The summit between Chinese president, Xi Jinping, and US president, Donald Trump, reportedly covered a lot of ground. The two leaders are said to have discussed trade, technology and the war in Iran, agreeing that Strait of Hormuz should be kept open. But the most potentially hazardous issue they covered was the future of Taiwan, which Xi said if handled poorly, could lead to conflict and “an extremely dangerous situation”.

The danger is not simply that Xi and Trump disagree over Taiwan’s future. It is that actions one leader may see as defensive could easily be interpreted by the other as evidence of hostile intent. It’s a security dilemma that is well known in international diplomacy.

For Washington, arms sales to Taiwan, including a recent multibillion-dollar package, are intended to strengthen deterrence and reduce the likelihood of conflict by making coercion more costly for Beijing. But even ostensibly defensive arms sold to Taiwan appear immensely threatening to the Chinese government, given Beijing’s determination to restore Taiwan to Chinese sovereignty.

Chinese fears that Washington’s arms sales will embolden the Taiwanese leadership to seek independence are mirrored in US fears that China will seek to use force to reunify Taiwan. In the weeks and months before the summit, in a clear signal to Trump and the leaders in Taipei that China means business, Beijing ramped up the scale and frequency of its military exercises and drills.

À lire aussi :
Trump-Xi summit: US president says he will discuss arms sales to Taiwan – breaking decades of US policy

The danger is not that either side necessarily wants war. It is that both sides may believe they are acting defensively while interpreting the other side’s defensive moves as preparation for aggression.

History suggests that the danger of a superpower clash can sometimes be reduced through direct leader-to-leader diplomacy. One important example came during the final decade of the cold war.

Following the 1983 Able Archer crisis (when Soviet leaders reportedly feared that a Nato nuclear exercise might conceal preparations for a real nuclear strike) the then US president, Ronald Reagan, began to reconsider how Moscow interpreted US actions. Reading intelligence reports on Soviet fears, Reagan reflected that “maybe they are scared of us and think we are a threat”.

He concluded that he wanted to go “face to face” with Soviet leaders to explore whether the US-Soviet conflict was being driven by mutual fear and misperceptions.

That instinct helped pave the way for Reagan’s later diplomacy with Mikhail Gorbachev. Their meetings in Geneva (1985), Reykjavik (1986), and Washington (1988) did not erase geopolitical rivalry, but they did help create a degree of interpersonal trust between the two leaders. That trust mattered. It reduced the risk that every military move or diplomatic signal would automatically be interpreted in the most threatening way.

The lesson is not that Trump is Reagan or Xi is Gorbachev. Nor is it that personal diplomacy can magically solve a conflict as deep as Taiwan. The lesson is more modest, but also more urgent. Potential adversaries need leaders who can recognise when fear and misperceptions of the other side’s hostile intent might be driving a conflict, rather than genuine malign intent.

Communication and trust

In our upcoming book on interpersonal diplomacy and trust in international relations, we describe this process through the concept of “security dilemma sensibility”. This is the willingness to recognise that an adversary’s actions may stem from insecurity and fear as well as aggressive intent. Such moments are rare, but they can become critically important in preventing rivalry from sliding into catastrophe.

Direct leader-to-leader communication matters. It allows rivals to bypass some of the bureaucratic, political, and military filters through which signals are often distorted. The Biden-Xi summit in San Francisco in 2023 produced an important agreement to restore high-level military-to-military communications after relations had deteriorated sharply following Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan. Biden later remarked that both leaders had agreed they should be able to “pick up the phone and call directly and we’d be heard immediately”.

That kind of trusted communication channel matters enormously during crises, where silence, delay, or misinterpretation can rapidly intensify fears on both sides. But communication alone is not enough. Without at least some degree of mutual trust and security dilemma sensibility, even direct exchanges risk being dismissed as manipulative or deceptive.

That is the challenge now facing Trump and Xi over Taiwan. Trump’s transactional approach to diplomacy makes the problem especially acute. Beijing may wonder whether Taiwan is something Trump might bargain over. Taipei and US allies may worry that American commitments are less firm than Washington claims. And Trump himself may believe that personal rapport with Xi can substitute for the hard work of clarifying red lines, managing deterrence and reducing the risk of both inadvertent and deliberate escalation.

Exercising security dilemma sensibility would require both leaders to recognise that actions intended as defensive by one side are often experienced as threatening by the other. For Washington, this means appreciating why Beijing views growing US military and political support for Taiwan as a challenge to a core national objective. For Beijing, it means recognising that coercive military pressure around Taiwan deepens fears in Washington and Taipei that China is preparing to impose a solution by force.

If the summit produces only theatrical displays of toughness or transactional bargaining, the deeper dangers in the relationship will remain. But if Trump and Xi can strengthen channels of direct communication while demonstrating a greater awareness of each other’s fears and insecurities, they may reduce the risk that a future Taiwan crisis spirals through miscalculation into catastrophe.

The real test of the Trump-Xi summit is not whether either leader comes out as a winner in the eyes of their domestic constituencies and wider global opinion. They need to leave understanding that deterrence doesn’t just fail when leaders appear weak. It can also fail when they are so convinced of their own defensive intent that they can’t see how threatening they look to the other side.

Dorothy Bain is reportedly moving on after five years in the job.

The Lord Advocate is poised to quit after a controversial period in office.

Dorothy Bain has reportedly told the First Minister she intends to leave the role.

Bain was criticised this year over claims she tipped off John Swinney about details of the criminal case against former SNP chief executive Peter Murrell.

Swinney previously said he had “absolute confidence” in the Lord Advocate, but The Scotsman has reported she is standing down.

The new Scottish Parliament is set to swear in Swinney as first minister next week and one of his jobs will be identifying a new Lord Advocate.

Bain, like her predecessors, faced accusations the job amounted to a conflict of interest.

She is head of the prosecution service and the top legal adviser to the Government, which critics say is unacceptable.

READ MORE: Andy Burnham confirms bid for Parliament return – but hurdles still remainREAD MORE: Wes Streeting resigns as Health Secretary to force leadership contest against Keir Starmer

This is a breaking news story – we’ll bring you updates, pictures and video as it happens.

For the latest news and breaking news visit: https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/

Here you can get your must-see news, features, videos and pictures throughout the day from the Daily Record, Sunday Mail and Record Online.

Get all the big headlines, pictures, analysis, opinion and video on the stories that matter to you.

You can also check out our social media channels for live updates.Follow us on Twitter @Record_Politics for the latest news.

Or you can catch all the action by following our team: @paulhutcheon and @dennynews.

We’re on Facebook where you can join our Record Politics group for all our stories.

We also have a weekly politics podcast, Planet Holyrood, which you can listen to Spotify or Apple music, or watch on the Daily Record YouTube channel.

Don’t forget to follow us on Instagram and TikTok for the best bits of the podcast.

One seaside town in Dorset has been ranked the UK’s safest bet for a beach holiday in the spring, if the sun decides not to play ball and the rains decide to fall

The UK has seen a fair amount of both rain and sunshine in recent days. With the unpredictability of spring weather, many worry about booking holidays just to be faced with grey skies.

According to a new study, one UK beach town is far better equipped than most when the weather takes a turn.

An analysis of weather data and geographical information by Parkdean Resorts found the best beaches to visit on a rainy day.

Bournemouth, a hotspot in Dorset scores 95 out of 100 on the company’s new Rainy Day Index, which considers nearby indoor attractions, shelter opportunities and weather data.

With seven miles of coastline and 12 nearby indoor facilities to take shelter in, Bournemouth beats destinations such as Exmouth Beach and Weymouth Beach – which came in second and third places with 6 and 7 indoor attractions respectively.

READ MORE: Little-known 10p UK rail ticket could help cut down your journey timeREAD MORE: Man stranded in Magaluf after Lightning McQueen shoes left him with brain injury

For tourists lucky enough to visit on a sunny day, there are the classic deckchairs and sandy seaside sunshine to bask in. In fact, Bournemouth beach is perhaps the most prominent and famous seaside town beaches in the whole of the UK.

If you’re not lucky enough to turn up when the sun is shining, the town offers rainy-day entertainment with everything from aquariums and museums to indoor climbing centres and theatres.

One of the biggest spots is Russell-Cotes Art Gallery & Museum, a striking clifftop Victorian mansion overlooking the sea, packed with art, travel collections and period interiors.

For families with kids, the Oceanarium, home to sharks, turtles and tropical sea creatures, might be worth a visit – as well as RockReef on the pier, which combines indoor climbing walls, adventure activities and the popular PierZip attraction.

More indoor attractions include screenings at the BH2 cinema complex, shows at the historic Bournemouth Pavilion Theatre and shopping and café-hopping in nearby Westbourne Village.

Advertisement

To make the most of the promenade and beaches when the weather clears up, make sure to include family-friendly spots like Alum Chine Beach and the upmarket Sandbanks Beach in the itinerary.

A short trip out of Bournemouth will take you to Durdle Door – a striking geological monument which hangs over the sea.

One of the best-known attractions year-round, no matter the weather, is the town’s Lower Gardens. They stretch from the town centre down towards the seafront with walking trails, floral displays and open green spaces.

Cyclists can also enjoy the ride towards Hengistbury Head, followd by either a land train along the promenade or pit stops at the many restaurants and bars overlooking the water.

The ranking of the top 10 “rainproof” beaches also included Woolacombe Beach, Paignton Sands, Sandbanks Beach, Llandudno North Shore Beach, Bridlington South Beach, Rhyl Beach and Portobello Beach.

Alan Rothwell, who played David Barlow, the brother of Ken Barlow (William Roache) on the long-running ITV soap, died on Thursday, following a short illness.

Mr Rothwell’s family said he died “peacefully in hospital”.

In a statement, his family said: “Alan was a professional radio, television, film and stage actor and director whose career spanned more than 70 years.

“Beyond his professional achievements, he was a loving husband, father, grandfather and uncle.

“He will be fondly remembered and deeply missed by his family, friends, colleagues and the many people whose lives he touched through his work.”

Coronation Street’s Alan Rothwell dies aged 89

Born in Oldham in 1937, Mr Rothwell was a prolific actor in the 1960s, appearing in TV series such as Gideon’s Way and The Villains.

Coronation Street creator Tony Warren, who had worked with Rothwell on BBC Radio’s Children’s Hour during their childhoods, created the role of David Barlow specifically for him.

William Roache paid tribute to his former colleague.

Mr Roache said: “I am very sorry to hear of Alan’s passing.

“He and I worked together on the very first episodes of Coronation Street, which was such a wonderful time, I got to know him well over the years, he was a very good actor and a delightful man.

“I send my thoughts and condolences to his family.”

The Longest-Running UK Soaps

Mr Rothwell also appeared as Nicholas Black in Brookside during the 1980s and was the presenter of children’s television programmes Picture Box and Hickory House.

He said: “We’re very sorry to hear of Alan Rothwell’s passing and extend our sincerest condolences to his family at this very sad time.

“He created an iconic and memorable character in David Barlow and will forever be remembered as one of the original cast members of Coronation Street.”

CHIYAH, Lebanon (AP) — Ayman al-Zain watched on a recent afternoon as a bulldozer cleared the rubble of what used to be his sports clothing store, which was one of dozens of buildings destroyed in Israeli strikes against the Hezbollah militant group.

With a nominal truce in place that has reduced but not halted the fighting, Al-Zain tried to assess whether to rebuild the shop in Beirut’s southern suburbs that he once hoped to pass down to his kids. But it’s unlikely he will be able to do so anytime soon, and not only because of the fear of more airstrikes.

“Everything is expensive,” he told The Associated Press. “If I want to open a new store and get mannequins, hangers and some accessories, the prices are very different than before.”

The U.S.-Israeli war with Iran, and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, have sent economic shock waves across the Mideast. In Lebanon, those woes have been compounded by the country’s existing economic problems and by largely unregulated markets that are vulnerable to price gouging.

“This continues to be a major economic shock, one of honestly an existential nature,” said Economy Minister Amer Bisat, who is part of the Lebanese Cabinet that came into office over a year ago on a reformist agenda.

Problems have piled up for years

Since 2019, the tiny Mediterranean country has been in the throes of an economic crisis that pulverized the value of its local currency and its banking system.

That’s when Lebanese banks collapsed, which evaporated depositors’ savings and plunged about half of the population of 6.5 million into poverty, after decades of rampant corruption, waste and mismanagement. The country suffered some $70 billion in losses in its financial sector, further compounded by about $11 billion in the 2024 war between Israel and Hezbollah, according to the World Bank. The Lebanese pound has since lost over 90% of its value against the U.S. dollar.

The cash-strapped state electricity company provides only a few hours of power a day, and most Lebanese rely on diesel generators to make up the difference. That makes the economy particularly vulnerable to fuel price increases.

Lebanon was already “grappling with multiple rounds of crises,” said Mohamad Faour, professor of finance at the American University of Beirut. “So this round of war only made an already fragile situation more fragile.”

With this new war, 1.2 million Lebanese have been displaced, largely from southern Lebanon and Beirut’s southern suburbs. Many are sheltering in schools with no work or draining whatever money they have renting out apartments or hotel rooms.

Economy suffers job losses and crippling inflation

In an interview with the AP from his office, Bisat estimated that the country faces an economic loss of around 7% of its gross domestic product due to the war because “companies are closing, people are losing their jobs, tourists are not showing up.”

Evidence of inflation abounds.

In the usually bustling produce market in Sabra, south of Beirut, vendor Ahmad al-Farra looked dejected as an elderly woman shopping for watermelon, tomatoes and potatoes walked away without buying anything after checking the price tags.

Prices have spiked since the U.S. and Israel launched a war against Iran on Feb. 28, followed quickly by a resurgence of war between Israel and Hezbollah.

“We’re keeping our prices low so we can sell, and even then we’re not selling,” al-Farra said as the sound of an Israeli drone whizzed overhead.

Even consumers who can afford to spend are anxious and cutting back on nonessential purchases, leaving many businesses empty.

Riad Aboulteif, who runs several restaurants and bars in the capital, said his revenue has dropped by some 90% since the war began, as Lebanon’s shrinking middle class cuts costs.

People are saving more money for their survival and not making plans to celebrate birthdays or other special occasions, he said at one of his bars in the bustling Hamra district of Beirut, where the loud chatter of customers once overpowered the jazz music coming through the sound system.

That night, only a few tables were occupied. He’s had to downsize his staff and restructure his menus to offer more affordable items.

War fuels price gouging

Meanwhile, the country’s bankrupt government has struggled to crack down on unfair and illicit profiteering and the hoarding of fuel and other essential items.

Many agricultural areas in southern and eastern Lebanon are no longer accessible because of airstrikes and clashes, but al-Faraa believes suppliers have raised prices beyond what is necessary to cover cost increases.

Some of the starkest increases have been in generator bills.

Families and businesses for years have paid multiple utility bills to cover privately supplied electricity and water in the absence of government services. Neighborhood generator owners charge a monthly fee, and some landlords have their own generators and charge the cost to tenants.

Frustrated business owners have said that generator bills have doubled at times, forcing them to shorten their hours of operation or even close on some days to cut costs.

“If we didn’t take these measures, we cannot continue,” Aboulteif said.

Bisat said his ministry has conducted over 4,000 inspections of private generators, gas stations and shops across the country since the start of the war in March and lodged dozens of complaints to the courts. But the issue will not be quickly resolved.

In the meantime, the government has little ability to crack down on the handful of companies that import and distribute fuel and other goods.

No sign of relief on the horizon

With no end to the war in sight, the economic situation shows no sign of easing.

A tenuous ceasefire is in place between the U.S. and Iran, but talks between Washington and Tehran are gridlocked. A nominal truce between Israel and Hezbollah has reduced but not stopped the fighting in Lebanon.

For now, Lebanese families and business owners are confronting the challenges day by day and hoping for the best.

“Only God knows how we’ve been trying to manage ourselves,” al-Farra said.

David Tennant has opened up about working with “difficult” actors, admitting he “takes it personally” when a bad atmosphere is created on set, as Rivals returns to Disney+

The Rivals star David Tennant has confessed he “takes it personally” when discussing “difficult” actors. The former Doctor Who star acknowledges that many in his industry are perceived as “self-involved” and “narcissistic”.

However, David maintains that the majority of actors he’s worked with during his career have been “great”. The 55-year-old goes as far as saying he genuinely enjoys spending time with his fellow performers.

That said, he has come across some “difficult” characters along the way. He shared this insight during an appearance on the Inside of You podcast with Michael Rosenbaum.

When questioned whether he’s worked with anyone he “can’t stand”, David responded: “I’m sure I have, I’m sure you have too.

“Most actors are great, I’d say, and I think it’s always worth saying that because we do have that reputation as a profession, of being self-involved, narcissistic, and awful.”

“But 95 percent of people might have a smattering of that but actually, they’re interesting people, they’re fun people, they’re creative people. I enjoy being with actors. I enjoy hanging out with actors.”

David does concede there are certain individuals he finds challenging to collaborate with. He describes these as people who “get going” by creating a “bad atmosphere”.

He added: “But every now and again…the trouble is the industry indulges it because if somebody is worth something to a production, they are cosseted and protected and that breeds a behaviour. That can be difficult to navigate.

“I’m not very good with a bad atmosphere and I take it very personally and find it hard to operate. For some people it’s like their engine, isn’t it? They come on, they p**s everyone off, and that gives them a little bit of catnip. That gets them going.

“For me it’s the absolute opposite. If I feel I’m being accommodated, I want to flay my own skin off, so I find it very difficult to be around that kind of personality, that kind of energy.”

Rivals, adapted from Dame Jilly Cooper’s Rutshire Chronicles novel series, makes its comeback on Disney+ today (May 15). The opening three episodes drop at 7am.

New instalments will follow on a weekly schedule, with a further batch of episodes due later this year.

David reprises his role as Lord Tony Baddingham, the merciless managing director of Corinium Television. He’ll share the screen with Emily Atack, Aidan Turner and Alex Hassall.

The official synopsis for Rivals states: “In the second season, the battle for the Central South West television franchise reaches fever pitch as the war between Corinium and Venturer enters a dangerous new phase.

“More ruthless than ever, Tony Baddingham is determined to dismantle his rivals piece-by-piece, weaponising scandal and manipulating those closest to him to maintain his grip on power.”

Five Italian tourists were exploring caves in the Maldives at a depth of 50 meters

Advertisement

Five tourists, including a mum and her daughter, have died during an underwater diving trip in the Maldives.

The holidaymakers were exploring Vaavu Atoll 160ft underwater on Thursday, May 15, when tragedy struck. Police have since launched a probe into the incident. The cause of their deaths is unknown at this stage.

The five deceased divers have been identified as university professor Monica Montefalcone and her 20-year-old daughter Giorgia Sommacal, Muriel Oddenino of Turin, Gianluca Benedetti of Padua and Federico Gualtieri of Borgomanero, according to reports. All five of the victims are Italian.

Italy’s foreign ministry said: “Following an accident during a scuba dive, five Italians died in the Vaavu atoll, in the Maldives.”

It added that the five people died “while attempting to explore caves at a depth of 50 meters”.

Advertisement

Local authorities rushed to the scene after being alerted to group’s disappearance at about 1.45pm local time. An urgent search operation was launched before their bodies were found.

It is understood that the divers boarded the foreign-operated live-aboard diving vessel, the Duke of York yacht, before disappearing near Alimatha, one of the Atoll’s most popular diving spots.

The area faced strong winds of up to 30mph and a yellow warning had been issued earlier in the day.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Italian Embassy in Colombo, Sri Lanka, said they have been contacting the victims’ families.

Local Italian media has citied diving experts that the sudden deaths could have been caused by oxygen toxicity. This can cause tissue damage and affect the central nervous system. It is caused by breathing oxygen at high pressure for an extended period.

The company operating the Duke of York yacht provides nitrox, according to its website, a breathing mixture for scuba divers made from nitrogen and oxygen.