European countries are working with Volodymyr Zelenskyy on proposed "security guarantees" to protect any future peace deal, measures that Donald Trump has suggested he will support after his White House meeting with the Ukrainian leader this week. But there is a "wide spectrum" of ways it could all play out in practice, said the BBC, and a "big question mark" over what guarantees Russia would be willing to accept.

What did the commentators say?
The "inherent contradiction" of any security guarantees is that they must be "robust enough" to deter Russia from a future attack, said the BBC, but "not so robust" that Russia refuses to accept them.

Trump has ruled out Nato membership for Ukraine and also US boots on the ground, but Europe still hopes that Washington will agree to provide logistics and intelligence, and a backstop of military air support if Russia were to renege on any peace deal.

Even for Europe, "I don't think boots on the ground is a credible answer", military analyst Sean Bell told Sky News. Policing the 600-mile border would require 100,000 soldiers at a time and a total force of 300,000 to allow for training and rotations. The entire UK army would only make up 10% of that, with France likely to be able to contribute a further 10%.

Keir Starmer said the coalition of the willing was "preparing for the deployment of a reassurance force" in the event of "hostilities ending". In practice, that is likely to involve "protecting Ukraine from the skies and sea", said The Times, and helping to train and replenish its depleted armed forces – or an agreement "with only the threat of military involvement once any deal is breached".

What next?
A peace deal still relies on Russia agreeing to security guarantees for "a state it denies exists", said The Economist. If it does so, the question remains: how would the coalition respond if its forces were attacked or Russia re-invaded Ukraine? "A formal pledge to fight Russia would amount to Article 5", Nato's mutual defence pact, "by other means", while a "vague mandate" might "tempt Russia to test European resolve".

The US Open has debuted a new quickfire mixed doubles event with an increased $1 million prize pot, shorter matches, and pairings of top singles stars including Carlos Alcaraz and Emma Raducanu (pictured above). But not everyone is won over by the changes.

'Gimmicky sporting reformat'
This week's two-day tournament had "the feel of an exhibition", with its "quickfire scoring system" and scheduling "prior to the official US Open start date", said The Independent, but it offered tennis fans the chance to see the "world’s top male and female players competing alongside one another".

It seems like in the "era of the great gimmicky sporting reformat, tennis finally has its turn", said The Telegraph. The matches are best of three sets, with sets of up to four games, rather than the usual six. And there is no "advantage" point at deuce; the winner of the next point wins the game. But you can see why the "truncated nature of matches" and "generous prize money" have attracted the top stars, and the first match alone showed that this "shortened, starry format has a future".

Doubles specialists prove point
The loudest objection has been that seasoned mixed doubles players have "lost an opportunity to win a Grand Slam" and "an avenue to make money", said Flashscore. "But the facts are, people just don't watch doubles", and "supporters are only really drawn to their favourite singles player". Taking the "emotion out of it", the previous format "doesn't really make any sense" for players, who are "earning a fifth of the prize money, but they're not being watched".

As it turned out, Andrea Vavassori and Sara Errani, the "only doubles specialist team" in the 16 pairs, beat the "singles superstars" and took home the $1 million prize last night in New York, said The Guardian. The Italians had been determined to prove the value of doubles players and "made their points clear". But so did the US Open organisers. Their aim was to "create a bigger stage" for a format "deemed obsolete", and the interest it has generated is "undeniable".

Divers watch a crane lift an artefact from the sea at Abu Qir Bay in the port city of Alexandria. A total of 86 antiquities recovered from Egypt's coastal waters have gone on display in the new "Secrets of the Sunken City" exhibition at the Alexandria National Museum. 

Khaled Desouki / AFP / Getty Images

Unpredictable weather and "patchy trading" have seen gardening sales "wilting", said Natalie Whittle in the Financial Times. But independent garden centres are going to great lengths to "tempt" back visitors, from opening top-notch cafes to selling "bougie" homeware. Here are our favourite spots.

Petersham Nurseries, London
"Arguably the original destination nursery", this tranquil oasis in the heart of Richmond is home to a swanky Michelin Green Star restaurant, said The Telegraph. There's also a "more informal tea room" and a shop where you'll find "stylish" gardening accessories ranging from ceramic pots to Japanese secateurs.

Burford Garden Centre, Oxfordshire
This "sprawling" complex in the Cotswolds sells plants and shrubs but is also home to a bookshop, a children's boutique and a bakery, said Lauren Indvik in the Financial Times. You'll go in for a packet of bulbs and leave with "a tin of Perello olives and a gift for your three-year-old niece".

Cambo Gardens, Fife
Cambo is a great excuse for a trip to the "stunning" east coast of Fife, said The Telegraph. The "stellar planting" inspires the "imaginative selection of plants for sale". Whatever the season, be sure to stop at the "excellent" on-site cafe, where you'll find delicious vegetarian and vegan food.

Wildgoose Nursery, Shropshire
This plant nursery is "hidden within a beautiful walled garden" in the Shropshire countryside, said The Guardian. Stroll through the wild Floral Meadow and follow the winding path into the hot garden before enjoying the wonderful "plot-to-plate" cafe.

Notting Hill Carnival 2025 is make or break for Sadiq Khan
James Ford in City A.M.
Stabbings aren't the "only danger" at the Notting Hill Carnival, writes James Ford. More than 350 violent or sexual offences were reported at last year's event, and police have warned of a "very real prospect of a Hillsborough-like crush" when it returns this weekend. London taxpayers are "subsidising all this danger", but Mayor Sadiq Khan has ignored the "palpable public concern" as he's "staked his reputation" on the carnival being a success.

Warding off the evil eye in rural Italy
Marianna Giusti in the Financial Times
"The first mentions of evil eyes were recorded millennia ago," writes Marianna Giusti. But some in Italy still believe "that another person's envy can bring about an inadvertent curse" that supposedly leaves victims feeling "heavy-headed and restless, as though they've been beset by ill fortune". Calling on "witches to perform removals" remains "widespread" across "multiple generations". And while I don't believe in the "evil eye", in "times of crisis", rituals that seem "outside of time" have the "soothing touch of a homecoming".

Things aren't quite as rosé as surveys make out
Hilary Rose in The Times
A recent survey found that a "third of British men would prefer a glass of rosé to a pint and I've never heard such a load of old cobblers in my life", writes Hilary Rose. "I've never known a man even order" rosé, and while my male friends will drink red or white wine, "if they're in a pub", they "always, always" opt for beer. "I've been fed some lines by men in my time, but they obviously save their best for people conducting surveys."