals deal on Tuesday – that the deal was “only part of the picture”.

“We have heard multiple times from the US administration that it’s part of a bigger picture,” said Stefanishyna, who has led the negotiations.

According to Ukrainian sources, the US has had to back away from some of its more onerous demands from the war-torn nation and many of the details of this agreement will require further negotiation.

The precedent, however, is set. US aid in the Trump era comes with strings attached. Aid for aid’s sake – whether given for humanitarian or strategic reasons – is a thing of the past.

That represents a fundamental reordering of American foreign policy for more than 75 years, from the days of the Marshall Plan to post-Cold War idealism and George W Bush’s “Freedom Agenda” push to promote global democracy.

Ukraine is just the start. Expect Trump and his foreign policy team to apply their “America First” principles around the world over the course of the next four years.

Ukraine’s news site Ukrainska Pravda reported that the minerals deal was set to be signed by Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha and US Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

The news site’s economics unit EP said the two countries had also agreed to set up a reconstruction investment fund.

Ukraine holds huge deposits of critical elements and minerals, including lithium and titanium, as well as sizeable coal, gas, oil and uranium deposits – supplies worth billions of dollars.

Last year, Zelensky presented a “victory plan” to Ukraine and its Western partners which proposed that foreign firms could gain access to some of the countries’ mineral wealth at the end of the war.

On Tuesday, Russian President Vladimir Putin said he was open to offering the US access to rare minerals, including from Russian-occupied regions of Ukraine.

Ukraine and its European allies have become increasingly alarmed over a recent thaw in US-Russian ties, including their bilateral talks in Saudi Arabia last week.

There is concern in Kyiv and across Europe that they might be excluded from any negotiations aimed at ending the war, and that the continent’s future security as a whole could be decided behind their backs.

It is estimated that about 5% of the world’s “critical raw materials” are in Ukraine – including:

• 19 million tonnes of proven reserves of graphite, which is used to make batteries for electric vehicles

• A third of all European lithium deposits, the key component in current batteries.

Before Russia’s full-scale invasion began three years ago, Ukraine also produced 7% of the world’s titanium, used in construction for everything from aeroplanes to power stations.

Ukrainian land also contains significant deposits of rare earth metals, a group of 17 elements that are used to produce weapons, wind turbines, electronics and other products vital in the modern world

Some mineral deposits have been seized by Russia. According to Yulia Svyrydenko, Ukraine’s economy minister, resources worth $350bn remain in Russian-occupied territories today.

Sir Keir Starmer is preparing to travel to Washington to meet Donald Trump after setting out plans to increase defence spending to 2.5% of national income by 2027.

On Tuesday, the prime minister said he would cut the foreign aid budget to fund the military boost – a move welcomed by the Trump administration but labelled a “betrayal” by development charities.

Sir Keir will face MPs in the Commons on Wednesday before flying to the US, where Ukraine will be top of the agenda.

The spending announcement came as leaders across Europe looked to overhaul defence policies over fears the US could make a deal with Russia to end the Ukraine war which leaves the continent vulnerable.

Trump – who has long called for European members of the Nato military alliance to spend more on defence – is attempting to cut a rapid deal to bring the Ukraine war to an end after speaking to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

He has been a staunch critic of the previous US administration’s military support for Kyiv and wants Europe to play a bigger role in any future security guarantees for Ukraine.

On Tuesday, Ukrainian officials confirmed to BBC News a deal had been reached which gives American firms access to the country’s vast deposits of valuable rare earth minerals, which Trump signalled could mean continued US military support for Kyiv until a ceasefire with Russia is reached.

Announcing the defence spending plan, Sir Keir said the UK’s aid budget would be reduced from 0.5% of gross national income to 0.3% in 2027, “fully funding the investment in defence”, which will rise from 2.3% of GDP.

He told the Commons that would mean spending £13.4bn more on defence every year from 2027.

Last year the UK spent £53.9bn on defence.

The prime minister said defence spending would rise to 2.6% of GDP by 2027, once the contribution of intelligence services to defence had been factored in.

The move was praised by US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth, who called it a “strong step from an enduring partner”.

Urging European allies to step up, Sir Keir said the UK would also set out a “clear ambition” to increase defence spending to 3% of GDP after the next general election.

Holding a news conference following the announcement, Sir Keir said an election pledge to raise defence spending to 2.5% of GDP had been brought forward “in light of the grave threats that we face”, with the country facing a “dangerous new era”.

Asked if pressure from Trump had pushed him to act, Sir Keir insisted it was “very much my decision, based on my assessment of the circumstances that we face as a country”.

But he conceded “the last few weeks have accelerated my thinking”.

“I think in our heart of hearts we’ve all known that this decision has been coming for three years, since the beginning of the conflict in Ukraine,” the prime minister added.

In its election manifesto, Labour pledged to restore development spending to 0.7% of gross national income “as soon as fiscal circumstances allow” – a goal the government says it is still committed to.

Charities were stunned by the aid cut, with Save the Children calling it “a betrayal of the world’s most vulnerable children and the UK’s national interest”.

“There is nothing respectful about slashing lifelines for families in the most dangerous places,” the charity’s chief executive Moazzam Malik said.

Labour MP Sarah Champion, who chairs the Commons International Development Committee, called on the government to “rethink today’s announcement”.

“Cutting the aid budget to fund defence spending is a false economy that will only make the world less safe,” she said.

Responding to the criticism, Sir Keir said it was “not a decision I wanted to make” but he argued there was “no driver of migration and poverty like conflict”.

The hike in defence spending will help the UK’s armed forces, which have experienced severe cuts since the end of the Cold War.

However, it will not completely reverse the decline in the country’s military capability.

Even before this extra cash injection, the Ministry of Defence was facing a black hole in its equipment budget of around £17bn over the next decade, according to the National Audit Office.

A large part of the increase will go towards plugging holes in underfunded programs and fixing urgent shortages in munitions, according to Malcolm Chalmers, deputy director of the Royal United Services Institute think tank.

But he said the commitment to reach 3% of GDP by the mid-2030s could lead to a “transformation in how our military fights”, giving the armed forces the ability to plan long-term and “ensuring that innovation is not always squeezed out by spending on big platforms”.

Dr Simon Anglim, a fellow at the Department of War Studies at King’s College London, said spending 3% of GDP on defence by 2030 is “the barest minimum” to build a military strong enough to deter Russia.

If the US were to withdraw military support “we may have to start talking about more than that”, he told the BBC.

Sir Keir had previously said the government would set out a pathway to spending 2.5% of GDP on the military by the next general election, following a review of the country’s defence capabilities.

But rapid diplomatic developments, spurred by Trump’s push to end the war in Ukraine, injected urgency into decisions about defence.

It is unclear if the increase will impress Trump, who has been telling European Nato allies they should be spending something more like 5% on defence.

Nato guidelines suggest each member state should spend at least 2% of their GDP, but recently the organisation’s head, Mark Rutte, said allies should be aiming for something “north of 3%”.

The prime minister’s trip to the White House later this week follows French President Emmanuel Macron’s talks with Trump on Monday.

Sir Keir will also host European leaders in the UK this weekend to discuss their future defence.

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch welcomed the increase in defence spending and the “repurposing” of money from the aid budget.

But she did question whether the government had a strong enough economic strategy to underpin the rise in spending on defence.

The Liberal Democrats have previously called for cross-party talks on reaching 3% of GDP on defence “as soon as possible”.

Party leader Sir Ed Davey welcomed the announcement but urged the government to “raise the money in different ways” through seizing frozen Russian assets or by increasing taxes on multi-national tech companies.

The SNP’s Westminster leader, Stephen Flynn, said that whilst his party backed the increase in defence spending, it could not support “the populist playbook” of cutting aid to fund it.

Hundreds of thousands of people have signed a petition to revoke Elon Musk’s Canadian citizenship amid tensions between the Trump administration and Canada.

The petition, which opened to signatures five days ago, accuses Mr Musk of acting against Canada’s national interest and undermining its sovereignty.

In Canada, citizenship can be revoked only if someone has committed fraud, misrepresented themselves or knowingly hid information on an immigration or citizenship application. Mr Musk, who was born in South Africa, holds both Canadian and US citizenship.

Responding to the petition, the billionaire wrote on X: “Canada is not a real country.” The post was later deleted.

The petition claims the billionaire “has used his wealth and power to influence our elections” and “has now become a member of a foreign government that is attempting to erase Canadian sovereignty”. Mr Musk has Canadian citizenship through his mother, who was born in Saskatchewan.

Launched on 20 February, the petition, already signed by more than 250,000 Canadians, remains open for signatures until 20 June.

It is mostly symbolic and has no legal force. But petitions with at least 500 signatures and a member of parliament’s backing typically receive a government response, this one may not, as a spring election could dissolve parliament.

It was created by a British Columbia author and endorsed by MP Charlie Angus of the New Democratic Party. Angus, a 20-year MP for Timmins–James Bay, has announced he will not seek re-election.

The BBC has contacted his office for comment.

US-Canada tensions have escalated since Trump’s return, with the president repeatedly suggesting Canada could become a US state and threatening tariffs on steel, aluminium, and other imports.

Canadian leaders have pushed back, vowing counter-tariffs.

The spat has spilled out beyond government, with Canadians cancelling US trips, boycotting American products, and booing opposing anthems at hockey and basketball games.

Mr Musk moved to Canada from South Africa at 18, and worked odd jobs before studying at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario. He later emigrated to the US.

The billionaire has backed Trump’s hardline immigration policies but now faces scrutiny over claims he worked illegally in the US on a student visa.

In a recent interview, Steve Bannon, a former advisor to President Trump, called Mr Musk a “parasitic illegal immigrant”.

The Tesla CEO has denied the accusations, and has said he did not work illegally. He became a naturalised US citizen in 2002, according to a recent biography.

The BBC has contacted Mr Musk via his businesses for comment.

Police will be given new powers targeting anti-social behaviour and be allowed to search homes for stolen mobile phones without a warrant under major legislation to be unveiled in Parliament.

The Crime and Policing Bill is at the heart of what the government calls its “Safer Streets mission” and ministers want it to become law by the end of the year.

Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said the bill would take back “our streets and town centres, restoring respect for law and order”.

The Conservatives say the plans have been “copied and pasted from the last government’s announcements”.

The Crime and Policing Bill pulls together many measures set out in Labour’s general election manifesto.

But they come amid questions over whether police have the money to make the government’s plan work.

Ministers say that the enormous piece of legislation will target the crimes that communities want prioritised to make their areas feel safer and to bear down on behaviour that has gone unpunished.

Under the bill, police gain the power to enter and search a property without a court warrant for a stolen mobile phone, or other items that have been electronically tracked such as laptops or Bluetooth-tagged bikes.

The power means that victims of mobile phone thefts, who are tracking their device while it is in the hands of a criminal, can call on police to recover it quickly.

The bill also includes the government’s proposed “Respect Orders”.

These court-imposed restrictions will be similar to the Anti-Social Behaviour Orders (Asbo) developed in the Tony Blair era, then scrapped by the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats coalition a decade ago.

While Asbos were popular with voters, critics say the restrictions often became unworkable or poorly enforced.

The proposed Respect Orders allow courts to impose restrictions on an individual’s behaviour, just like an Asbo.

But they would also be able to compel them to attend programmes such as addiction treatment or anger management courses to change their ways.

Other measures previously announced in the bill include:

• Scrapping a 2014 law that classified shoplifting of items worth under £200 as less serious than other retail theft – making them less of a priority for the police.
• An offence of assaulting a shop worker – also a Conservative commitment before the 2024 General Election.
• A new police power to seize without warning off-road bikes or e-scooters.
• A new offence of spiking drinks, separate to current assault laws.
• Giving judges the power to issue a Stalking Prevention Order against a suspect, even if they are not convicted of a crime.

Another already announced power to be added as the Bill goes through Parliament will compel online retailers to alert police to bulk or suspicious sales of knives.

The Home Office says the bill’s aims will be delivered by recruiting 13,000 additional neighbourhood officers by 2029 – and the department has pledged £200m specifically towards that.

But some forces have already warned they will have to cut officers this year because of a wider budget crisis.

The National Police Chiefs Council (NPCC ) said last year that forces faced a £1.3bn funding gap, and the available cash was not being shared evenly between forces due to outdated rules.

The Home Office has since confirmed it is putting £1.1bn extra into policing up to April 2026.

But the NPCC has warned that if it is to deliver the “Safer Streets” plan, forces would need a pay settlement that would help them to attract and retain the best possible officers.

Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said: “For too long communities have had to put up with rising town centre and street crime, and persistent antisocial behaviour, while neighbourhood police have been cut.

“And for years too little has been done to tackle the most serious violence of all including knife crime and violence against women and children.

“That is why the new Crime and Policing Bill is about taking back our streets and town centres, restoring respect for law and order, and giving the police and local communities the support and tools they need to tackle local crime.”

Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary, said: “Labour had 14 years to come up with new ideas – but all they have done is copied and pasted what the last government had already announced.

“Labour’s funding settlement next year for police forces leaves them £118m short after accounting for salary rises, inflation and the national insurance hike – putting 1,800 police officers at risk.

“Police forces are warning that this will get worse this year due to Labour’s inadequate funding settlement.”