European leaders reaffirm support for Ukraine

This is the Global News Podcast from the BBC World Service. I'm Valerie Sanderson and in the early hours of Friday the 28th of March, these are our main stories.
European leaders in Paris reaffirmed their support for Ukraine and agreed to keep sanctions against Russia. Meanwhile, President Putin is in the Arctic to highlight the region's strategic importance for his country.
A BBC journalist is deported from Turkey as the government cracks down on the media following ongoing protests there. Also in this podcast, King Charles cancels a day of engagements after suffering side effects from his cancer treatment.
And... The AI is getting so good that it's become really hard to distinguish between an AI generated image and a real photo.
How a fashion company is using AI to make artificial twins of real life models. We start in Paris, where European leaders have been meeting to discuss the war in Ukraine alongside President Zelensky.
The summit sought to set out what security guarantees Europe can offer Ukraine once a ceasefire deal is agreed with Russia, including the possible deployment of military forces. France and Britain are the driving force behind the initiative.
And the British Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, said it was obvious that Russia was dragging its feet in its response to US-led proposals for a ceasefire. There was absolute clarity that Russia is trying to delay, is playing games, and we have to be absolutely clear about that.
And that has meant more support for Ukraine to make sure Ukraine is in the strongest possible position, both now and in further negotiations. Second, complete clarity that now is not the time for lifting of sanctions.
And of course, we discussed further the plans for reassuring the peace, the coalition of the willing and the military and operational plans, whether they're on the land, the air or the sea.

The French president Emmanuel Macron said France and Britain would forge ahead

with plans for a reassurance force involving several countries.

But he also admitted there was currently no unanimity on sending such a force.

The history of Europe, he said, would be at a tipping point

if the US stopped supporting the continent.

We must hope for the best, but prepare for the worst. My hope is that the Americans will be

committed alongside us and that they will provide support or even active participation in all of

this, because it's good for their European allies, good for NATO and good for all of us. But we must prepare for a situation where perhaps they will not join us.
So how far along are the proposals for what President Macron is describing as a European reassurance force? I asked our Europe regional editor, Danny Eberhard. It's a work in progress, very much so at this stage.
What we have there today, for example, among the leaders, there were some that back it. So people like Emmanuel Macron, Keir Starmer of Britain.
But there were others who, although they want to show willing in terms of supporting Ukraine, they were not prepared to send troops on the ground in any kind of eventual future ceasefire scenario. So for example, Italy's Prime Minister, Giorgio Maloney, or Poland's Prime Minister, Poland is obviously a very strong supporter of Ukraine, but Poland does not want to send troops to Ukraine.
So there's a lot of divisions still, although the broad message is still one of solidarity towards Vladimir Zelensky and Ukraine. And how does this so-called coalition of the willing fit in with the Trump administration's view on defence spending and Ukraine? Because President Trump and his White House, they don't think European nations are spending nearly enough, do they, of their GDP on defence? Well, this is one way that Europe can show it is willing to take responsibility for its wider security on the European continent.

So from that perspective, I think the US welcomes that sort of initiative.

It's by no means clear, though, how much support really in the US there is for this proposal, for example, to send troops to Ukraine on the ground.

And the backdrop of all this, of course, is that Russia is deeply opposed to any deployment of European or NATO troops to Ukraine. It says it would see that effectively as an act of war and a direct military intervention.
So there are still lots of questions about the force itself and also whether in reality it will ever be deployed. And President Zelensky of Ukraine was at the summit.
What was his message? Well, he was raising some of those questions himself. So he was saying that one clear plan is needed on this initiative.
And he talked about questions such as what countries will be involved? What was the size and the structure of the force? How would it respond to any threats from Russia? And when would they deploy? Would they deploy after a ceasefire? Would they deploy it when the peace settlement is done up? So he also, of course, consistently stressed the idea that Russia does not want peace, a real peace. It's dragging out the war for its own interests.
So he is very sceptical, basically, about the whole ceasefire process, although he's taking part in it. Danny Eberhard.
And we have another question and answer podcast with our colleagues from Ukrainecast coming up soon. So if you've got any questions, please send us an email to globalpodcast at bbc.co.uk.
And if possible, please record your question as a voice note. Well, meanwhile, President Putin has been turning his attention to another zone of Russian strategic interest, the Arctic.
He was speaking at the International Arctic Forum in the Russian city of Murmansk. Our Russia editor Steve Rosenberg is there and sent us this report.
The Arctic feels like a world away from the war in Ukraine. But this is a region with its own geopolitical undercurrents and Russian ambitions.
At Russia's Arctic Forum, Vladimir Putin warned that geopolitical battles were intensifying. He referenced Donald Trump's plan to annex Greenland.
But President Putin claimed that idea was not extravagant and had historical roots. He said Russia would stay out of it.
What's more, the Russians have an offer for America. In a region packed with natural resources, there are deals to be done.
Kirill Dmitriev is President Putin's foreign investment envoy. He's already had meetings with US officials.
We are open for investment cooperation in the Arctic, and that could be in logistics, that could be in other areas, where, again, it's beneficial to Russia and also beneficial to the U.S. But before deals can be done, the war in Ukraine needs to end.
And many people in the West accuse Russia of dragging its feet, of making no concessions or compromise, just laying down conditions. Well, first of all, I'm focused on economics and investment, so I don't comment on political issues.
But I think the only thing I can say is that we have a very good dialogue. And I think it's very important.
US is trying to understand Russian position. Moscow is confident it can woo Washington with promises of lucrative deals in the Arctic and across Russia.

And that confidence is understandable, considering how senior US officials have been repeating

Kremlin talking points about the war in Ukraine and about Europe. In the words of one Russian

newspaper headline I saw recently, American and Russian officials are now speaking the same

language. Steve Rosenberg.

Turkey has continued a media crackdown over protests

at the arrest of President Erdogan's main political rival.

Opposition television stations have been ordered to suspend some broadcasts

and the BBC journalist Mark Lowen, who was detained on Wednesday,

has now been deported.

The authorities said he was a threat to public order. He'd been on a temporary assignment in Istanbul to cover the recent protests.
Here's some of his reporting. What is the Turkey that you want? Democracy, like pure democracy, as everyone wants.
Do you feel that this time it could be different? I think it's different. It's make or break time for Turkey.
It is galvanising the side of Turkey that feels stifled by President Erdogan's authoritarian rule. And they say they're not going to leave these streets until Imamoglu is out of jail and Erdogan is out of power.
Mark Lowen. Well, Joe Inwood spoke to Selim Gerrit, a Turkish BBC journalist who worked with Mark Lowen.
We're all very distraught about what's happened to Mark. He's a very dear friend of mine, not only a colleague, but a very good friend of mine as well.
He was in detention for 17 hours, but he was treated well, he said. He wasn't particularly mistreated by the police force.
They were having tea at times even. But of course, being on a detention is distressing itself, no matter how you're treated.
And the grounds that he was reported was, if just a shock actually, being a threat to public order, the statement said apparently. I hadn't come across this before as a charge for journalists.

But given the circumstances on the ground in Turkey and how the authorities are trying to suppress the coverage of the protests for the last week or so, I think we will be seeing more of these, more of international journalists being not maybe deported, deported, but coming under pressure so that the protests on the ground and the public disorder in Istanbul and elsewhere does not get coverage across international media and does not resonate with the audiences across the world. And I think it is important to point out to our audiences that although it's Mark's story, the one that we highlight, this is not unique.

This is happening to other journalists. No, it is not unique.
Absolutely. You're very right in that.
Actually, this week, there were seven journalists who were remanded in custody. They were later released, but pending trial, of course.
So there were other reports of journalists being treated, even being beaten, being pepper-gassed on the face by the police forces. So, no, what has happened to Mark is not unique, but of course it is very important.
It's a shame. He lived in Turkey for five years when he was covering Turkey, when he was a Turkey correspondent, and I was the bilingual correspondent for the BBC then, so we were part of the same team.

And I know how much he loves the country, how much he loves Istanbul.

Actually, he sent a video visiting his neighborhood just on the day he was detained and showing

where he lived and paying visits to the cafes around.

And he was in love with the country, he was in love with Istanbul. It's a shame that he won't be able to visit.
Celine Garrett. AI, or artificial intelligence, has already brought great innovation to healthcare, education and finance.
Now it's making headway in the fashion industry, where the retailer H&M is to use it to create digital twins of models. The company says it will use the AI doppelgangers in some social media posts and marketing, but only with the permission of models who will be compensated for the use of their image.
But there's concern it'll drastically reduce the amount of work available. James Menendez heard more about how it will work from Mark Bain, who's technology correspondent at the Business of Fashion in New York.
It's a little bit unclear at the moment just because H&M has admitted that it's not totally sure itself. You know, this is sort of uncharted territory.
They admit that they don't have all the details worked out yet. What they do say is that they partnered directly with a number of models and their agencies.

They essentially took a lot of photographs of the models to capture their bodies down to like birthmarks, that sort of thing, as well as their movement patterns.

And from that, they're able to use those digital twins, as they call them, to generate AI imagery featuring a realistic image of the model in it.

Yeah, and I'm looking at some of them now, and I mean, you know, it's not a very good photocopy that I have, but on first look, you can't really tell the difference. I mean, why do you think the company's doing it? I mean, the first thought that springs to mind that this is just a way to save money, isn't it? Yeah, I mean, if you look at history, when companies have a chance to save money through automation and technology, typically, they will do it.
We've seen that over and over. H&M says that this is not the main priority.
So according to the company, they keep an eye on technology, they see that AI is coming. And they were trying to think about how they can use AI while protecting the rights of the models.
Because in theory, you know, and we've seen other examples of this, like you could just generate images of models without having to involve them. Not necessarily like an exact replica of a human model, but just something that looks like a regular human model, not based on any actual person.
They decided that the best approach, according to them, would be to actually involve the models and to give them rights over their digital twins. So they actually own their digital twin and can decide when they want to use it.
And so according to them, it's a way to try to find sort of a path forward in this new age of AI that allows you to use AI while respecting the rights and jobs of the models. Just one final thought.
I wonder what consumers will make of it, because there is something strange. If you suspect or you know you're looking at an AI image of a person, I mean, it does create this sort of weird distance sometimes, doesn't it? It does.
And even the models themselves. I spoke to the first model who H&M created a digital twin for, and she described it as a little bit scary, actually, to look at a picture of herself that wasn't really her.
I think the thing that's worth noting is that the AI is getting so good that it's become really hard to distinguish between an AI-generated image and a real photo. And so in some cases, you know, consumers might look at these things and not even realise they're looking at an AI image.
In fact, H&M has said it plans to watermark the images for now to be transparent, to make clear when you're looking at AI. Technology journalist Mark Bain.
Still to come, why man-made change is threatening fungi or fungi, the lifeblood of most plants. The fungi bring in nutrients and water that the plants need.
So without these fungi, we're not going to have our plants, we're not going to have our forests, our grasslands or even our crop plants. Buckingham Palace has provided an update on the health of King Charles following his diagnosis of cancer last year.
The statement said the King had spent a short time in hospital on Thursday after he experienced temporary side effects from his ongoing medical treatment. His appointments for Friday have been cancelled.
The BBC's Ben Schofield has the details. Royal sources are telling us that this is a, in their words, most minor bump in the road that is going in the right direction.
I'll take you back to February last year, early February 2024, and that was when King Charles was first diagnosed with cancer. He had spent three nights in the London Clinic,

a private hospital in the capital.

He was being treated for what was described as a benign, enlarged prostate.

It was during that treatment that medics discovered the King also had cancer.

Now, it's never been confirmed what type of cancer the King had. It was said that he didn't have prostate cancer, but they've never gone into any other specifics beyond that.
Now, of course, as you might expect, he suspended public duties from then on and didn't resume them until late April last year. It seems from the communications we've had from Buckingham Palace this evening that it is with some regret that he has had to cancel some of his appointments today and also what he was scheduled to do in Birmingham tomorrow.
That statement from Buckingham Palace talking about the side effects that he has encountered as a result of his treatment, but palace sources saying that that's no surprise that these sorts of side effects are common when it comes to this type of treatment. They say that they are temporary and such issues are not uncommon with many medical treatments.
We know that the King spent some time in hospital today, went back to the London clinic, which is where he was initially diagnosed and is now recovering at home in Clarence House. He is said to be going through his state papers and making calls from his residents there.
Ben Schofield. With attention focusing on the war in Ukraine and the breakdown of a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, another area of the world is preparing for possible conflict.
Japan is taking the threat of war between China and Taiwan so seriously that it's made a plan for how it would evacuate 120,000 of its people living on islands close to Taiwan. The government says it'll start conducting evacuation drills next year.
I asked our Asia PacificPacific regional editor Celia Hatton what's prompted the government in Tokyo to act now. I think that Tokyo is becoming increasingly worried by the rising tensions across the Taiwan Strait.
It can see for itself, as all of us can see really, that China is putting increasing pressure on Taiwan, that open talk of a possible invasion of Taiwan is really on the table now. I mean, the Taiwanese defence ministry just said itself, it's preparing its own military drills with the idea that China could invade in 2027.
So that date is being bandied around by the US and now Taiwan. And so I think Japan is very well aware of this, that it wants to protect itself.
It has some islands that are quite close to Taiwan, the Sakishima Islands. The closest one of those particular islands is called Yonaguni.
It's only 100 kilometres away from Taiwan itself. And so Japan's just thinking ahead.
So tell us about Japanese plans. Well, the Japanese have been planning this on paper in table exercises for quite some time.
For a few years now, they've been releasing images of meetings where they have a map on a table in front of them and they're moving little wooden boats and planes around. But now they want to go one step further and actually

rehearse these evacuations. So they want to play out what would go into taking 120,000 people off

of the Sakishima Islands and getting them onto Japan's bigger mainland and what that would take.

They estimate it would take them about six days of evacuating about 20,000 people a day using military vessels, Coast Guard vessels, and also private ferries in conjunction with planes. They would all be taken to ports and airports on Japan's main Kyushu Island, and then they'd be dispersed around the country from there.
Now, in typical Japanese style, they've really thought ahead about this. And they want to make sure that they evacuate people in groups.
So you're always with a group of people that you know, and you'll all be transported to your ultimate destination where you're going to stay for a while with people you know, and that's to minimise distress. Have they ever done anything like this before? I don't think so.
And that's why they're trying to play it out so carefully in terms of what kinds of transportation they use, who they would evacuate first, how they would go about it. And that's why we're going to be seeing these live drills starting next year.
You know, I think the hope for everyone is that they wouldn't have to use this. But Japan is a country that is hit by earthquakes.
It's a country that's had to deal with nuclear disasters. This is a country that really thinks ahead.
And so that's why I think they're really going that extra step in terms of actually going through these live exercises instead of just planning this out on paper. Celia Hatton.
Later this year, Japan's Tokyo Metro, along with UK rail and bus firm Go Ahead and Japanese conglomerate Sumitomo will begin operating the Elizabeth Line here in London. It's the newest tube line in the capital, linking a town like Reading and Heathrow Airport in the west through central London to Essex in the east.
It took 20 years of planning, construction and delays and finally opened in 2022. The train now approaching.
It's your first Elizabeth Line service from Paddington to Abbeywood via Canary Hall. So what can we expect from the new Japanese operator?

Andrew Peach heard more from our Japanese business reporter, Mariko Oi, who's been talking to the boss of the Tokyo Metro.

I think a lot of commuters in London might be hoping for, you know,

the punctuality and efficiency of the Japanese metro system,

because, as you might know, you know, the Japanese capital is known for its, you know, it really is a spiderweb of rail and metro systems. And Tokyo Metro is the biggest operator of subway train lines.
And despite that, it's incredibly punctual. It's really rare for them to deviate from the schedule.
Sometimes they apologize if they leave, you know, three seconds too early, that kind of stuff. But I guess the big question is whether or not they can actually do the same in London because of all the differences in system and whatnot.
So I put that question to the boss of Tokyo Metro, Akiyoshi Yamamura. We provide nine train lines covering 195 kilometers of track between 180 stations in Tokyo.
It's a dense network and we carry 6.86 million passengers every day. To operate all the trains on time, we try not to let them stop at stations for longer than scheduled.
Each line has a committee to tackle possible delays. For example, we ring a bell to inform passengers that the door is about to close.
We also have strategies to prevent anyone getting caught in the door. We also use a new signaling system called CBTC to minimize the gap between each train.
Not all of our experiences in Tokyo may work in London, but I believe our system to avoid delays will work. And what about the sort of cultural differences between the UK and Japan? Will these two operations be linked up all the time? So when there's industrial action, that kind of thing? Yes, exactly.
That was the first thing that I thought of, that, you know, it's all good and well, as the boss was just talking about it, trying to copy what worked very well in Tokyo, in London. But as you said, in the UK, drivers often go on strike, which is very, very rare in Japan.
Obviously, they're very strong unions in the UK, whereas in Japan, you know, they do have unions, but they hardly ever walk out. So, you know, I put that question to Mr.
Yamamura as well, about how they're going to navigate this cultural differences between the two countries. As for the UK's labour culture, I realise there'll be differences, but along with our partners Go Ahead and Sumitomo, we aim to create an environment where employees enjoy working.
So that's Akiyoshi Yamamura, the president of Tokyo Metro. The company will start operating the Elizabeth line in London in May.
So we'll see how they navigate those cultural differences that we've talked about and whether they can actually really bring that punctuality of Japanese trains to London. Mariko Oi.
The British environmental activist group Just Stop Oil says it'll end its campaign of civil disobedience. In the past, the group's supporters have disrupted

sporting events by bursting bags of bright orange chalk dust, shut down key roads and,

most infamously, in 2022, two activists threw soup over Van Gogh's sunflowers painting

in the National Gallery in London. This was that moment.
Security. What is worth more, art or life? Is it worth more than food? Worth more than justice? Are you more concerned about the protection of a painting or the protection of our planet and people? Our climate editor, Justin Roulat, has been following the activities of the group since it was first formed at the end of 2021.
We are hanging up the high-vis was the message from Just Stop Oil, whose activists have often been seen wearing bright orange safety vests. It was formed in late 2021 by a splinter group which thought the climate campaign group Extinction Rebellion wasn't confrontational enough.
Its actions, including slow marches on motorways and throwing soup at works of art, attracted huge attention and a great deal of public anger. And Just Stop Oil says its campaign has been successful.
Hayley Walsh is an activist with the group. She disrupted a West End production of The Tempest featuring Sigourney Weaver.
We're the most successful anti-oil initiative in direction action groups that's been run. We've kept 4.4 billion barrels of oil in the ground and our first demand for no new oil and gas licenses is now government policy.
So we've had huge, huge wins. But the activities of Just Stop Oil and other direct action climate groups brought a tough response from the authorities.
New laws were introduced criminalising new forms of protest such as locking on, chaining yourself to something and tunnelling underground. Just Stop Oil activists have received the longest sentences ever handed down for non-violent civil disobedience.
But the group says this doesn't mean its members will give up campaigning. It says it's creating a new strategy.
Nothing short of a revolution is going to protect us from the coming storm, Just Stop Oil says. Justin Roulat.
Scientists are warning that man-made actions are posing an existential threat to fungi or fungi, as they say in the United States. The organisms are an important part of our ecosystem, and the International Union for Conservation of Nature is warning that more than a thousand varieties could face extinction.
Dr. Greg Muller coordinates

the fungal program at the organization, and he told me more about the research.

Fungi are super important for the environment, and they're at risk for many of the same things that

are problems for animals and plants. Loss of habitat, changes in climate, and overuse.
And so those are all issues that fungi face. We're finding that fungi are challenged all over the world.
We're seeing it in Western Africa, in northern United States, in Sweden and northern Europe, and in South America. So every place fungi occur, they're seeing challenges.
And how many types of fungi are there? There's about 155,000 described species, but we estimate that there could be as many as 2 million out there. We just have a lot more work to do.
And if they disappear, or if some of these thousands of species disappear, what effect does that have on the environment? Almost every plant depends on an intimate relationship with these fungi. The fungi bring in nutrients and water that the plants need.
So without these fungi, we're not going to have our plants, we're not going to have our forests, our grasslands, or even our crop plants. And also they're super important for sequestering carbon.
So they would be a major impact on climate change. What does it mean if they die off? Because what you're telling us is that they are the lifeblood of most plants on our planet.
That's very correct. So the plants depend on these fungi, and everything that depends on the plants, therefore, depend on the fungi as well.
So how can this be stopped? In some cases, it's just better land management. It's reducing loss of habitat.
It is setting up preserves where they might be protected. So those are some of the actions that are really needed.
We just need to think about fungi and include them in our conservation actions. Currently, they're usually not considered, and we need to change that.
Until recently, we didn't think fungi were under threat. The idea was that they're doing fine.
And so the results we just put out shows that fungi do need attention, they are under threat, and we need to do something about it. Dr.
Greg Muller. And that's it from us for now, but there'll be a new edition of the Global News podcast later.
If you want to comment on this podcast or the topics covered in it,

send us an email. The address is globalpodcast at bbc.co.uk.
You can also find us on X at BBC World Service. Use the hashtag at Global News Pod.
This edition was produced by Judy

Frankel and mixed by Holly Palmer. The editor is Karen Martin.
I'm Valerie Sanderson. Until next time,

bye-bye.