Dozens of construction workers have been pulled alive from metal containers after they were trapped by a deadly Himalayan avalanche for around 36 hours, according to authorities in northern India.

The Indian Army launched a rescue operation after heavy snowfall triggered the avalanche last Friday near a construction site in the village of Mana, Uttarakhand state, about 10,500 feet (3,200 meters) above sea level.

Some 46 workers survived inside the containers, Indo-Tibetan Border Police and the Indian Army said. Eight workers were killed, officials said.

Many of those rescued were migrant laborers constructing a highway in the remote region, according to local authorities.

The decision likely saved many lives, he said.

“The containers… kept people safe and in fact made the rescue efforts easier because to find a body buried under such dense snow is much harder than finding a large container,” he said.

Photos posted to an Indian Army X account showed soldiers with sniffer dogs surrounding partially crushed metal containers in deep snow.

“Whoever could be taken out immediately was taken out … we got full support,” one unnamed survivor said from his hospital bed in a video attached to the post.

Avalanches and landslides are common in the Himalayas, especially during winter. But the human-induced climate crisis is making extreme weather events more severe and increasingly unpredictable.

Glaciers in the Himalayas melted 65% faster in the 2010s compared with the previous decade, which suggests rising temperatures are already having an impact in the area, according to a 2023 report by the International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development.

The erosion of glacial slopes also heightens the likelihood of floods, landslides and avalanches, increasing the risk to millions living in mountain communities.

In 2021, more than 200 people died after part of a glacier collapsed in Uttarakhand, carrying a deadly mixture of ice, rock and water that tore through a mountain gorge and crashed through a dam.

A contentious law that allows South Africa’s government to expropriate land – without compensation in some cases – has enraged the United States, triggering aid cuts by Washington and outbursts from President Donald Trump.

Many fear that the African nation could now potentially lose some of its US trade privileges as relations between the two countries deteriorate.

South Africa is the largest beneficiary of the African Growth and Opportunities Act (AGOA), a US trade agreement that provides preferential duty-free access to US markets for eligible Sub-Saharan African nations.

Some US lawmakers want those benefits withdrawn when AGOA is reviewed this year.

What has angered the US?

In January, South Africa enacted the Expropriation Act, seeking to undo the legacy of apartheid, which created huge disparities in land ownership among its majority Black and minority White population.

Under apartheid, non-White South Africans were forcibly dispossessed from their lands for the benefit of Whites. Today, some three decades after racial segregation officially ended in the country, Black South Africans, who comprise over 80% of the population of 63 million, own only around 4% of private land.

The expropriation law empowers South Africa’s government to take land and redistribute it – with no obligation to pay compensation in some instances – if the seizure is found to be “just and equitable and in the public interest.”

President Cyril Ramaphosa said the legislation would “ensure public access to land in an equitable and just manner.” But the White House disagrees.

Trump and his South African-born billionaire adviser Elon Musk believe that the land reform policy discriminates against White South Africans. Sanctions have since followed.

Responding to a post by Ramaphosa on X about the new legislation, Musk asked: “Why do you have openly racist ownership laws?”

In an executive order issued on February 7, Trump revoked all aid for South Africa, accusing the country of human rights violations. He also denounced South Africa’s stance against Israel’s war in Gaza, saying the nation undermined US national interests.

The executive order did not specify what aid was being halted but nearly $440 million was committed to South Africa in 2023 – the bulk of which went to its health sector – according to data on the US Foreign Assistance website.

Ramaphosa said in a post on X before the order was issued that, “with the exception of PEPFAR Aid (the US President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief) which constitutes 17% of South Africa’s HIVAids programme, there is no other funding that is received by South Africa from the United States.”

“Based on the changes in trade policy and national interests of the US government, the possibility of changes and South Africa’s exclusion does exist,” he said.

To remain eligible for AGOA, a benefiting nation “must demonstrate respect for rule of law, human rights … (and) should also not seek to undermine US foreign policy interests,” according to requirements outlined on its website.

In a letter to Trump on February 11, US Rep. Andy Ogles and three other Republican congressmen called for South Africa’s duty-free access to the US market to be withdrawn and for diplomatic ties to be suspended, expressing disapproval of its land reforms, its alleged “vendetta against Israel” and its “embrace of China.”

What happens if South Africa is cut off from AGOA?

South Africa’s exports are partly driven by agriculture, which accounted for 10% of the country’s total export earnings in 2021, according to the National Agricultural Marketing Council (NAMC). South Africa is the main agricultural exporter under AGOA and its largest beneficiary, according to the US Department of Agriculture.

In a 2023 report, the department said that two-thirds of South Africa’s agricultural exports to the US “are exported tariff-free under AGOA,” with exporters of citrus, wine and fruit juice among the top beneficiaries.

“South Africa is likely to face higher tariffs of about 3% for agricultural exports to the USA should the country be ineligible for AGOA benefits,” he said.

“The loss of preferential market access for the agricultural sector could lead to reduced foreign exchange earnings, decreased competitiveness of South African agricultural products in the USA, and potential job losses,” Thindisa added.

The move might also run counter to the Trump administration’s apparent aims. Stripping South Africa of its AGOA privileges on account of its expropriation law would hurt the same White farmers whom the US seeks to protect, according to Chrispin Phiri, a spokesperson for the country’s foreign minister.

He added that: “It’s a known fact that most of our commercial farmers are White. They are the ones who are in the majority in the commercial agricultural sector, and they have a commercial gain from an agreement like AGOA. So, the very same people that you believe are being persecuted would be persecuted by such a volatile decision.”

“It would affect us considerably and threaten local jobs,” he said. “It is difficult to estimate precisely to what extent. Citrus is the economic heart of Citrusdal, and any shocks or changes in the industry affect the entire rural community.”

Justin Chadwick, who heads South Africa’s Citrus Growers Association (CGA), said the group was concerned about the situation.

“If AGOA is not renewed, it will create a challenging environment for South African citrus. AGOA ensures our citrus isn’t subject to US tariffs. A US tariff on South African citrus would make our fruit more expensive for American consumers.”

“To give you an idea of how many jobs are currently connected to US citrus export: an estimated 35,000 local jobs from farm level throughout the supply chain as well as an additional 20,000 jobs in the US are sustained by US-SA citrus exports. Without AGOA, these jobs will surely be under threat.”

At least 100,000 pallets of citrus are shipped to the US from South Africa annually, he said, adding that “South Africa’s entire North American exports make up around 9% of our total citrus exports.”

Are there other markets to turn to?

Outside the Americas region, which accounted for 6% of South Africa’s agricultural exports in 2024, the African continent is the main market for the country’s agricultural goods, making up 42% of its agricultural exports, according to the Agricultural Business Chamber of South Africa (Agbiz).

Other export destinations include Asia and the Middle East, which together totaled 21%, and the European Union, which made up 19% of South Africa’s agricultural exports for 2024, Agbiz data showed.

Despite the comparatively lower trade volume, the US market “matters significantly,” according to Wandile Sihlobo, chief economist at Agbiz.

“Firstly, the exports (to the US) are concentrated in specific industries, mainly nuts, citrus, wines, grapes, and fruit juices. This means while the risks associated with this market are not as significant in proportion to overall agricultural exports, they present challenges to specific industries,” he said.

Secondly, Sihlobo said, “the negative sentiment arising from any confrontation with the Americas region would have negative effects on South Africa’s agriculture.
It is, therefore, vital that South Africa maintains positive agricultural relations with this region.”

For the citrus grower Van der Merwe, finding an alternative destination for his produce if South Africa is removed from AGOA and exporting to the US becomes less profitable would not be easy.

“We would still probably export quantities (of) citrus to the US, but given that the usual tariffs would then apply, it would be a big setback,” he said. “South African citrus is valued in other markets like the Middle East and the EU, and switching to those markets if it is more profitable can be considered. But the volume of exports for us to the US is large, it will be difficult for it to be absorbed elsewhere.”

Can South Africa mend its ties with the US?

South African leader Ramaphosa said on Thursday he was ready to “do a deal” with the US to repair their plummeting relations.

“We would like to go to the United States to do a deal,” he said while responding to questions from Richard Gnodde, vice chairman of US bank Goldman Sachs, during a conference in Johannesburg.

“We don’t want to go and explain ourselves,” he added. “We want to go and do a meaningful deal with the United States on a whole range of issues.”

Ramaphosa did not specify what the deal would entail but noted it would span trade, diplomatic and political issues.

“We decided that it’s not best to have a knee-jerk reaction,” Ramaphosa said of Trump’s executive order cutting aid to his nation. “We wanted to let the dust settle.”

To seasoned diplomatic observers, US President Donald Trump’s furious dressing down of Volodymyr Zelensky in the Oval Office was a planned political mugging, a trap set by the Trump administration to discredit the Ukrainian leader and remove him as an obstacle to whatever comes next.

Whether it was orchestrated or not, Moscow – which reacted with glee to the White House slanging match – is now anticipating talks aimed at rebuilding the US-Russia relationship will continue, even accelerate, in the weeks ahead.

Nothing has been announced in public. But, privately, there’s talk of the Trump-Putin summit, always on the cards, now being fast-tracked.

There is also renewed optimism in Moscow that, with President Zelensky at odds with President Trump and his team, difficult negotiations to end the war in Ukraine will now take a back seat to a raft of potentially lucrative US-Russia economic deals already being tabled behind closed doors.

Riyadh, in Saudi Arabia, is where the US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov led the first round of extraordinary talks last month, sidelining Ukraine.

Separately, the Financial Times is reporting that there have been efforts to involve US investors in the restarting Russia’s Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline to Europe, which Germany halted at the beginning of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Dmitriev has called for the Trump administration and Russia to start “building a better future for humanity,” and to “focus on investment, economic growth, AI breakthroughs,” and long-term joint scientific projects like “Mars exploration,” even posting a highly produced computer graphic, on Elon Musk’s X social media platform, showing an imagined joint US-Russia-Saudi mission to Mars, on board what appears to be a Space X rocket.

Putting aside the many risks, there are clearly vast profits to be made in doing business with Russia, which incidentally also has the world’s fourth biggest reserves of rare earths, far bigger than Ukraine’s.

That clearly appeals to the mercantile President Trump, whose relentless pursuit of a lucrative deal is being harnessed by the Russian state.

“Trump’s business acumen crushes Biden’s narratives. The attempt to defeat Russia collapsed,” Dmitriev commented on X.

But what has been witnessed since Trump’s inauguration in January seems to be about way more than money but a fundamental resetting of US-Russia ties.

By so closely embracing the Kremlin, the Trump administration risks turning its back on the Western allies, leaving Europe isolated in a seismic shift of Washington’s global stance.

Even the Kremlin, somewhat taken aback by the speed of events, has publicly taken note.

“The new (US) administration is rapidly changing all foreign policy configurations. This largely coincides with our vision,” the Kremlin spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, told Russian state television in remarks which aired Sunday.

But why the US president would choose the Kremlin over America’s traditional partners remains the subject of intense speculation.

Much of it, like the frequent suggestion that Trump is somehow a Kremlin agent, or beholden to Putin, is without evidence.

Perhaps the right-wing US ideological fantasy that Russia is a natural US ally in a future confrontation with China, and can be broken away from its most important backer, is motivating Washington’s dramatic geopolitical shift.

But for many bewildered observers, both explanations for Trump’s extraordinary pivot to the Kremlin seem equally misplaced.

The usually strained, if not openly hostile, relationship between the US and Russia appears to be entering a new and radical phase.

Massive snowstorms and record heat hit eastern China over the weekend, with residents of one province wrapping up against driving snow and their compatriots down the coast heading outdoors to enjoy ice cream.

Blizzards on Sunday swept across the eastern province of Shandong, south of Beijing, with snow piling up to 13 centimeters (5.1 inches) deep in some areas, according to state-run outlet the Global Times.

Photos from provincial capital Jinan showed residents bundled up in thick coats and boots, workers shoveling snow from roads, and parks boasting newly-built snowmen.

City authorities issued two red alerts for road ice and blizzard dangers, while several districts canceled classes for Monday, the Global Times reported.

Travel was also disrupted, with delays on multiple high-speed rail lines through the province.

But about 400 miles down the coast in the finance hub of Shanghai, residents experienced a weekend of record heat.

The city of almost 25 million recorded its hottest early March in more than 150 years, according to the Global Times.

Temperatures hit a new early March record on Saturday – then rose even higher on Sunday to 28.5 degrees Celsius (83 Fahrenheit). Residents took advantage of the unseasonably warm weather, flocking outdoors in t-shirts and shorts; photos from the city show people eating ice cream in the sun and children frolicking in public fountains.

Temperatures in Shanghai are expected to drop in the coming days. But the vastly different conditions across the country reflect the increasingly unpredictable climate that in recent years has brought soaring temperatures, prolonged droughts and devastating floods.

Last year was China’s hottest since nationwide records began more than 60 years ago and in Shanghai, it was the warmest year since the Qing dynasty, Reuters reported, citing local authorities.

It was a weekend for the history books. What began with US President Donald Trump furiously berating Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in the White House ended with a show of European unity in London and vows to wrestle negotiations over the Russia-Ukraine war away from the US.

Here are five key takeaways from a public bust-up that has profound implications for Washington’s relationship with some of its strongest allies:

Zelensky-Trump fallout

The unprecedented scenes that unfolded in the Oval Office on Friday appalled Western allies, but came after weeks of fundamental changes in transatlantic relations led by a new White House administration pushing an “America First” agenda.

Those changes first became apparent when US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said last month that Kyiv joining NATO was unrealistic – upending the alliance’s stated policy while handing Russia a major concession – and told European allies the US will no longer prioritize European and Ukrainian security.

Later, Vice President JD Vance made a blistering speech to European leaders in Munich, claiming they are suppressing free speech, losing control of immigration, refusing to work with hard-right parties in government – and that the biggest threat they face comes “from within,” rather than China and Russia.

And Trump had already wrongly accused Kyiv of starting the conflict and labeled Zelensky a “dictator.”

Then Zelensky met Trump on Friday as their two countries tried to hammer out an agreement that would give Washington access to Kyiv’s mineral resources in exchange for investment and what Ukraine hopes would be concrete security guarantees.

That deal looks off the table for now after the fiery showdown which saw the Ukrainians instructed to leave the White House, accused of being ungrateful for American military support.

Europe steps up

Western nations were quick to signal their continued support for Zelensky and his war-torn country.

On Saturday Zelensky arrived in London, where British Prime Minister Keir Starmer embraced him in front of the TV cameras. That warm reception also extended to a meeting with King Charles at Sandringham House.

But it was at a crucial summit of European leaders in London that European unity and allyship with Ukraine was on full display, as they attempted to forge a path toward a ceasefire and ramp up ongoing military support for Kyiv.

Starmer told the summit that the West is at a “crossroads in history” and “this is not a moment for more talk. It’s time to act.”

NATO chief Mark Rutte said more countries agreed to ramp up defense spending, and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said it was vital for Europe to “rearm” and would present a plan to do that this week.

Fresh plan to stop the fighting

During the meeting, France and Britain proposed an alternative peace deal for Ukraine that would involve a month-long limited ceasefire, French President Emmanuel Macron told Le Figaro newspaper.

Countries would enter a “coalition of the willing” to defend a deal and guarantee peace, Starmer said, and his country would back this with “boots on the ground and planes in the air.”

Any potential peace plan would have to involve Russia, but Moscow would not dictate the terms of “any security guarantee,” Starmer added. Zelensky has not said whether he agreed with the proposal and Russia has already said it will not accept European troops as peacekeepers.

And it remains to be seen whether this proposal has legs with the White House, which has pursued direct peace talks with Moscow that currently do not include Ukraine or Europe.

American support still needed

What was clear from the meeting is that US support is still crucial for Ukraine peace efforts. Starmer reiterated any plan would need “strong US backing.”

Since his disastrous visit to Washington, Zelensky has repeatedly expressed his gratitude for both US and European military support. “There has not been a day when we have not felt this gratitude,” he said in his nightly address Sunday night.

Zelensky said on Saturday his country was ready to sign the rare minerals deal with the US, and called the US a “strategic partner,” saying it would not benefit anyone other than Russia if US assistance to Ukraine were to stop.

A win for Putin

Putin has been tight lipped about the Oval Office fracas although Russian state media and officials have reacted with glee.

Moscow is now anticipating talks aimed at rebuilding the US-Russia relationship will continue in the weeks ahead and, though nothing has been announced in public, there’s talk of a Trump-Putin summit being fast-tracked.