This is the Global News Podcast from the BBC World Service.
I'm Keith Adams, and in the early hours of Sunday 23rd November, these are our main stories.
The UN's COP climate summit in Brazil ends with a deal, but is criticised for not mentioning fossil fuels.
Kiev pushes back on Donald Trump's peace plan as it prepares for talks with Washington.
And several airlines suspend flights to Venezuela – after the US warns of increased military activity.
Also in this podcast, the ceasefire in Gaza is said to be holding, but the fighting has not stopped.
And the man who dressed Princess Diana.
For a long time, I was a skeleton until eventually my work started selling.
But it was a very good learning curve and it made me very aware of what is good and what is bad in fashion.
The Irish fashion designer Paul Costello has died.
When you hear talk of climate change, the words fossil fuels are never usually far behind.
But the deal that has finally been agreed at the UN climate talks in Brazil has no explicit mention of fossil fuels.
That was a disappointment for more than 80 countries at the meeting, who wanted a deal with further commitments to move away from energy sources like oil, coal and gas.
But after a bitter row with the oil-rich nations, led by Saudi Arabia, the wording was removed.
Several countries even attempted to stop the COP30 talks from wrapping up, demanding that the fossil fuel reference be put back into the final wording.
Tom Rivett-Karnak is a former political strategist for the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.
He says the absence of the United States at this year's COP was significant.
When you have a united states fully engaged that is prepared to use its economic might to lean on other countries and get these deals, then you can get countries like saudi arabia actually moving forward in the right direction this year the fact that we've had trump in the white house actively trying to destroy these sorts of agreements i'm honestly quite pleased that at least multilateralism is still moving forward in a positive direction, reaffirming existing commitments, stating that All other countries are still serious about this and we've got a platform to build on.
Of course, like everything in climate change, it's not fast enough.
Well, the BBC's environment correspondent, Matt McGrath, was at the talks and he told me more about the outcome.
There are some things in this agreement that I think everybody will be relatively happy with.
It acknowledges the Paris Agreement.
There is some small steps to encourage countries to move away from fossil fuels more quickly, and there's some more money ultimately for developing countries to help them adapt to to the impacts of climate change.
That involves a tripling of so-called adaptation finance by 2035.
But I think what most people will focus on is the fact that there are big things missing.
A lot of countries have hoped that there would be a roadmap in this and a plan of intention, if you like, to move away from coal, oil and gas, and also a roadmap on ending deforestation, the cutting down of trees.
Neither of those things are in this roadmap plan, and I think there's an awful lot of disappointment here amongst people who believe that this was the moment when those two would clearly emerge.
You hear a lot that the process of decarbonisation is happening.
The world is moving away from fossil fuels anyway, for economic reasons, because of innovation.
Is COP and are the actions of governments still relevant?
Yeah, that's a question that people have been asking themselves here, I think, for a long time, particularly these last two weeks.
Up to 2015, when the Paris Agreement was signed, COP was extremely relevant.
It allowed countries to come together and to make an agreement that would apply to everybody.
So everybody would jump together.
So there was a great deal of equality in that.
But that's 10 years ago.
What does it stand for now?
What are they trying to achieve?
The real world has moved on.
And I think the Brazilian presidents were really conscious of that and they wanted to make this about equality, the action agenda and implementation.
I have no idea what those phrases mean.
I don't think they did either, but i think they really wanted to make this relevant to the real world.
But when you have old-fashioned battles, like we've had the last few days, people staying up through the night arguing about commas and the meaning of words, it feels very old school and different from the world that many people are living in now and the geopolitical realities of that world.
The cop, i don't think, is quite fit for purpose at this point, And you've been to lots of these COP meetings, haven't you?
I mean, how does this compare?
Is it always this last minute struggle?
Yes, it is usually this last minute struggle.
I've been to 15.
This is probably the most challenging.
And I think that's kind of intentional as well.
I think the Brazilian President Lula wanted people to come here and really experience what it's like to live in a city that's really impacted by climate change.
And Belém is one of those cities.
It's got extreme heat and humidity.
Air conditioning is everywhere.
You know, there's deluges from huge downpours every day.
You can't drink the water, you have to drink bottled water.
So it's a real, i suppose, snapshot of what life in the future could be like for many countries, and i think he really wanted to get people to see that, and certainly that has made this challenging the actual negotiations.
They've also been incredibly challenging too, and i guess the most consoling thing that people would take away from here is that the show continues and They will come back and do it again next year.
And I think people who've been to a lot of COPs understand that actually that is a strength.
It does keep rolling on and eventually, small bit by small bit, progress is made.
But they may be running into the realities of the world as it is right now and not the world as it was 10 years ago.
Matt McGrath.
Ukraine is in a precarious diplomatic position.
It wants an end to the war with Russia and it needs the US on side as a mediator to help make that happen.
But the peace deal put forward by Donald Trump this week is for Kyiv a non-starter.
The Ukrainian MP Maria Ayanova told us why.
It is about sovereignty, territorial integrity and also responsibility for aggression, especially after like 16 hours without electricity and also, you know, the recent missiles, the Russian attack to Ternopil, where more than 30 people have been killed civilian people, by the way.
How would you like me, as a member of the parliament, to explain that we have to pardon Russians and there will not be a justice?
So it's really a very complicated question for our society.
Well, on Sunday, Ukrainian officials will have a chance to discuss the peace plan with the US during talks in Switzerland.
But will there be any room for negotiation when, just days ago, this deal seemed like a take-it-or-leave-it ultimatum from President Trump?
I asked our North America correspondent Sean Dilley, who was standing just outside the White House.
That's one perspective, but it was one perspective held by rather a lot of people, particularly in Europe, with some concern that there has been an awful lot of concessions to Russia and an awful lot that would have to be given back.
Now, those key concessions would be handing over of key territory and the reduction of the size of the army and the weapons stocks provided by the United States and much of Europe.
But President Trump has said that it's not necessarily the final version of an agreement.
Yeah, I think he's gone much further than that, hasn't he?
It was really tough talk.
It was robust.
It was considered to be an ultimatum, a take it or leave it deal, that he thought Thanksgiving was a reasonable deadline.
Now, deadline is quite a harsh word.
He sort of softened that slightly a few days ago saying well, it's possible it could move slightly.
But it was clear it was a deadline.
Now, with the involvement of Britain, France and Germany is what's known as the E3.
So these key security issues countries in Europe, and indeed the comments by Europe more widely, and Canada and Japan just to boot.
Saying that they think that the US deal has elements of what would be required for a lasting peace deal.
There's the diplomatic language, but they're concerned that there would be far too much in relation to Ukraine having to surrender parts of its border.
They say there can be no question of that happening. in any sense other than a voluntary sense.
And it's changed the landscape.
That deadline, it's more or less dissolved, hasn't it?
And what now happens is Marco Rubio, the US Secretary of State, and a chap called Steve Witkoff, who's the president's special envoy, will be entering into discussions with Ukraine, who say they haven't been consulted so far, and entering into discussions with Britain, France and Germany's key security officials to see if they can come up with a deal that is more acceptable.
It lets it keep its dignity, but it's something that the United States and Russia can also live with.
Why is the US backing so important to Ukraine?
Well, the United States provides so much of the intelligence that Ukraine relies on to defend itself.
It provides intelligence on air defences.
But also President Trump has probably the closest international relationship, at least being able to communicate with the Kremlin and President Putin.
Not that the two necessarily have spoken in very flattering terms after what the US regarded to be the failed Alaska talks over Ukraine, but they very much would like them on board.
The United States obviously would like to sort this out.
President Trump firstly said that he would sort it out in one day if he was elected president.
Well, it's a bit more than one day, isn't it?
But now the United States is faced with the reality that European neighbours, and those in Europe generally, are sort of very politely ramping that volume up and saying hey, we have a security interest in what happens here in Europe as well.
Sean Dilley in Washington.
And as President Trump seeks an end to the war in Ukraine, he's been ramping up military action in the waters near Venezuela.
The US says it has carried out 21 strikes on alleged drug trafficking boats in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific, killing at least 83 people since September.
Some lawyers have warned that the strikes may breach international law.
There is also mounted speculation that Mr Trump is trying to push the Venezuelan president, Nicolas Maduro, out of power.
And people in Venezuela and its neighbour, Colombia, feel they're caught in the middle.
Our correspondent Ione Wells reports.
The Caribbean coast of Colombia looks like something out of a postcard.
Dozens of small, colourful boats, people swimming, paddling, sailing in the tranquil, clear sea.
In September.
The family of a fisherman from around here called Alejandro Carranza say he went out fishing and never came back.
Later, the US released a video of the government blowing a boat out of the water.
He has five children.
They miss him.
They are sad.
They want to see their dad again.
Lisbeth Perez is his niece.
They lived all together, about 30 family members in their house, in the fishing village of Guayra.
Colombia's government and some members of his family say he was killed in that US strike.
Others, like Lisbeth, are left wanting answers.
The truth is that we don't know it was him.
We want them to clarify that for us.
What the president of the United States is doing is not right.
He has to prove it. whether they are or aren't drug traffickers.
Colombia's president alleged that Alejandro Carranza was a fisherman who accepted a payment from a drug trafficker to transport several kilos of drugs to a nearby island when his boat was struck.
The US called the claim Colombian citizens were on board baseless, insisting it's targeting traffickers.
The US says it is under threat from drugs that kill thousands.
Cocaine production in South America and seizures of it have increased.
But fentanyl, the main driver of drug deaths in the U.S., comes from Mexico, not here.
Well, it's just gone 6 am in the sleepy fishing town of Taganga and we're just getting on the boat of fisherman Juan, which is quite a big one.
It's still very much alive and flapping around.
I don't know what they're bombing.
That worries us fishermen, in case, at any moment, they see us and think we're doing the same thing carrying drugs.
We're not involved in any of that.
Fishermen here say they've sometimes seen US drones flying overhead, often at night, something which makes them fearful.
We see the light and the morning star, they hover quietly and disappear.
We think they might be investigating us.
We're not doing anything wrong, we're just fishing.
Many lawyers question the legality of killing people in these strikes if they pose no imminent violent threat.
Daniel Kovalec is a lawyer working for some of Alejandro's family.
Even if you claim that people you're killing are trafficking in drugs, you don't have the right to just engage in extrajudicial killings of them, right?
If you really believe they were doing something wrong, those people should be arrested.
They should be tried in a court of law, convicted and sentenced.
The US has now struck more than 20 alleged drug trafficking boats, killing more than 80 people.
It sent its biggest military deployment to the Caribbean in decades.
But it's not just small boats Washington has its eyes on.
The US accuses neighbouring Venezuela's President, Nicolas Maduro, of being the head of a trafficking organisation.
We may be having some discussions with Maduro.
President Maduro denies this and says he's open to talks with the US.
Faith to faith.
No one here believes that the US's biggest military deployment to the Caribbean in decades is just about bombing small alleged drug trafficking vessels.
Most instead feel it's about putting military pressure on Venezuela's president, Nicolas Maduro, to step down or on his allies to oust him.
But while the US mulls its next move, these usually sleepy calm, tranquil fishing villages feel that they're now on the sidelines of war.
I own you, Wales.
Well, the US government has said it will add President Maduro and his government to its list of dangerous terrorist organisations on Monday.
As you just heard, Washington accuses Mr Maduro of leading a drug trafficking network.
That's something he denies.
And with tensions rising, some international airlines have said they're suspending flights to Venezuela over safety concerns.
I heard more from Luis Fajardo of BBC Mundo.
There's several airlines, both from Europe and from Latin America including, for example, Avianca in Colombia, Iberia and others from Europe, that are saying that they are responding to notifications by the US authorities, by the FAA, describing what they call potentially dangerous situations in Venezuelan airspace over the next few days.
For example Avianca, the Colombian airline, has suggested that it will not fly more airplanes for the rest of the weekend and into the early next week.
Discussions in Colombian media, for example, have concentrated around the risk, around military actions, including the speculation about eventual US military actions in Venezuela and also increased military activity in Venezuela itself by Venezuelan military forces.
They have been having exercises involving their air force units and also their anti-aircraft defense system.
So all of this is creating a great deal of tension.
And it's hard to believe for many people that the only objective is just to attack fairly small suspected drug-carrying vessels in the Caribbean.
So the speculation and the anticipation of many people is that it could lead to some bigger military operation by the US against Venezuelan targets, against Venezuelan mainland targets, specifically Venezuelan government targets.
But why would the US want to do that?
The U.S. has made no mystery of its antagonism to the Venezuelan government of Nicolás Maduro.
The US government has been framing this military buildup in the Caribbean as a mostly counter-narcotics operation.
And they have pointed out that there's this widespread belief that there's parts of the Venezuelan government and the Venezuelan military that are involved in drug trafficking.
There is also the issue of whether the U.S. is interested directly in regime change.
The Maduro administration has been in power for many years, and before that his predecessor, Hugo Chavez.
Both of them characterized for being very anti-American in many of their arguments, in many of their discourses, in some cases close to American antagonists.
Certainly, the Venezuelan government has close military ties to Russia.
And there's also some Cynics would argue a U.S. domestic policy element involved.
There's many Venezuelan Americans who fled Venezuela because of the Chavez and then the Maduro administration.
They certainly are against the Maduro administration.
And they would be very happy if the US government in some way contributed to regime change in Venezuela.
And some cynics again would argue that this would be very good politics for the Trump administration.
Luis Fajardo.
Still to come.
In this podcast, Seeing real-time data from a monarch butterfly flying down the eastern coast, I was almost in tears.
The joy of tracking butterflies.
The ceasefire in Gaza is officially said to be holding, but the reality is that the fighting has never stopped.
Israel has continued to carry out airstrikes on the territory, targeting what it says are Hamas fighters.
More than 20 Palestinians were killed and dozens more wounded in the last attack, according to the Hamas-run health ministry.
Our correspondent in Jerusalem, John Donison, spoke to my colleague, Charlotte Gallagher.
There is a ceasefire in place in Gaza, and it has been in place for six weeks, but...
The firing has not ceased and we saw more examples of that, with heavy airstrikes across much of the Gaza Strip, in Gaza City in the north, in Nusrat Camp in central Gaza and also in Rafah, with the number of casualties rising really by the hour.
Now, among those killed was apparently a senior Hamas commander.
Israel, for its part, says it was targeting Hamas after they sent one of their soldiers fighters across the so-called Yellow Line, which designates the areas still under full Israeli control under this ceasefire.
Hamas, for its part, has accused Israel of violating the ceasefire agreement.
Has called on Qatar and Egypt, the mediators, to intervene.
But, as I say, this sort of thing is happening on a daily basis despite the ceasefire, and I think the figures now are more than 300 Palestinians have been killed during that six-week ceasefire period by Israeli strikes.
I mean, I imagine a lot of people listening to this will think well, how can the ceasefire be holding?
How can there be a ceasefire if Israel are still carrying out airstrikes on Gaza?
Well, look, before October the 7th, if you had a day like today, that would have started a war.
Now President Trump came out when this ceasefire deal, which of course he drove through, and he said the war is over.
Well, many people in gaza would disagree with that, and if the ceasefire is holding, it's a pretty fragile one, and the key thing to remember, i think, is president trump's plan, which of course, got backing from the in that un security council resolution last week.
He's only really achieved the first bit of that.
They got the hostages out in exchange for Palestinian prisoners, but it is still really vague what happens next.
So who's this international stabilisation force that's going to go into Gaza?
Are Hamas going to give up their weapons?
What's happening with aid?
Still not enough aid is getting in.
And who's going to govern Gaza?
So you know, we've got the hostages out and Palestinian prisoners have been exchanged, but we're a long, long way from any sort of permanent stable settlement in Gaza.
John Donison.
You might not know his name, but you almost certainly have seen his work.
Paul Costello was Princess Diana's personal fashion designer from 1983 until the end of her life.
On Saturday, his company announced that he had died at the age of 80.
Wendy Urquhart looks back at his life.
Paul Costello was born in Dublin in 1945 and learned much of his trade as a designer from his father, who ran a successful business making raincoats.
His career began at Grafton Academy of Fashion Design in Dublin, where he won a prize for making hats.
But really, he wanted to be at the heart of haute couture.
After dropping out of a fashion course in Paris...
Paul persuaded the French designer Jacques Esterel to give him a job.
But life wasn't always easy in the City of Lights.
We were given projects each week to design suits for ready-to-wear clients.
And there'd be a pile of sketches from everybody.
And then the client would come in, make their selection.
And the ones that got taken, they would get paid, and the designers that didn't get anything taken would not get paid.
For a long time, I was a skeleton until eventually my work started selling.
But it was a very good learning curve and it made me very aware of what is good and what is bad in fashion.
After spending time in Italy and the US, Paul returned to Ireland in 1979 and launched his own label.
He quickly became a household name.
His collections were in high demand.
And before long, he was exhibiting at fashion weeks in London, Paris, Milan and New York.
Four years later he became Princess Diana's personal designer and has fond memories of their time together.
So gentle, so feminine, so warm, so humorous.
And I sat in the drawing room this is Kensington Palace and I couldn't believe looking out of the window at High Park.
And I am here.
It was one of the most amazing experiences in my life.
Now he was in the big leagues, and he continued to dress Diana until her death in 1997.
Suddenly, it wasn't just the rich and famous that wanted Paul Costello's help.
Corporate clients such as British Airways, Ireland's Olympic team and the European Rider Cup team were lining up to commission his work.
He survived by his wife Anna and seven children.
On Saturday they issued a statement saying they were deeply saddened to announce the passing of Paul Costello following a short illness.
Wendy Urquhart.
Back in September, the former Brazilian president, Jair Bolsonaro, was sentenced to 27 years in prison for plotting a coup.
Mr Bolsonaro, a right-wing populist and ally of Donald Trump, was convicted of trying to stop his successor, Luis Inacio Lula da Silva, from taking office.
He's been living under house arrest while his lawyers appeal the verdict.
But on Saturday, he was taken back into custody by police, who said he was a concrete flight risk.
Leandro Prezerich from BBC Brazil has the details.
Mr Bolsonaro was arrested following a request from the Brazilian Federal Police.
After the Federal Police detected an alleged attempt to tamper with an electronic ankle monitor that has been used since July,
Investigators also point to the fact that his house is only 13 kilometres from the US Embassy and the Federal Police had already found documents months ago mentioning plans for a flee through an embassy.
On the other hand, in a statement to the press, Mr Bolsonaro's lawyers, they have been saying that they will appeal the decision and that, despite these allegations of a possible flee, Mr Bolsonaro was arrested at home.
His arrest led to an intense wave of reactions, especially on social media.
In Brasília, where he was arrested, there were just a few people in front of the federal police headquarters, where he's going to stay for the time being.
But on social media, his arrest is a trending topic since the beginning of the day.
On the left, politicians and supporters have been celebrating his arrest.
But on the right, Bolsonaro supporters have been claiming that Mr Bolsonaro again is a victim of a political persecution conducted by the same Brazil Supreme Court justice who decided over his arrest.
When it comes to what's going to happen next.
His lawyers have been telling the press that they are going to appeal his arrest.
But the situation is that his case will go back to the Brazil Supreme Court.
Pocket watch that was recovered from the body of one of the richest passengers on the Titanic has sold at auction for 23 million.
It belonged to Isidore Strauss, a former US congressman who co-founded the Macy's department store in New York.
He and his wife Ida died when the ship sank.
The watch had stopped at 2.20am.
That's the exact time that the Titanic went down.
Andrew Aldrich, who's an auctioneer at Henry Aldrich & Sons, told the BBC more about the couple.
Isidore Strauss is one of the most iconic and famous passengers on the Titanic.
He and his wife have been portrayed pretty much in every dramatisation and movie relating to the Titanic since the year dot.
They were a love story to the point that when the ship was sinking, they had their maid with them, a lady called Ellen Bird, and they were at a lifeboat.
Ellen Bird went into the lifeboat.
Ida went into the lifeboat.
Isidore was asked to go to the lifeboat because he was an older chap.
He declined because he said basically there were women and children on the Titanic.
I'm not going anywhere.
And his wife Ida got out of the lifeboat, basically said, we've lived this far together.
Where you go, I go.
She took her fur coat off and gave it to her maid to keep her warm which is a fairly good idea into her mindset that hey, I'm not going to survive here because I don't need my fur coat.
Ellen survives, she leaves the Titanic in her lifeboat and obviously Isidore and Ida literally go down in history.
After the ship sank, the White Star Line chartered several ships to go to the wreck site and bodies were allocated numbers for the purposes of identification and the repatriation of their effects.
In the case of Mr Strauss, his effects were sent back to his eldest son, Jesse.
The watch is obviously amongst those.
And the watch has been kept within the family ever since.
I received a call late last year to have a discussion about it.
But also a letter that was written by Ida on the Titanic on April the 10th.
And that's really, really fascinating on many levels.
She's referring to... life on the ship.
She's referring to how luxurious the ship is.
You know, in essence, this letter gives us a snapshot into the life of a VIP passenger on the Titanic on the afternoon of her leaving Southampton.
Andrew Aldrich.
Now, monarch butterflies are little miracles of nature, with those bright orange and black wings that can span up to 10 centimetres.
They move across North America to spend the winter in Mexico, and scientists have started to learn much more about their migration patterns thanks to some tiny new gadgets.
Michael Lanzone from Tracking Technologies devised a small transmitter, and he teamed up with Professor Chip Taylor from the University of Kansas.
They both spoke to my colleague, the BBC's Krupa Pardi, about their findings.
First, it's an extremely small device. transmitter.
I mean, it's about the size of a grain of rice and it weighs probably about the same too.
It's only about 60 milligrams.
It has a super, super tiny solar panel on it that powers the device.
That must have been tricky, considering just how small it is and the fact that you have to apply this chip onto a butterfly.
That must have come with significant engineering challenges.
It's funny because we were looking into how to put it on, because you know that the sticker tags are, you know, pretty much have loose adhesive on the back.
And we really needed something that we knew would stick on a bit more for a transmitter like this.
And so we started using active eyelash glue.
We knew super glue was not good for Monarchs.
And so we started using that and it seemed to work really well.
That's extraordinary.
I thought you were going to tell me something a little bit more technologically sophisticated.
You know, the funny thing is, who knew active eyelash glue was developed for extreme environments?
Chip, I'll turn back to you.
We're now in this position where we can track the location of butterflies on our phones.
What have you been able to learn about the migration patterns of this species that you didn't know before?
It's actually amazing.
We've looked at the behavior of these butterflies for 30 years and we have a whole number of pathways that we know that they take.
And this tagging established it, yes.
But they have taught us that they are using them quite differently from how we expected.
There's a big wind effect.
There's a big weather effect.
One of the things that comes out on these data is that The butterflies are often blown off course, but they have the extraordinary capability of reconnecting with where they should be.
And so they are able to course correct in remarkable ways.
And surely some get lost, which we hadn't really known much about before.
But they're showing us that there are other pathways that we didn't know about.
These butterflies that have been tagged this season have flown over 2000 miles and over a two-month period.
Now that's a testimony that this whole system works.
Michael, we can hear just what this development means to Chip.
And I wonder what your reaction has been when you realised you and your team, when you realised that these trackers actually work.
It was incredible.
I think...
We were in development for over two years and we were all tied to our computers, looking at the screen and seeing real-time data coming in.
And really for me.
I've dedicated my entire life to advancing technology, seeing real-time data from a monarch butterfly flying down the eastern coast.
I was almost in tears.
It was one of the most amazing things I had ever seen.
And to realize that we had achieved something that really I thought was impossible.
Where are they right now?
There's a good number of them that are in Mexico right now.
Two, three days ago, there was a substantial amount between Texas and the wintering grounds.
That's huge to be able to see an entire track of a monarch butterfly.
I mean, we have them now from Canada all the way down to Mexico.
It's addictive.
It's been a two-month ride that I could not imagine.
I've missed meals.
I've missed sleep.
I've been emailing all sorts of people.
I say, did you see this?
Did you see that?
It's wonderful.
Professor Chip Taylor there.
And before that, Michael Lanzone, speaking to the BBC's Krupa Pardi.
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 podcast or the topics covered in it, you can send us an email.
The address is globalpodcast at bbc.co.uk.
You can also find us on X at BBC World Service.
Use the hashtag...
Global News Pod.
This edition was produced by Peter Goffin and Stephanie Zachrisson.
It was mixed by Ricardo McCarthy.
The editor is Karen Martin.
And I'm Keith Adams.
Until next time, goodbye.
