Global News Podcast - Prince Andrew gives up royal titles

Episode Date: October 18, 2025

Britain's Prince Andrew is handing back his royal titles after new allegations emerged over his links to the late sex offender, Jeffrey Epstein. Andrew — who made the announcement following a discussion with King Charles — will no longer be known as the Duke of York but will remain a prince. Also: Volodymyr Zelensky fails to secure Tomahawk missiles for Ukraine during a meeting with Donald Trump; a landmark deal to cut global shipping carbon emissions collapses under US and Saudi pressure; the French banking giant BNP Paribas is found liable for atrocities committed in Sudan during Omar al-Bashir's rule; a temporary ceasefire between Pakistan and Afghanistan breaks down; an ancient Roman memorial stone is unearthed halfway around the world; Taylor Swift fans flock to a German museum to see the pop star's latest muse; and how good is your favourite athlete's poker face?The Global News Podcast brings you the breaking news you need to hear, as it happens. Listen for the latest headlines and current affairs from around the world. Politics, economics, climate, business, technology, health – we cover it all with expert analysis and insight. Get the news that matters, delivered twice a day on weekdays and daily at weekends, plus special bonus episodes reacting to urgent breaking stories. Follow or subscribe now and never miss a moment. Get in touch: [e-mail]

This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the UK. Vanity Fair calls BritBox a delicious streamer. Collider says everyone should be watching. Catch Britain's next best series with Britbox. Streamer claim new originals like Code of Silence. You read lips, right? Anne Linley, based on the best-selling mystery series. Di-I, Linley. Take it from here.

And don't miss the new season of Karen Piri coming this October. You don't look, let, please. I'll take that as a compliment. See it differently when you stream the best of British TV with Britbox. Watch with a free trial today. What's it like to be a journalist in Gaza? International journalists may soon be allowed back into the strip after two years. But what about the Palestinian journalists who never stopped covering the story on the ground?

This is the Global Story podcast from the BBC. And we've been speaking to Ghada Al-Kourd, who kept reporting against all odds. Listen to the global story on BBC. This is a BBC.com or wherever you get your podcasts. This is the Global News podcast from the BBC World Service. I'm onker to sign at 5 hours GMT. On Saturday the 18th of October, these are our main stories. King Charles's brother Andrew relinquishes his royal titles

after new allegations emerge over his links to Geoffrey Epstein. Volodymyr Zelensky fails to secure Tomahawk missiles after a meeting with Donald Trump. And a landmark deal to cut global shipping carbon emissions collapses under US and Saudi pressure. Also in this podcast, how good is your favourite athletes' poker face? When they perform extraordinary well, what you see there is a sort of slightly more relaxed face.

If they're performing not so well, you see a little more facial behaviour, a little more muscle movements. We begin here in Britain. King Charles's brother Andrew has announced he's relinquishing his royal titles, except for Prince. His fall from grace was triggered by his friendship with the late American businessman Geoffrey Epstein, who was jailed for sex crimes against underage girls. Andrew stepped back from public life in the wake of this disastrous BBC interview back in 2019. Do I regret the fact that he has quite obviously conducted himself in a manner unbecoming? Yes.

Unbecoming. He was a sex offender. Yeah, I'm sorry, I'm being polite, in the sense that he was a sex offender. The problem was that once he had been convicted... You stayed with him. I stayed with him. That's the bit that, as it were, I kick myself for on a daily basis, because it was not something that was becoming a member of the royal family. And we try and uphold the highest standards and practices,

and I let the side down. Simple as that. Just over two years later, with the Epstein story not going away, the late Queen Elizabeth stripped her second son of his honouring military affiliations and royal charitable patronages. This month, emails were revealed which contradicted claims made by him

in his BBC interview about when exactly Andrew ended his relationship with Epstein. And next week we'll see the posthumous publication of a book by Virginia Dufre who took her life earlier this year. She claimed she was trafficked by Epstein and was forced to have sex with Andrew

at the age of 17. We should point out that Prince Andrew denies all allegations, against him. Virginia Dufre's brother, Sky Roberts, gave the BBC his reaction to the news that Andrew is losing his titles. In a lot of ways, this vindicates Virginia. She was a truth teller from the beginning, and she was telling the truth. And I think this is a moment where we feel very proud for her, but we're also sad because she should be sitting here. She should be talking to you, but she's not. And so we're here to advocate for her and her survivor sisters. I think

her kids would be incredibly proud to know that their mom is an American hero, that she's an international hero, that all the years of work that she put in is now coming to some sort of justice. And these monsters can't escape from it. The truth will find its way out. So has the prince taken this step willingly? My colleague Valerie Sanderson asked our UK correspondent Rob Watson. In his statement, he says he did it in discussion with King Charles and the wide family but I don't think there's any doubt and I think the palace has pretty much hinted at this that had Prince

Andrew not fallen on his sword that King Charles and his heir Prince William would probably have pushed him onto it because I think and this wouldn't be the first time in the thousand year history of the monarchy Valerie I think that the king and Prince William decided that

in the end the reputation and survival of the monarchy trumps all else family loyalty you know brotherly love such if that exists. And that's why this move was taken. He's been surrounded, Prince Andrew, by scandal for years. What do you think the tipping point was? I think there have been two tipping points in the last few days. The first one, of course, goes back to Geoffrey and his relationship and friendship with the disgraced financier. And the publication, the posthumous

publication of a book by Virginia Jafray, who was trafficked by Geoffrey. Now, in her book, she says that she thought that Andrew was, and I'm pretty much quoting here, entitled, and I'm quoting now, believed having sex with me was his birthright. That is obviously hugely damaging, but secondly, his name had also been linked with a senior Chinese Communist Party official whose name has been mixed up in a rather prominent case in the last few weeks about espionage against targets in the UK. So I think it was the combination of those two things I think probably led to the king and those around the king saying to Prince Andrew, look, the game is up. You've got to go for the sake of the monarchy.

Now, he's giving up the Duke of York title and other honours, but he remains a prince, doesn't he, because he's the son of a monarch, the late Queen Elizabeth, and he'd already stepped back from royal duties. So what does this mean practically for him going forward, do you think? I think practically not very much. I mean, as you say, the disgrace, the demotion, the humiliation began. with his mother, reluctantly, the late Queen Elizabeth II, stripping him of his military titles,

of him being able to call himself his royal highness in 2022, and essentially stepping back from all royal duties. So practically not much. But I guess the way you would put it is that this completes, if you like, his humiliation, his demotion and banishment from public life. I mean, any idea that Prince Andrew is ever going to return in some way to the front row of the royal family, that is now finished, and he will be more isolated than ever.

Rob Watson reporting. Donald Trump and Vladimir Zelensky have come a long way from that explosive White House meeting earlier this year, when the U.S. President called his counterpart disrespectful. You don't have the cards right now. With us, you start having cards. I'm not playing cards. I'm not playing cards. You're playing cards.

You're gambling with the lives of millions of people. You're gambling with World War III. Your country's in big trouble. Well, on Friday, the leaders were on friendlier terms as they met again in Washington to discuss Russia's war in Ukraine. They spoke about the potential for a ceasefire, security guarantees and lost territory. But the question of providing long-range U.S. Tomahawk missiles was the one on everyone's mind, including President Trump's.

Speaking ahead of the meeting, he remained non-committal. So we're going to be talking about tomahawks and would much rather have them not need Tomahawks, would much rather have the war be over. to be honest. The war in the Middle East was far more complicated. We got that one done, and I think we have a good chance. I think President Zelensky wants it done, and I think President Putin want it done. Now all they have to do is get along a little bit. President Zelensky spoke to journalists after he appeared to come away from the meeting empty-handed.

We had productive meeting, long meeting. We spoke about air defense. It's important for us. You know, even now when we speak with you, yes, a lot of drones in Ukraine. We spoke about long range, of course, and I want not to make statements about it. We decided that we don't speak about it because the United States doesn't want escalation. Our reporter Ben DeBusman Jr. was at the White House and gave us this assessment of the meeting. Well, it was a very optimistic mood inside the room during the meeting between Zelensky and Trump. in the cabinet room of the White House, but it ended without any sort of firm commitment from either side or any sort of agreement or indication of the way forward. For the last several days,

President Trump had kind of teased that he was mulling over providing Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine, which could alter the war in that it would allow Ukraine to strike targets very, very deep into Russia. But today, he sounded far less committed to that idea. He said that the U.S. has many Tomahawks, but that it needs them. At one point, I also asked President Trump whether he thinks that the prospect of Tomahawks being introduced to the conflict would, is what brought President Putin to the table. And he said he frankly doesn't know.

So it was a cordial meeting, certainly compared to the very infamous Oval Office meeting several months ago, but it did seem to have ended without any sort of firm indication of the way forward, for one. A lot of talk about the Tomahawk missiles, would they be a huge game changer? And what sort of a strategic advantage would it give Ukraine, which you touched upon just there? They could certainly be very much a strategic advantage for Ukraine. Tomahawk missiles have ranges of over 1,000 miles, which would allow Ukraine to strike strategic targets very deep inside Russia,

certainly in all of the European portion of Russia, including, for example, drone factories or airfields used to, launch aircraft that launch munitions at Ukraine. So it's certainly something that Ukraine would very much like. But as President Trump noted in the meeting, they're also something that the U.S. uses very frequently. In recent months alone, Tomahawk missiles were used as kind of the follow-on strike after the airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities. They were previously used against Houthi targets in Yemen earlier on in this administration. So President Trump's concern is that giving these weapons to Ukraine would mean that the U.S. is less prepared to use them themselves in the future.

If we look ahead to this potential meeting between President Trump and President Putin, what would the mood be like going into that one now, especially after President Putin would have seen today's events? Well, it's very difficult to say. You're in the meeting today at the White House. President Trump certainly seemed optimistic that Putin does, in fact, want to come back to the negotiating table. But what is unclear to many in Washington is why that is, you know, he likes to keep his cards close, taking kind of a carrot and stick approach, you know, in that he and Secretary of Defense Pete Hexat this week kind of said that there would be costs for Russia not coming to the table. What those costs exactly are is still unclear, but there's certainly momentum behind, for example, secondary sanctions.

It's something that was discussed among Republican lawmakers here in Washington this week. but President Trump's not really giving anything away about what makes him so optimistic that these talks in Budapest will accomplish what previous talks in Alaska and over the phone haven't. Burnt de Booseman Jr. in Washington. It's been 10 years in the making and was supposed to be a world first,

but a landmark deal to cut global shipping emissions has collapsed under pressure from the U.S. and Saudi Arabia. More than 100 member states of the U.N.'s shipping body had gathered in London to approve a treaty but it fell at the final hurdle, as Esme Stalard reports. This week's meeting of the International Maritime Organisation in London was meant to be a victory lap for the global deal to cut shipping emissions. Countries were set to approve the agreement, which, from 2028,

would have required ship owners to use a certain amount of green fuels in their vessels or face vines. But the US ratcheted up the pressure over the course of the week, particularly on island states, to reject approval because of concerns the deal would increase the cost of goods for US. consumers. On the final day, when countries should have been voting to approve it, Saudi Arabia tabled a motion to delay the talks for a year. It was won by a handful of votes. With discussions on hold, the deal is highly unlikely to meet its 2028 deadline, and delegates have said it could push back action for years. Speaking after meeting, Stuart Neill, Director of Strategy, at the industry body,

the International Chamber of Shipping, said companies needed clarity. So we are disappointed that governments haven't been able to come to an agreement here because industry needs clarity so it can invest. The issue really is it doesn't send a market signal to those fuel producers to start producing the new fuels that we're going to need. That's outside of the shipping industry's responsibility. We are a global industry. We travel the world and we need a global regulator. But US Secretary of State Marco Rubio took to social media to declare this a huge win for President Trump. Well, the US delegation's approach at this conference has highlighted at his President Trump's continued opposition to the carbon-cutting agenda.

Here's our climate editor, Justin Rolat. Donald Trump has just brokered peace in the Middle East and is trying to do the same for Ukraine, yet the US president still found time to post about an obscure UN shipping body. Why? It shows his determination to take his war on climate action global. After dismantling the US's domestic climate policies, he is targeting international. ones. On truth social, he declared the US will not stand for this global green news scam tax

on shipping and will not adhere in any shape or form. This isn't gentle diplomacy. He is wielding hard power. His administration threatened tariffs, visa bans and blocking access to US ports for ships from tiny island states in the Pacific and Caribbean, as well as any others who supported the deal. Mr Trump says he's educating countries. on the dangers of relying on renewables, especially wind turbines or windmills, as he likes to call them. Meanwhile, his team is urging nations to weaken climate pledges and burn more, ideally American oil and gas.

Diplomats are asking what it says about how the US will approach COP 30, the latest UN climate summit, which is being held in Brazil next month. Next, tennis players about to serve, footballers taking penalties, golfers ready to tee off, off with a drive. Can we predict how athletes will perform just by studying their faces before an important moment in the game? New research suggests there is a link between performance and poker face. Philip Furley is a senior lecturer at the German Sports University and an expert on sports behaviour. He's just published a study on the facial tics and movements of top

darts players just before they throw a dart. We do find a correlation within players that when they perform extraordinary well. You see that in the face. And what you see there is a sort of slightly more relaxed face, more of a poke face, less facial muscle movements before they perform extraordinary well. If they're performing not so well, you see a little more facial behavior, a little more muscle movements in particularly around the eyes and around the mouth region. They sort of coincides with suboptimal performances. Yes, it gives away what's going on in their head in other words. That's what I would say, yeah.

Does it extend beyond darts, do you believe? So we've also looked at that in the context of penalty kicks, in football, for example. There does seem to be something there that the body sort of tells that do give away some levels of performance tendencies. I mean, you mentioned football, Zinidin Zadan, a famous French football,

was famously sick on the pitch, wasn't he, before he took a penalty again? England, but he still scored. So, I mean, it's obviously not foolproof and you wouldn't claim that it is. No, no, certainly not. Exactly in an extraordinary players like Saddam. I mean, they can show they aren't in the optimal state to perform well. But I mean, he still got it together, scored that penalty kick. And where does your work, your own research work go from here? We've talked darts, we've talked football. I'm wondering about sports like tennis, golf, for example. Do you look elsewhere now to try and sort of underline everything

that you've examined so far? At the moment we are looking very much into sort of a big question in psychology that the people all around the world sort of have similar emotional expressions in sporting contexts. In particular, we're looking at how they react when they win big Olympic matches or lose big Olympic matches. This is something that we're researching intensively at the moment. How has all this work informed what you do when you play sport?

Yeah, well, I'm getting older, so it's not that professional. I think we all are, yes. So I don't play professionally anymore, well, I never did really professionally. But I was a decent handball player. And when you played handball, did you have a poker face? I think my face is actually quite revealing. I wouldn't say I've got a poker face. Maybe that's the reason why I got so interested in it.

Maybe there's room for improvement there. Philip Verley speaking to Julian Warwicka. Still to come. It's very ethereal and you can almost see the water flowing, the movement of it, the movement of the fabric. The contrast of the light and the dark, it's beautiful, it's breathtaking. Fans of Taylor Swift flocked to a German museum to see the pop star's latest muse.

What's it like to be a journalist in Gaza? International journalists may soon be allowed back into the strip after two years. But what about the Palestinian journalists who never stopped covering the story on the ground? This is the Global Story podcast from the BBC, and we've been speaking to Ghada Al-Kourd, who kept reporting against all odds. Listen to the global story on BBC.com or wherever you get your podcasts. A U.S. Court has found France's biggest bank BNP Parabar liable for widespread atrocities committed in Sudan under the former regime of Omar al-Bashir. The trial which began last month heard harrowing testimony from three Sudanese plaintiffs on a litany of human rights abuses carried out by Sudanese soldiers and the Janjaweed militia in Western Darfur.

On Friday, the jury in New York awarded nearly $21 million to the three victims who testified in courts. The French bank did business in Sudan from the late 1990s until 2009. A reporter Mickey Bristow has been following the story. This court case relates to a period of time at the beginning of the century, first decade really, when there was atrocities carried out in Sudan by the Sudanese government under Omar al-Bashir. essentially he sent in Sudanese soldiers and a militia known as the Janjaweed into Darfur. It's thought they attacked civilians and perhaps 300,000 civilians were killed, two and a half million were displaced,

and it's one of this century's most atrocious acts by a government. In fact, the International Criminal Court has laid several charges against Omar al-Bashir for crimes against humanity and genocide. Now, this case in New York was brought by three people, were involved in those atrocities. They retold terrible things which happened to them, being subjected to knife attacks, burned with cigarettes. One of the plaintiffs, a woman, was sexually assaulted. And they claimed essentially in court that BNP Parabat, this French bank, was partially responsible for what went on in Darfur because it had helped fund or

facilitate the Sudanese government's trading with the rest of the world. And so essentially brought it money, which was then he was then able to use to fund these atrocities. And just tell us why this is so key as well in terms of opening up to a wider class action case. Yeah, there are apparently at the moment around 20,000 US citizens, now US citizens, but originally people from Sudan, so they're waiting in the wings really to see how this case has transpired. Now, the bank all along said that they acknowledge that they'd done business with the Sudanese government under Omar al-Bashir. But what they said was essentially that

these atrocities would have happened anyway without them. The Sudanese government would have traded its commodities, oil and cotton, without their help. And so they weren't really responsible. That was their argument. But the jury rejected that and awarded compensation. And so the first of the bank has been in a US court? It isn't.

Ten years ago, it settled a case with the Department of Justice in the United States who accused the bank essentially of ignoring US sanctions when it came to using the US financial system to facilitate deals with Sudan and Cuba and Iran as well. And it was fined nearly $9 billion. So there is a legal case already, as you mentioned there, relating to this French bank about them contravening rules. And probably other people, as we've just mentioned there, the people in America, ex-Sudanese people, they're probably waiting and launching their own cases now.

Mickey Bristow, a temporary ceasefire that had brought relative calm on the border between Pakistan and Afghanistan appears to have been broken in an alleged Pakistani airstrike on the southeastern Paktika province. The Taliban government in Afghanistan says at least eight people were killed in the attacks. An Afghan cricket board official also said three of those killed on Friday evening were local cricket players. The truce which began on Wednesday had halted a week of intense border clans

between the two countries. Many civilians and soldiers from both sides had been killed in the fighting. Our global affairs report, Ambarasan Etirajan, has been following the latest developments for us. This all happened after Taliban accused to Pakistan of violating the ceasefire by targeting a couple of areas in Pactika province,

by using drones and other assets to target. But many civilians were killed, according to the Taliban authorities. But we haven't heard anything from Pakistan. side. This is all coming, you know, hours after a 48-hour ceasefire was declared between Pakistan and Afghanistan after a week of intense fighting along the border in which dozens were killed. And this comes off the back of an escalation in attacks between the two countries, especially since 2021 and when the Taliban retook Afghanistan. According to Pakistani officials,

since Taliban took over, more than 3,700 people have been killed inside Pakistan due to attacks by Islamist insurgents and Islamabad accuses Kabul of providing safe havens to these Islamist militant groups. And that is the main issue, bone of contention between the two countries, that Kabul is providing some sort of sanctuary for these militants, a charge denied by the Taliban authorities. And that is now escalating into a major crisis for between the two countries. On the other hand, you have to see how Pakistan's position has changed. the defense minister of Pakistan, he was posting on social media a short while ago saying that when you see more and more action against our security forces, we will go after wherever the threat comes from.

So what it looks like, the message seems to be as in when their attacks happen inside Pakistan, then Pakistan would respond. And now they're saying we are not going to issue any diplomatic notes or appeal. We are going for straightaway into action. That means what some people call it as a new. new normal. There were planned talks this weekend in Qatar between the two sides. How will this affect those conversations? The Taliban officials have been saying that they are planning to send a delegation to Qatar for talks with the Pakistani officials on how to diffuse tensions between the two countries. So far, Pakistan have not commented really about the talks, but they're confirmed about the talks as well, even though media has been reporting about these talks.

Now, it becomes more complicated given the latest round of attacks. for, you know, both sides will be sitting together to discuss these matters. But countries like Saudi Arabia and Qatar have been putting pressure on both countries to engage in a dialogue to reduce tensions between the two countries. Umbrasan Etirajan. At its peak, the Roman Empire stretched from Britain to the Nal River to the Persian Gulf. But one place the Romans did not conquer was the city of New Orleans in the southern US. So how did a memorial stone for an ancient Roman soldier end up in the backguard?

garden there to be discovered by a woman clearing weeds. Professor Suzanne Lusnia of the Department of Classical Studies at Tulane University spoke to Paul Henley. I was sent an email by the homeowner who found it in her backyard, and I looked at the photo and I just had a shiver up my spine because it looked like a genuine Roman inscription. But to see that it was here in New Orleans in the garden in their backyard seemed very odd. unexpected, certainly. To say the least, what did it say in Latin? Yes, so in Latin, it's a funerary inscription. It says, dis manibus sexto congenio vero, mility classes praetoria

misinensis, natione bestso, wixit anos quadriginta duo, militawit anos wiginti-duo, Tutta la triere Asclepio, fecourant Attilius Carus at Wettius Longinus Heredes Benimarenti. To the spirits of the dead, four, or on behalf of Sextus Congenius Verus, soldier of the Praetorian fleet Misenensis, from the tribe of the Bessie, who lived 42 years and served 22 years in the military

on the triremes Asclepius. Attilius Carus and Vettius Longinus, his heirs, made this four. or him well-deserving. But the obvious question now, how this Greystone found its way across the Atlantic, we know that it's missing from a museum collection in Italy, do we? Correct.

We knew that it came from the museum at Chivitevacia. It had come from the old museum, the Museo Chivico. That museum was basically destroyed in bombings that happened in May of 1943. Later on, there was a person from New Orleans who was serving in the U.S.O, their job was to provide services for the military, in particular entertainment. So he was a vocalist, a singer, who was based in Italy, and he was the one who had it. It was in his house here in New Orleans. His granddaughter saw the news story that our

local news here in New Orleans ran about this on television, recognized it as something that had been in her grandfather's house, and that she had acquired, it had been handed down the through the family, and that she had been the one who put it into the backyard at this house. By mid-May, we had handed it over to the FBI, so they will handle it. Eventually, at some point, there will be a transfer made, and it will go back to that museum in Chivivacia. Professor Suzanne Lusnia. She's already been credited with driving a new wave of fans to American football because of her relationship with the NFL star Travis Kelsey. Now it appears Taylor Swift's influence has spread.

to the world of fine art too. A museum in central Germany is welcoming hundreds of extra visitors who have come to see a painting of Ophelia from Shakespeare's Hamlet which inspired the imagery for Swift's new song, The Fate of Ophelia. Chantal Hartel has this report

which starts with a word from Swift herself. The album cover is a reference to the famous Ophelia painting which then ends up being referenced in the music video. Ophelia's plight is, captured in a painting by the German artist Friedrich Heiser thought to date back to the year 1900. It shows her laying in a stream surrounded by water lilies, white dress flowing, a dramatic downcast gaze. The very

pose Swift recreates in the opening scene of her video. Initially, Swift's fans thought she had found her muse in the better-known older portrait of Ophelia by John Everett Millay, which hangs in the Tate Gallery in London. But the colour of the dress and the angle of the pose, then pointed them to Heiser. Now, hundreds of swifties, as they're known, have been flocking to the museum in the city of Wiesbaden to see the art thought to have inspired their idol. One family travelled to the museum from Hamburg, a five-hour driveway. This fan from the US was impressed by the painting. It's very ethereal and you can almost see the water flowing, the movement of it, the movement of the fabric, the contrast of the light and the dark. It's very ethereal. It's very ethereal. And you can almost see the water flowing, the movement of it, the

It's beautiful, it's breathtaking. Despite long queues forming at times, museum director Andreas Henning said he was delighted to welcome all the new visitors. Just last weekend, several hundred swifties were here. I find it absolutely wonderful that they approach the art with great respect and maintain a good distance. And when there are several of them, they naturally form a lot. so that each person can have a moment with the artwork.

Museum staff are still holding out for one extra special visitor, though, Swift herself. Shantil Hartle reporting. And that's all from us for now, but there will be a new edition of the Global News podcast later. If you want to comment on this episode, all the topics covered in it, you can send us an email. The address is Global Podcast at BBC.co.uk. You can also find us on X. at BBC World Service, and you can use a hashtag global news pod. This edition was mixed by Martin Williams and produced by Peter Goffin and Anna Aslam.

And the editor is Karen Martin. I'm Uncle Dissau. Until next time, goodbye.