Trump then endorsed the newly compliant Delcy Rodriguez to run Venezuela, took control of the country's oil business, and crucially, set up an oil blockade of Cuba. In doing so, he indicated that Cuba was now on his list of countries he intends to "deal with". Iran, already on that list, has recently been at the centre of the president's attention, but all the indicators are that Cuba is most certainly "next". We know this because Trump has said so. In reality, the oil blockade is already bringing Cuba to its knees. Venezuela provided cheap fuel to Cuba, and it was augmented by supplies from Mexico. These vital lifelines have both stopped on Trump's orders, though Mexico maintains it was a "sovereign decision". A single Russian oil tanker has reached Cuba this year, but that is for now, all the oil it has received. Cuba has failed to diversify its power supplies - there's little solar power, little wind power, and very little gas - making it particularly reliant on oil to the point that now it can barely function. I've recently been inside Cuba, and the effects of the blockade are devastating and immediately obvious. This oil blockade is an economic war every bit as destructive as bombs and bullets. There are continuous power blackouts across the country, and now also in the capital Havana, which was traditionally spared this type of treatment. Government food stores and bakeries selling heavily subsidised household essentials are now regularly closed or virtually empty. Many Cubans relied on these stores to buy food to survive - and not having this vital supply means there is a growing crisis, with people going hungry. Read more:South African opposition leader jailedLondoners unknowingly 'in China' Petrol stations are largely closed and empty, pharmacies are bare, and people are queuing to get money from cash machines that are often drained and always come with a strict withdrawal limit. The tourism industry that once brought billions of dollars of hard currency to Cuba has almost come to a standstill. Trump's threats, the blackouts, and a lack of aviation fuel have scared tourists away, particularly in Havana. The traditional safety nets in Cuba, like its healthcare system, have broken. Hospitals are running on generators with very little supplies. Charities are doing their best to pick up the slack with food handouts for the elderly and the homeless - they say they're now also handing out food to children and trying to help with education. But they're struggling to find the resources, struggling to keep up with the demand and the need. Rubbish is piled up on the streets all over the capital, and that's mainly because there's no fuel for the bin trucks to collect it. I watched as people picked through the rotting food and vegetables in the rubbish, looking for something to eat - sometimes eating it where they stood. In alleyways nearby we filmed as people slept rough. Countless people I spoke to told me that even though Cuba is a poor country, seeing this type of thing was not common here in the past - this was not how it used to be. But these types of images have now become a constant visual reminder of how every facet of life in this Caribbean country is being affected by the blockade and Donald Trump's threats. The once magnificent buildings that marked Havana out as a special place in the region are crumbling, even completely falling apart in places. People still live in these monuments to Cuba's past; they're clinging to a way of life that is disappearing. A charity director I spoke to, who is also a tour guide mainly for Italian visitors, explained it to me this way: when her clients see Havana's disintegrating buildings, they ask her when the war was that brought this destruction about - there hasn't been a war, she has to explain. Observers, neutral or otherwise, agree that people can't go on living like this and that Cuba needs help. So far, Trump and his advisers have shown little regard for the fate of the Cuban population. His promise that Cuba is next means nothing to the average person, because they don't know what next means, and here many doubt that the president or anyone in the White House knows what next means either, or if there is even a plan for a future in Cuba.

The ruling that could cost the company - which also has a significant share of the UK festival and concert market - hundreds of millions of dollars and have a big impact on the industry. The verdict in New York came after four days of deliberations at the end of a high-stakes trial, following several years of scrutiny over the company's prices and practices. Live Nation has denied it is a monopoly and said in a statement that the verdict "is not the last word on this matter". Its dominance in the industry was picked up by US politicians in 2022, when Ticketmaster was forced to cancel its general sale of tickets to Taylor Swift's much-anticipated Eras tour due to "extraordinarily high demands". The American civil case was initially brought by the US Department of Justice (DoJ) and dozens of individual US states in 2024, with the claim that Live Nation monopolised the industry by controlling ticketing, concert booking, venues and promotions. In March this year, Live Nation Entertainment settled with the DoJ for $280m, subject to a judge's approval. Some states joined the settlement - a deal that included a cap on service fees at some venues, plus some new ticket-selling options for promoters and venues. However, more than 30 states continued with the trial. Among other things, jurors found Ticketmaster's anticompetitive practices led to people in 22 states paying an extra $1.72 per ticket, which the judge could order the companies to pay back. Penalties are yet to be determined. Live Nation Entertainment owns, operates, controls booking for or has an equity interest in hundreds of venues, and Ticketmaster is widely considered to be the world's largest ticket-seller for live events. Ticketmaster was established in 1976 and merged with Live Nation in 2010. The company now controls of 86% of the market for concerts and 73% of the overall market when sports events are included, according to an attorney for the states, Jeffrey Kessler. Read more from Sky News:Teens staying silent on politics for fear of being 'cancelled'Woman given 14 shots on cruise awarded £220k in damages Live Nation said in a statement following the verdict: "The jury's verdict is not the last word on this matter. Pending motions will determine whether the liability and damages rulings stand." It said it plans to renew a motion for judgment "as a matter of law, which the Court deferred until after the jury returned its verdict". "That motion addresses all liability theories," the company continued. "The Court previously noted that Live Nation's motion raises serious issues". What about the UK? The company also came under scrutiny in the UK over the ticket sale for the highly anticipated Oasis reunion. The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) carried out an investigation and announced in September that it had secured a number of commitments from Ticketmaster, after finding it did not offer fans enough clarity on pricing. CMA chief executive Sarah Cardell said the changes would give fans more information about prices and clear descriptions on what they are paying for. "If Ticketmaster fails to deliver on these changes, we won't hesitate to take further action," she said.

People living in the 100 flats in Royal Mint Court estate said they were "shocked" when the government did not disagree during a judicial review hearing brought by the residents that the land has been diplomatic - with access rights therefore subject to Chinese approval - since 2018. Their flats, built in 1978, are on the land belonging to Beijing after it bought the old Royal Mint site in 2018, but they say they have never been told if their homes are on diplomatic land, which would mean, if they are, the land is inviolable. Under international diplomatic laws, inviolability means UK authorities, including ambulances, police and fire engines, cannot enter inviolable land unless the head of an embassy consents. The residents have brought the judicial review over concerns about their safety and whether planning conditions attached to the government's planning permission, granted in January, can realistically be enforced. At a review hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice at the end of March, the government failed to deny diplomatic immunity applies across the entire site. Resident Mark Nyegate told Sky News the revelation was a "shock" and said they are concerned the Chinese could oust them from their flats. There are also concerns the conditions placed on the planning permission will not be enforceable due to the site being diplomatic land. Last October, a letter from then foreign secretary Boris Johnson to Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi was leaked, revealing he had granted the site diplomatic consent in 2018. He also gave Beijing assurances planning permission would be granted. The current government has refused to release the letter but a minister confirmed it is factual in parliament. In a copy obtained by Sky News, Mr Johnson makes no mention of whether the flats and any planning permission requirements and conditions are included in this diplomatic consent. Under UK law, as soon as diplomatic consent is granted, the land is inviolable. Luke de Pulford, co-founder of the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China, which is helping the residents with the judicial review, told Sky News: "It is absolutely outrageous that the government failed to inform residents that they are living on Chinese diplomatic land. "Quite apart from possible safety implications, there are obvious consequences for the value of their properties. It's about time that this shady deal was fully dragged into the light." Read more:Everything we know about China's new super embassyProtesters march against new embassy The residents had been left wondering if their homes were on diplomatic land since the Johnson letter was revealed, but nothing was mentioned in the planning application for the new site, where much was made of a fence placed between their homes and flats to be built for Chinese embassy staff. Mr Nyegate, treasurer of the Royal Mint Court Residents Association, told Sky News: "It came as a bit of a shock to us. "I've always half joked about living in China since 2018, but that's a reality now. "That hearing shows we are definitely on diplomatic land, and if we had any issues then Tower Hamlets Council wouldn't be able to be involved, and police couldn't come onto the land. "We've always thought we would be covered by UK law and what we're trying to find out is have we lost our rights? "The planning application has a fence dividing us from the embassy flats, but that obviously isn't the case in terms of our rights." Mr Nyegate added: "What's to say tomorrow morning they just say 'you're moving off'? "And will any of us be able to sell our homes now that they're essentially owned by China?" Hong Kong dissident Chloe Cheung, advocacy manager at the Committee for Freedom in Hong Kong Foundation, said she and other Hong Kongers had protested against the embassy from the flats' car park. "It is outrageous that Hong Kong activists could step into what we believed was safe ground, only to later discover it was effectively treated as Chinese territory," she told Sky News. "People took those risks without informed consent. When governments strike arrangements with Beijing, the absolute minimum they owe the public is transparency. Instead, Hong Kong activists were left in the dark and exposed to danger." The residents' concerns about the planning conditions being unenforceable have previously been dismissed by the government, which says there are ways of enforcing planning conditions through diplomatic laws. The residents believe this is unlikely to happen because, under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, it would mean the British government having to declare Chinese diplomats persona non grata or terminating diplomatic relations entirely and expelling the entire mission. This would cause a major diplomatic row with a country the government is trying to stay on the right side of. The government said it does not comment on ongoing legal action. The Chinese embassy in London did not respond to requests for a comment.

It marks Clayton's fourth nightly win of the 2026 campaign and the Welshman was also completing back-to-back successes after his victory in Brighton last time out, having also won in Glasgow and Nottingham. 'The Ferret' is now all but confirmed to be at Finals Night at The O2 in May with his five-point advantage at the top of the table. Premier League Darts in Rotterdam: As it happened!Premier League darts: Latest schedule and results ✅Darts in 2026: Key dates, calendar, results 📅Got Sky? Watch on the Sky Sports app 📱Not got Sky? Get instant access with NOW 📺 He sits on 29 points at the summit, with Littler on 24 points in second, Gerwyn Price on 19 points in third and Michael van Gerwen on 16 in fourth. Littler made it into his fourth nightly final but could not seal the victory, although he did manage to silence the Rotterdam crowd after they had booed him when he came out for his walk-on ahead of his quarter-final against Price. The night in Rotterdam marked the first time since 2019 that there have been two Dutch players in the Premier League but both Gian van Veen and van Gerwen lost in the quarter-finals. "I watched last week's final against Michael [van Gerwen] back, and it hurt a little when somebody said I was favourite to finish bottom of the Premier League," Clayton told Sky Sports. "That annoyed me a bit, to be honest. But it's going good for myself so I've got a massive smile on my face. "It's the grandpa and the young kid! All jokes aside, I've got total respect for Luke. He's absolutely amazing. "This guy has got years ahead of him, an amazing darts player - and he's shown us all the level we need to be to beat him. But this old dog has got some life in him yet." Clayton fought off Littler to make it three wins in four Premier League meetings against 'The Nuke' in 2026. From 2-0 down, Clayton rattled off three legs in a row, eventually moving into a 5-3 lead. Littler won the next leg before Clayton held his nerve and pin D20 for the game. Clayton shows grit and Premier League prowess Clayton showed that he knows how to win ugly with a 6-5 win over Josh Rock in the semi-finals. There was nothing separating the pair in what was an edgy contest, breaks of throw being matched as Clayton moved 5-4 ahead. Rock produced a brilliant 142 checkout to take the match to a decider but then his trebling fell away. That allowed Clayton's efficient throwing to see him take out tops for a fifth nightly final. The Ferret had earlier ended Van Gerwen's hopes of getting a Premier League win on home soil with a dominant 6-2 victory. It was clear from the outset that Van Gerwen was getting frustrated by every slight missed opportunity while Clayton was still in his fine form from Brighton as he took five legs in a row before the Dutchman could hit back. The Welshman then wrapped up the match in style by reeling in the 'Big Fish', ending the Dutch crowd's hopes of a home winner in 2026. How Littler silenced Rotterdam crowd Littler started his night by silencing a loud Rotterdam crowd with a 6-3 win over Price. He told Sky Sports pre-match he was aware he was going to get a strong reaction after his spat with Dutch world No 1 Van Veen in early April and that came to fruition. After walking on to strong booing, Littler found his zone and looked steely on stage as he veered away from showing any emotion and focused on his game. He started with a hold of throw then followed it with a 124 checkout for a break of throw. Five breaks of throw in a row helped move Littler 4-2 in front and after a hold of throw apiece, the world No 1 then shone again in the ninth leg with a second 124 finish, this time on the bullseye. That finally got the big reaction from Littler as he let out a roar. Littler booked his spot in the final by holding off a fight back from Luke Humphries to clinch a 6-5 victory. The game was tense at two legs apiece and the Littler only heightened that when he made a 'calm down' gesture to the crowd which ramped up the noise again. Showing swagger on stage, Littler pushed himself out to 5-2 ahead with four legs on the spin but Humphries battled back with three legs of his own to bring the match level at 5-5. Despite the hard work from Humphries, Littler held his nerve on his own throw and took out his favourite D10 to reach the final. Elsewhere, Humphries picked up his first quarter-final win in four weeks with a comprehensive 6-3 victory over Van Veen. Van Veen had the moment he has always waited for as he got to experience a walk-on in front of a home crowd but that was the only joy he would find in Rotterdam. Humphries made two breaks of throw and a clinical period of doubling sealed a crucial two points for the defending Premier League champion as he seeks to climb the table to reach next month's finals night. Rock remains bottom of the table despite continuing his uptick in form, demolishing Stephen Bunting 6-1 in the last quarter-final. Who will win this year's Premier League Darts? Luke Humphries bids to defend his title and you can watch the action every single Thursday until May on Sky Sports. Stream darts and more top sport with NOW.

Hundreds of safety deposit boxes were ransacked by the gang, meaning the exact value of the theft remains unclear at this stage. The incident unfolded at a branch of Credit Agricole on Thursday morning - and the hostages were held for a couple of hours prior to their release. Footage posted online showed firemen smashing through windows to help people climb out, and no injuries have been reported. Reports suggest the robbers may have escaped through sewers after drilling a hole in the bank's floor throughout the night. Detectives are now searching sewers throughout the local area but are yet to make any arrests. According to local media reports, three or four people were involved in the heist - and had worn masks depicting famous actors. One hostage told Fanpage.it that customers and bank staff were locked in a room. They added that, although the thieves were armed, no violence was used. Dozens of customers descended on the bank last night to demand information. One told La Repubblica: "We want to know what was stolen. Was the bank vault containing the cash stolen, or were private safety deposit boxes emptied? How many safe deposit boxes were opened?"

Staff were told of the news of redundancies during an all-staff call at 3pm on Wednesday but were not given details of who would be affected. The cuts would mark the biggest round of job cuts at the BBC in almost 15 years. They come as the broadcaster attempts to reduce costs by 10% over the next three years. In February, it was revealed it aimed to reduce spending by hundreds of millions of pounds within this timeframe as it continues to face "substantial financial pressures". The latest cuts, initially reported by the Financial Times, come as former Google boss, Matt Brittin, prepares to take over as director-general next month. The BBC also recently revealed plans to drastically reduce the team behind the coverage of national occasions such as royal and state events. Interim director-general Rhodri Talfan Davies, who led the all-staff meeting and will head the corporation until Mr Brittin takes over on 18 May, told staff the corporation needs to save an additional £500m over the next two years. He said: "All of this needs to be done with real care - for our audiences and, of course, for all of you. "I know this is challenging news, and we'll need to work closely together to build our plans. "My commitment to you is that we'll do everything possible to try to reduce the strain and uncertainty that change of this kind brings." Read more:Mandelson's firm collapsedTrump: UK 'can't succeed' Previously, the BBC has said: "Over the last three years we have delivered more than a half a billion pounds worth of savings, much of which we've been able to reinvest into our output across the BBC." The BBC is predominantly funded through the annual licence fee, which rose to £180 per year on 1 April. Philippa Childs, head of broadcasting union Bectu, said: "Cuts of this magnitude will be devastating for the workforce and to the BBC as a whole. "BBC staff are already under significant pressure after previous redundancies. This will also inevitably impact the wider creative industries ecosystem, given the BBC's crucial anchor role in commissioning content and nurturing talent. "At a time of fake news and an industry that is becoming more concentrated in the hands of a few multinational corporations, the UK needs a confident, ambitious and sustainably-funded BBC more than ever. "The government must ensure that Charter Renewal puts the BBC's funding on a more secure, long-term pathway and prevent our national broadcaster facing death by a thousand cuts." Sky News has approached the BBC for a response.

A survey by the Economist Educational Foundation found that 22% of 15 to 17-year-olds had stopped themselves sharing political opinions because they were worried about criticism, along with 20% of 10 to 14-year-olds. Nearly one in four of the 4,000 students aged between 10 and 17 who took part in the survey said they have been asked to stop voicing their political views at school. The results also showed that 44% of 15 to 17-year-olds said they would not feel ready to vote in the next election. It comes after the government introduced plans last year to lower the voting age to 16, enabling up to 9.5 million more people to have their say at the next general election. The Economist Educational Foundation's chief growth officer, Tiffany Smyly, said the fear of being cancelled could push teenagers to online "fringe" communities where their views could become more extreme. She warned: "If teenagers are worried about being cancelled, then they are not going to be sharing their viewpoints at school or with friends. "Instead, they are likely to go into chat rooms or forums that do allow them to share a fringe opinion, and that might be where their views become more extreme. "We need to channel young people's political curiosity in more positive ways." Read more from Sky News:Social media bosses ordered to No 10BBC to cut up to 2,000 jobs The survey found the cost of living crisis and healthcare are the main concerns for younger people. Those who took part were more likely to say they were curious about politics than uninterested in it - and more than two-thirds of 15 to 17-year-olds admitted they would feel more confident voting if they knew more about different political policies. Flora Letanka, chief executive of the Economist Educational Foundation, called for more opportunities for young people to openly discuss the topics that matter to them. She added: "We need to ensure young people are given the chance to think critically about what's going on in the world, to explore different perspectives, and see the real impact of political decisions on the people around them."

Littler was booed to the stage for each of his three matches in his run to the final, continuing a theme that has followed his spat with Dutch No 1 Gian van Veen from Night Nine in Manchester. Van Veen won a controversial match in which Littler reacted angrily after his opponent turned towards him when throwing match darts, the Dutchman saying Littler was "out of order" for "celebrating towards the crowd". Jonny Clayton beats Luke Littler in Rotterdam to extend lead at top 🎯Premier League darts: Latest schedule and results ✅Darts in 2026: Key dates, calendar, results 📅Got Sky? Watch on the Sky Sports app 📱Not got Sky? Get instant access with NOW 📺 Littler reached the final again in Rotterdam before losing to Premier League leader Jonny Clayton. "It was exactly what I expected, the boos and whistles," Littler told Sky Sports. "But I knew as soon as I got on stage I could do my job." Ahead of his opening match against Gerwyn Price, Littler had said there would be "no reaction" from him to the taunts of the crowd, but he couldn't resist in his semi-final clash with Luke Humphries. When taking out tops to level the match at 2-2, Littler gave a gesture of 'calm down' to a section of fans before adding a few flamboyant flourishes with his darts in the next leg. "Littler said he will not react [to the crowd], but he has just reacted there - and they don't like it!" Sky Sports' Wayne Mardle said on commentary. "I think he's had enough of not reacting. He is strutting and really giving it now. "When he has this swagger, he's hard to deal with. He's giving it the full repertoire. I like it!" Littler came through 6-3 against Price and edged out Humphries 6-5 before ultimately coming unstuck in the final, losing 6-4 to Clayton after claiming the opening two legs in impressive fashion. Clayton's fourth nightly win of the 2026 campaign, and second in succession after also emerging victorious last week at Brighton, stretches his lead over Littler to five points at the top of the table. Clayton was full of praise for Little after the final, saying: "I've got total respect for Luke. He's absolutely amazing. "This guy has got years ahead of him, an amazing darts player - and he's shown us all the level we need to be to beat him. "But this old dog has got some life in him yet." Sky Sports' Glen Durrant also praised Littler for how he responded to the taunts of the Dutch crowd throughout the night. "It's brutal in here tonight," Durrant said. "I'm not sure I would have had the mental capacity to deal with it, but Littler is different." Who will win this year's Premier League Darts? Luke Humphries is defending his title and you can watch the action every single Thursday until May on Sky Sports. Stream darts and more top sport with NOW.