The name of the victim is being withheld until her next of kin has been informed.

Lee, a first-round draft pick for the New York Jets in 2016, last played in the NFL for the Buffalo Bills in 2020.

His four-year deal with the Jets was cut short by a year in 2019, when he left the franchise because of disciplinary problems and poor form.

Lee was part of the Kansas City Chiefs’ roster that won the Super Bowl in 2020, although he did not feature in the match.

He signed with the Las Vegas Raiders in June 2021 but did not play before his release two months later.

Lee was arrested in 2023 for assault and domestic violence. The arrest report said he pushed a woman “against the wall, throwing her to the floor and striking her face and head eight to nine times with his closed fists”.

Cricket’s most profitable tournament is set to start this weekend in a significantly diminished form, bereft of both a major qualifying nation and the single biggest fixture in terms of the potential viewership it can attract.

A complicated mesh of diplomatic disputes among the South Asian nations involved, including co-hosts India, mean the T20 Cricket World Cup begins on Saturday under a shadow of geopolitical turmoil.

It all began with Bangladesh’s withdrawal from the tournament, kicked out by the International Cricket Council (ICC) and replaced by the next-closest team to qualifying in Scotland. Bangladesh had refused to play any of their scheduled fixtures in India and demanded they be moved to co-hosts Sri Lanka, a request that was rejected.

Then, Pakistan announced that they would not play their group-stage match against arch-rivals India, due to take place in Sri Lanka’s capital Colombo on 15 February. No reason was initially given, but Pakistan’s prime minister has since confirmed this was in solidarity with Bangladesh.

These developments have put the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) at the centre of a dispute blending geopolitics, commercial power, and long-running grievances about how world cricket is run.

open image in gallery

Bangladesh’s withdrawal followed a formal request to move its scheduled matches to Sri Lanka, with the Bangladesh Cricket Board (BCB) citing security concerns for its team and fans amid escalating political tensions between it and India.

Relations have dramatically deteriorated in the past 18 months since street protests brought down the Sheikh Hasina regime in 2024 and compelled the former prime minister, an ally of India, to flee to Delhi. India has ignored Dhaka’s requests for Hasina’s extradition to Bangladesh, where she has been found guilty of crimes against humanity.

Since Hasina’s government collapsed, India and India-based rights groups have repeatedly raised concerns over the safety of members of the Hindu minority in Bangladesh. In December, a Hindu man accused of blasphemy was beaten to death by a mob, triggering protests by Hindu nationalist groups in India.

Against this political backdrop, the Indian Premier League franchise Kolkata Knight Riders released Bangladeshi fast bowler Mustafizur Rahman in January after being instructed to do so by the BCCI.

Bangladeshi authorities responded by banning broadcasts of the IPL in their country.

The BCB then renewed its request for their team’s matches to be shifted out of India.

open image in gallery

The ICC rejected the request on the grounds of an “absence of any credible security threat”, and gave Bangladesh 24 hours to confirm its participation.

The Independent understands that no efforts were made to provide proof of the security threat faced by Bangladesh’s team, and when the deadline passed, Scotland were invited to take the vacant place. The governing body said it was keen not to establish “precedents that could undermine the neutrality and fairness of ICC events”.

Pakistan initially indicated they might withdraw entirely in response to Bangladesh’s removal. They later confirmed participation but said their team would not play India. Pakistan’s government said it had granted “approval” for the team to compete in the tournament but that players “shall not take to the field” against their arch-rivals.

The India-Pakistan fixture has historically been the most-watched and commercially valuable match in global cricket. More than 600 million people watched on the Indian streaming platform JioHotstar when the teams met in last year’s Champions Trophy.

Cricketing ties between the two neighbours have been shaped by decades of conflict. They have not played a bilateral series since 2013, and India have not toured Pakistan since 2008.

Pakistan did not host any touring nations between 2009 and 2019 following an attack on Sri Lanka’s team bus in Lahore that killed six policemen and two civilians.

Pakistani players have been barred from the IPL since the 2009 Mumbai attacks, which left 174 people dead.

Last year, India refused to travel to Pakistan for the Champions Trophy, eventually playing their matches in the UAE.

That led to an agreement stating that when either country hosted an ICC event, matches between them would be held at neutral venues.

open image in gallery

Tensions between the neighbours escalated in the wake of a four-day military conflict last April, sparked by a militant attack on tourists in the Indian-administered part of Kashmir.

At the Asia Cup in September, Indian captain Suryakumar Yadav declared that his team’s victory in the final was a “perfect reply” to Pakistan.

His team skipped post-match handshakes, later saying: “A few things in life are above sportsman’s spirit.”

Match officials later confirmed the captains had been asked to skip handshakes, prompting protests from Pakistani officials and criticism from Asian Cricket Council chairman Mohsin Naqvi, who called the episode “utterly disappointing”.

India refused to accept the Asia Cup trophy from Naqvi, who is also chief of the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) as well as the country’s interior minister. It ended with Naqvi walking away with the trophy.

Former PCB chairman Ehsan Mani, who also served as the ICC chief between 2003 and 2006, told the Hindustan Times the latest row about matches between India and Pakistan was likely a fallout from the Asia Cup.

“You’ve got to look at the background to this,” he said. “I don’t think the PCB chairman was happy with the Indian players’ refusal to shake hands with the Pakistani players at the Asia Cup, then their refusal to take their trophy from him. You’ve really got to look at the whole picture; it’s not a good relationship between the countries, which is sad, because we always worked very closely with the BCCI, and their attitudes have changed significantly.”

He urged the ICC chairman Jay Shah, who is the son of India’s home minister Amit Shah, to engage with the PCB and the Pakistan government over their stance.

“The PCB is simply going to say that it is following government instructions, the same as India did for refusing to come to Pakistan in the last ICC event,” he said. “And this is all very unfortunate. I do hope that the chairman of ICC, after all, he represents all the countries, including Pakistan, is talking to Pakistan to see how they can overcome Pakistan’s position. In fact, he should be engaging not only with PCB but also with the government of Pakistan.”

open image in gallery

The ICC responded to Pakistan’s position by calling it “difficult to reconcile” with the premise of global competition.

“Selective participation undermines the spirit and sanctity of the competitions,” it said in a statement and warned of “significant and long-term implications for cricket in its own country”.

While acknowledging the role of governments in national policy, it said Pakistan’s decision wasn’t in the interest of the game or fans worldwide, including millions in Pakistan.

The Independent has reached out to the ICC, BCCI, BCB, and PCB for comment.

Former Pakistan captain Shahid Afridi accused the ICC of mishandling the situation. “It’s regrettable that Pakistan won’t play India, but I stand behind my government’s decision,” he wrote on X.

“This is the moment for the ICC to lead and prove through decisions, not statements, that it’s impartial, independent and fair to every member.”

Former PCB chairman Najam Sethi said the standoff reflected long-standing resentment over how power and revenue were distributed in world cricket. He accused the BCCI, the sport’s wealthiest board, of using its influence to dominate decision-making.

“I’m not a spokesman for the PCB, I’m giving you my view. The PCB consulted the government and they made this decision. There are 10-15 days to go before that match. My sense is that there are negotiations that are taking place, and my hope is that those negotiations will bear fruit,” he said.

Sethi linked Pakistan’s position to wider opposition to the so-called Big Three arrangement, under which India, Australia and England receive the majority of ICC revenue.

“It’s the attitude of the BCCI, that’s the problem. At every stage, they’ve been bullying people,” he said, recalling negotiations during the tenure of former BCCI chairman N Srinivasan.

“Nine members signed on and Mr Srinivasan came to me and said, ‘Why do you want to be left alone, blah blah blah, you will be isolated’, and the rest of it,” Sethi said. He described agreeing to revised revenue terms and an India-Pakistan series that later collapsed. “The contract was fine, but a year later, on the eve of the series, the BCCI, without a word, pulls out,” he recalled. “Can you think of a bigger insult?”

Sethi argued that Bangladesh’s removal had created the conditions for a broader challenge. “They have been treating us very badly. Now that Bangladesh have been snubbed in a sense, we feel there are 400 million people on one side. We can all stand up,” he said. “There may be temporary losses, but at the end of the day, we will get a better, reformed ICC.”

Players have largely deferred to governments and administrators. Pakistan captain Salman Ali Agha said the boycott was beyond the team’s control.

“Well, they are our brothers. I thank them for supporting us,” he said of Bangladesh. “And it’s really sad to see that they are not playing the World Cup.”

The India match, he said, was not in their control. “It was the government’s decision.”

Yadav said India would travel to Colombo as scheduled. “We have not refused to play, they have. We’ve booked our flight and we are going,” he said.

open image in gallery

While the ICC continues to hope that Pakistan will backtrack – especially with the governing body having warned of possible sanctions – former BCCI chief selector Chetan Sharma has predicted the PCB will reverse its stance after the 12 February election in Bangladesh, arguing the decision is politically driven.

“What was Bangladesh players’ fault? None. This is politics. Bangladesh has elections on the 12th. After that, you will see a U-turn. There will be a statement saying, ‘Considering public sentiment, cricket shouldn’t suffer, Pakistan will play against India.’ This stance is still about the Bangladesh election only,” he told India Today.

“I’ve been a politician, I’ve contested elections. After the elections, maybe even the military chief will say sport should be kept free of politics and the match should go ahead.”

Former England captain Nasser Hussain questioned whether the ICC had applied its rules consistently.

“If India, a month before a tournament, said ‘our government does not want us to play in a country for a World Cup’, would the ICC have been so firm and said, ‘You know the rules, bad luck, we’re knocking you out?’” he asked on the Sky Sports Cricket Podcast.

Scotland, promoted into the tournament, said preparations had been unusual. “It’s been unique circumstances for us. Preparations have been different than other teams. Every opportunity, we want to make most of,” captain Richie Berrington said.

If Pakistan do boycott the match versus India, their opponent will receive two points. They face the Netherlands, USA, and Namibia in their remaining group games. Only the top two teams from each group progress, leaving little margin for error. It’s unclear what would happen if India and Pakistan were drawn to meet in the final.

There’s precedent for teams refusing to play. Australia and the West Indies declined to travel to Sri Lanka during the 1996 World Cup, while England refused to play Zimbabwe in 2003, citing security concerns. Those teams forfeited the matches but were not fined.

The ICC constitution, however, allows for sanctions where governments interfere in cricket administration and requires boards to operate autonomously.

Zimbabwe were suspended in 2019 on account of government intervention and Sri Lanka lost hosting rights for an Under-19 World Cup four years later following the dismissal of its board.

Cricket analysts say the financial implications of an India-Pakistan no-show will be severe. Former ICC media head Sami Ul Hasan said: “The biggest hit, if the biggest game of the tournament doesn’t take place, will come from media rights.”

The losses will be felt by member boards.

Hasan pointed to the origin of the crisis in the removal of Mustafizur Rahman from the IPL.

“We must remember that this situation arose due to one player’s removal and one administrator’s statement,” he said, referring to comments by BCCI secretary Devajit Saikia, who at the time blamed “recent developments that are going on all across” – a comment widely understood to refer to the protests by Hindu nationalist groups.

.As the T20 World Cup gets started, the ICC says its priority is the delivery of the tournament. It is calling on all members to protect its integrity.

The World Cup is due to begin on 7 February and will conclude on 8 March. Viewers in the UK can watch every game live on Sky Sports. A live stream will be available via Sky Go and NOW.

Hong Kong is home to a special kind of star: the bar that holds the number one spot on the prestigious list of the World’s 50 Best Bars.

While I was there in October, I took the opportunity to experience it for myself. But despite the buzz and international acclaim, I left feeling… underwhelmed.

Opened in June 2023, Bar Leone is the brainchild of multi-award-winning Italian bartender Lorenzo Antinori.

The concept leans heavy on nostalgia, early ’90s cinema and sports culture, all wrapped in a colonial-style interior designed to evoke the casual charm of a Roman street bar. In theory, it sounds warm and transportive. In reality, it felt restrained to the point of bland.

I can’t help but think this place has been a victim of its own success; that being seen as ‘the best’ has actually, sort of, ruined it.

Like many Hong Kong establishments, Bar Leone is unassuming.

Street-level, dimly lit, and sparsely decorated, the space lacks the kind of visual drama or personality you might expect from a venue crowned ‘best in the world’.

WIN an overnight stay for two at ‘stylish’ Edinburgh hotel The Rutland

To celebrate the launch of The Getaway Expert, Metro’s exclusive travel newsletter, we’ve teamed up with The Rutland Hotel, Edinburgh to offer one lucky reader the chance to win a glamorous overnight stay for two, dinner and breakfast included.

To find out more and for your chance to win, simply submit your details in the form here before midnight on February 15, 2026.

Advertisement

You must be aged 18 or over to enter. T&Cs apply.

Inside, the room feels tight and crowded, with small tables that wobble when leaned on and little separation between guests. Rather than buzzing, it felt cramped, more functional than atmospheric.

And before we get to the drinks, there’s the wait.

Getting through the door of Bar Leone requires patience and a willingness to check WhatsApp obsessively. On arrival, a hostess takes your number and places you on a digital waitlist that updates sporadically.

I am told that five-hour waits are not uncommon. I started at number 57 and waited two and a half hours to reach the top three.

At one point, a drunk man in a dishevelled suit wielding a bamboo stick charged the entrance, only to be politely informed that he’d need to rejoin the digital queue.

‘Can we stay here, do you have a tent?’ he shouted. Welcome to the hunger games. 

Moments like this underline just how subjective lists like the World’s 50 Best Bars can be. Watching people endure hours-long waits made me wonder: was this about genuine love for the bar, or a desire to be part of the prestige attached to it?

For me, exclusivity does not mean quality. And waiting hours for what ultimately felt like a straightforward bar experience isn’t my idea of best in show. The interior, while tasteful, lacked imagination.

The vibe skewed more chaotic than convivial. Service, though polite, felt stretched, with water glasses going unrefilled, and once seated, attention was minimal.

Advertisement

Even the basics faltered. Last orders were called at 11:30pm, which is unusually early for Hong Kong’s buzzing nightlife scene, where bars commonly stay open until around 2am, and clubs run even later.

That’s the norm in nightlife districts such as Lan Kwai Fong and Soho, where late-night crowds never peak until after midnight.

So, when a bar with global plaudits cuts service so early, it feels like a missed opportunity, especially in a city built for late-night drinking.

These may sound like small details, but at this level, they matter. Isn’t this the bare minimum of bar etiquette?

To be fair, and this matters, the cocktails were genuinely excellent.

Advertisement

My olive oil sour was rich, balanced, and memorable. It was the kind of drink you stop talking mid-sentence to appreciate.

I didn’t get to try the food (by the time I was seated, I had just 45 minutes before closing), but TikTok has been relentless in flaunting a viral mortadella sandwich, which looks decadent and tempting.

For the uninitiated, the World’s 50 Best Bars list is often described as the Oscars of cocktail culture. Judged by hundreds of industry professionals worldwide, venues are assessed on creativity, technical skill, design, and overall experience.

While undeniably prestigious, the process is famously opaque. Voters are anonymous, criteria are broad, and results inevitably reflect prevailing tastes and trends, which can amplify hype just as much as quality.

Standing in the crowded entryway during my short stay, I couldn’t help but question Leone’s title.

Advertisement

While the drinks were outstanding, the overall experience didn’t live up to the promise. A number one bar, to me, should deliver consistency, comfort, and hospitality alongside innovation, not just one exceptional cocktail before ushering guests out the door.

So, is it worth the visit? In my opinion, no.

I understand why both judges and the public are drawn to Bar Leone: the pedigree, the drinks, the exclusivity. But the waitlist alone is enough to deter me from returning, especially when Hong Kong is packed with bars that offer equally strong cocktails and a more generous, enjoyable experience.

Places like Muis or Peridot, for example, impressed me far more. Both deliver inventive drinks without the chaos, offer warmer service, and create impressive, aesthetic and stimulating spaces where you want to linger.

But hey, maybe I was just cranky from the wait.

Advertisement

What’s your travel personality? Find your dream holiday and more with The Getaway Expert

Are you a Cultural Weekender or a Nature Nomad? Find your dream destination match and much more with The Getaway Expert , Metro’s new six-step guide to becoming a more confident traveller in 2026.

Over seven days, you’ll learn insider tips that will transform the way you travel, from how to get free stopovers in Istanbul to converting currency in real-time using the iPhone calculator app.

Sign up now.

Advertisement

MORE: Cathay Pacific economy review: I flew in the ‘World’s Best Economy’ seat — the highlight was a cup of soup

MORE: Japan cancels iconic cherry blossom festival — here’s the best places to see them in the UK

MORE: What not drinking enough water actually does to your body

Advertisement

Comments


Add as preferred source

The Getaway Expert

Your exclusive seven-day guide to travelling with confidence from Metro’s resident travel expert, Alice Murphy.

Advertisement

DARTS CHIEF Matt Porter has hinted that the PDC will change the Premier League Darts format in the future.

The tournament kicked off on Thursday with Michael van Gerwen winning the opening night in Newcastle.

The format of the Premier League Darts sees the eight players take each other on in a weekly knockout competition.

Each player faces each other at least once in the opening round, before it is then repeated in Weeks 9 to 15.

The format has faced criticism from fans who claim to be bored with repeated match-ups in the later stages of each night.

Porter has admitted that the format will change at some point, but presently, there is still enough interest as it is.

NO MIC TAKE

Darts star Michael van Gerwen facing probe after outburst live on Sky Sports

Advertisement

TURBO

Win a stunning VW Tiguan + £5,000 or £35,000 cash from just 12p with our code

Advertisement

Advertisement

He told the Metro: “We will change it at some point, but at the moment you can only look at the numbers that are in front of you.

“The live crowd and the TV audience, the numbers are telling us that the format is working.

“If people stop buying tickets or start changing the channel then it wouldn’t be working, but every metric is improving.

Porter did then reaffirmed that the format will be changed in the future.

BEST ONLINE CASINOS – TOP SITES IN THE UK

He added: “It’s not a format that will keep forever because we never keep any format forever in the Premier League.

“The format must have changed half a dozen times in the 20 years of the event.

“But at the moment, it’s still the right format, we believe, for what we’ve got.”

Porter is aware of the criticism the current format is facing and also admitted that sometimes fans will not get what they want at the oche.

PREMIER LEAGUE DARTS 2026 SCHEDULE AND RESULTS

He said: “I would accept that that is the biggest criticism of it. There is a lot of repetition.

“But you’re looking at it through the eyes of somebody who’s perhaps watching it on TV every week.

“If you’re in Nottingham, you want to see [Luke] Littler vs [Luke] Humphries.

“If you’re in Aberdeen, you might want to see the same, and if you’re in Brighton, you might want to see the same.

“It’s very difficult to turn around to people and say, ‘oh, sorry, you can’t see the biggest matchup in your city.’”

DELE ALLI has been snubbed from a move to League Two following his exit from Como.

The midfielder left the Serie A side in September 2025 and is currently a free agent.

Alli, 29, made just one appearance during his time in Italy, which ended after NINE minutes and with a red card.

It was his only taste of action on the pitch since he left Besiktas in February 2023.

He was a substitute in the 2-1 loss to AC Milan but was shown a red card in injury time for a foul on Ruben Loftus-Cheek.

Following the brief outing manage Cesc Fabregas left him on the outskirts of the team until his contract was terminated.

BECKS APPEAL

David Beckham signs exclusive deal as Man Utd legend joins Kane and Bellingham

Advertisement

TURBO

Win a stunning VW Tiguan + £5,000 or £35,000 cash from just 12p with our code

Advertisement

Since leaving Como, Alli has been left as a free agent despite multiple rumours linking him to clubs.

Rumours had also suggested he was closing in on a romantic return to MK Dons – where he made his professional debut at the age of 16.

But manager Paul Warne has insisted that there is nothing in the rumours.

He told the MK Citizen: “I haven’t heard anything about that.

BEST FREE BETS AND BETTING SIGN UP OFFERS

“There is absolutely no truth to it, unless I leave here and the owner pulls me aside!

“I’ve heard nothing, I’ve not spoken to him, we don’t know each other, we don’t have phone numbers, there’s no text banter.

“I’ve not seen him on the training pitch, he’s not asked to come and walk my dog!

“If you want to come here, it doesn’t matter if you’re one of the best players this club has ever had; you’ve still got to at least try and get on my good side!

Dele Alli’s club career by numbers

Here is a look at Dele Alli’s club career…

Milton Keynes Dons, 2012–2015

Tottenham Hotspur, 2015–2022

Milton Keynes Dons (loan), 2015

Advertisement

Everton, 2022–2024

Beşiktaş (loan), 2022–2023

Como, 2025

Advertisement

“I don’t know who started that rumour, but it’s crazy season.”

Reports have also suggested that there is still some interest in Alli with clubs in Spain taking a look.

It is claimed that four Spanish sides could be tempted to hand him a deal until the end of the season.

The clubs are said be Real Oviedo, Sevilla, Elche and Getafe who are all in LaLiga.

The order, issued on Friday, does not specify the rate that could be imposed, but uses 25% as an example. It says the tariff could apply to goods imported into the US from any nation that “directly or indirectly purchases, imports, or otherwise acquires any goods or services from Iran”.

Nothing elevates a present like beautiful wrapping; and when it comes to achieving a professional-level finish, who better to turn to for advice than one of the UK’s leading gift-wrapping experts?

When Jane Means started her own gift-wrapping business 31 years ago after spotting a gap in the market for such a service, it was an art that was rather undervalued in the UK. Now, she employs a team of 20 and offers gift-wrapping courses online and in person. She has also wrapped for the royal household and a host of luxury brands including Dior, Ralph Lauren and Tiffany and has launched her own line in wrapping paper, ribbons, tags and tape.

With Valentine’s Day approaching, we asked for her expert tips for wrapping any shape of present. For the low-down, see Jane’s step-by-step guides below.

You will need:

• Good-quality paper
• Tissue paper
• Scissors
• Double-sided tape
• Ribbons

How to wrap a bottle

Japan said goodbye to its last two giant pandas on January 27, as twins Xiao Xiao and Lei Lei were returned from their host country to China. Their departure has left Japan without any pandas for the first time since 1972, when Tokyo and Beijing normalised diplomatic ties.

The Chinese government has long pursued a strategy of giving or loaning giant pandas, which are found exclusively in China, to other countries to strengthen international ties and boost its global image. Widely known as “panda diplomacy”, this practice has seen more than 30 pandas sent to – or born in – Japan over the past 50 or so years.

However, relations between Tokyo and Beijing are currently tense. Comments made in November by Japan’s prime minister, Sanae Takaichi, that her country could respond militarily to a Chinese attack on Taiwan prompted an angry response from officials in Beijing.

And soon after, China announced it would be recalling Japan’s last two pandas from the Ueno Zoo in Tokyo a month ahead of schedule. The Tokyo metropolitan government had been negotiating with China to extend the pandas’ stay or loan new bears in their place. But these talks were put on hold and the pandas have subsequently been returned.

Panda diplomacy

China’s practice of sending pandas to foreign countries can be traced to the 7th century, when Empress Wu Zetian gifted two bears to Japan as a gesture of goodwill. However, modern panda diplomacy is often associated with the 1970s. That decade saw China open up and gift pandas to a number of major economies in an attempt to build ties, including the US and Japan in 1972, France in 1973 and the UK in 1974.

Due to declining wild panda populations, China stopped gifting pandas to other countries by 1984. Pandas were instead sent to foreign zoos on long-term loans, often lasting up to 15 years, with countries paying as much as US$1 million (£738,000) in “conservation fees” per year to keep them.

By the peak of panda diplomacy in 2019, a total of 21 countries or territories outside of China, Macau and Hong Kong had pandas. These were South Korea, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Qatar, Russia, Taiwan, Germany, Spain, Austria, Denmark, Belgium, Mexico, Australia, Thailand, Finland, Canada, Japan, the Netherlands, US and UK. That number has now dropped to 16.

One reason for this decline is that China has to be careful about which countries it chooses to engage in panda diplomacy with. Many Chinese people regard the giant panda as a national treasure, with the animal carrying deep emotional significance. Because of their status, the perceived mistreatment of pandas abroad can cause Beijing to receive intense backlash from nationalist circles at home.

For instance, when panda Le Le died of natural causes at Memphis Zoo in the US in 2023 and photos of his female companion Ya Ya looking thin and sickly surfaced online, speculation arose on Chinese social media that the US had mishandled the pandas. Some went as far as to accuse Chinese authorities of colluding with the zoo to cover up the incident.

For many of these people, the alleged mistreatment of the pandas was symbolic of what they saw as the US’s bullying of China. As one comment on the Weibo Chinese social media platform put it: “Treating our national treasure with such an attitude is an outright provocation of China”. Despite insistence by the Chinese foreign ministry that both pandas had been “well taken care of” in the US, Ya Ya’s stay was not extended.

The desire to avoid more public backlash may help explain why China recalled Japan’s last two pandas early and did not extend their stay. With tensions between China and Japan running high, it would have been difficult for officials in Beijing to justify why these cherished national symbols should stay in the hands of what many Chinese people see as a belligerent rival.

Panda diplomacy remains an effective tool of soft power for China. This was demonstrated by the 178,000 visitors that flocked to Ueno Zoo to catch a glimpse of Xiao Xiao and Lei Lei in the month after it was announced they would be returned. The public response was so strong that the zoo had to restrict visitor numbers to the panda viewing area to 4,800 people per day, with each visit limited to one minute.

Yet there are limits to using pandas as diplomatic tools, and not just due to the strength of nationalist feeling within China towards them. China’s practice of sending pandas to foreign nations has been heavily criticised by conservationists and animal advocates, who argue the bears are used as pawns in a game of geopolitical chess.

There are also question marks over whether the practice enhances conservation. While foreign zoos that host pandas send China millions of US dollars a year in conservation fees, the species is currently listed as “vulnerable” by the International Union for Conservation of Nature.

Panda diplomacy is a delicate balancing act. While it can help strengthen China’s international relationships, it also exposes Beijing to public backlash whenever its furry ambassadors become entangled in political disputes or welfare controversies.