Almost eight years after 72 people died when a devastating fire ripped through a tower block in central London, the government is set to announce that the building will be demolished, according to former residents and survivors’ groups.

Survivors of the fire at Grenfell Tower responded to the plans after a meeting on Wednesday with the deputy prime minister, Angela Rayner, ahead of an official announcement on the future of the structure, which is expected on Friday.

One group condemned the decision to demolish the remains of the building. In a statement on social media, Grenfell United, a group representing residents, said that Ms. Rayner “could not give a reason for her decision to demolish the tower,” and that she could not say “how many bereaved and survivors had been spoken to.”

But another group that represents some of the bereaved families, Grenfell Next of Kin, acknowledged that the tower could not be allowed to remain a permanent feature of the London skyline for structural reasons, saying in a statement: “Do we wish the whole tower could stand forever? Yes. Is that an option? Not from a structural point of view. Do we need a way forward? Yes.”

Since 2017, the shell of the tower — covered in a protective wrap — has remained a visible symbol of Britain’s most lethal residential fire since World War II.

Some former residents would like some or all of the building to remain in place as a lasting reminder and warning — or at least for it to remain until any possible prosecutions begin in connection with the disaster. That may not happen before 2027.

Others have supported moves for Grenfell Tower to be replaced with a permanent memorial, such as a garden and monument, to those who lost their lives there.

The blaze was started by faulty wiring in a refrigerator and ripped through the 24-storey building aided by flammable exterior cladding and insulation that had been installed the year before.

Some residents were advised to stay in their apartments and await help from firefighters that never came. An official inquiry, whose findings were published last year, blamed cost-cutting, dishonest sales practices and lax regulation for the disaster.

Grenfell also came to symbolize fears about growing inequality in Britain, following years of government austerity, because the tower had housed many on modest incomes living in one of the wealthiest parts of the country.

But it has proved difficult to decide what to do with the remainder of the building, the higher levels of which are said to be structurally unsound.

Grenfell Next of Kin said in its statement that the building was being supported “by approximately 6,000 props,” at a cost that by 2028 is projected to reach 340 million pounds — about $425 million — and that it could not be propped up indefinitely because of “safety concerns.” The group noted that the previous Conservative government had avoided taking a decision on the tower’s future, and that Ms. Rayner was in a difficult position.

However, it added: “We want discussion about the facts — the structural issues that have informed this decision. We want a discussion about what will go in the tower’s place.”

The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government said in a statement that “the priority for the deputy prime minister is to meet with and write to the bereaved, survivors and the immediate community to let them know her decision on the future of the Grenfell Tower.”

It added: “This is a deeply personal matter for all those affected, and the deputy prime minister is committed to keeping their voice at the heart of this.”

President Trump’s administration has temporarily exempted from its funding freeze a U.S. contractor supporting the police inside a Syrian desert camp that holds thousands of Islamic State members and their families, the camp’s director has said.

The reprieve underscored how securing the camp is seen as critical to helping prevent a resurgence of ISIS, a jihadist group, at a time when the ouster of Bashar al-Assad in Syria has thrown the country into flux and added to instability in the Middle East.

The contractor, Proximity International, was forced to halt operations after Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued a stop-work order last week for all foreign aid programs. Proximity International runs a program that trains and equips local security forces in northeastern Syria. The police it trains provide security inside Al Hol, a camp that houses some 39,000 ISIS members, their families and refugees.

The Trump administration has argued that the funding freeze, set to last 90 days, is needed to examine whether U.S. funds are being wasted. “Every dollar we spend, every program we fund and every policy we pursue must be justified with the answer to three simple questions,” Mr. Rubio said in a statement last month. “Does it make America safer? Does it make America stronger? Does it make America more prosperous?”

Proximity International had requested an exemption from the freeze, arguing that its work does make America safer, according to a person familiar with the program, who asked not to be identified because of the ongoing uncertainty around U.S. funding. Al Hol is seen as a key target for ISIS recruitment and operations, and maintaining security there is viewed as important to keeping the jihadist group at bay.

Late on Friday, just hours before the company’s contract for the security training program was due to expire, Proximity International was granted a one-month waiver to continue operating, according to an employee who asked not to be identified because of the sensitivity of the situation, and to Jihan Hanan, the director of Al Hol and an official with the regional Kurdish authorities.

The temporary exemption for Proximity International followed a decision to grant a 15-day waiver for Blumont, a nonprofit that handles aid distribution and employs some security guards at Al Hol.

Ms. Hanan said she was relieved that the Trump administration appeared to understand the significance of Al Hol. But she warned that the short-term reprieves and chaos surrounding the status of other programs meant that long-term security concerns remained.

Much of the confusion stems from Mr. Rubio’s announcement that he was folding the United States Agency for International Development into the State Department. Elon Musk, who runs a task force in the Trump administration, said the aim was to shut down the U.S. aid agency, which also supports operations at Al Hol.

American connections to the camp, and in northeastern Syria, go back to the U.S.-led coalition that fought to eliminate ISIS. American troops maintain a presence in northeastern Syria, supporting a local ally, the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces, to guard against an ISIS comeback. The Kurdish-led group controls not only most of northeastern Syria but also a constellation of prisons and refugee camps in the territory holding ISIS fighters and their families.

About 22,000 of Al Hol’s residents are under 18, Ms. Hanan said, and have grown up in families once, and possibly still, loyal to ISIS. The humanitarian support now under threat is critical to ensuring they do not embrace extremism, she added.

Aid workers and researchers have long raised alarm over the miserable conditions at Al Hol. Inhabitants live in tents and are not allowed to leave the walled camp, making them completely dependent on aid distributions for bread, fuel and water.

Ms. Hanan said that the humanitarian concerns alone “should be enough” to maintain funding.

“Stopping aid is going to impact children whose background makes them a threat to the world, their communities and their own families,” she said in an interview. “We want to rehabilitate these children by improving their living conditions and instead, we were shocked to find out that it’s going in the opposite direction.”

Schools are already shut down in the camp, she said, and some services for women there also appear to be at risk. “A lot of organizations are telling us: At any moment, we may get an order to stop,” she said.

It is unclear what will happen when the waivers for Proximity International and Blumont expire. Employees of both organizations have said that they are scrambling to clarify with U.S. officials about what comes next.

The Indian Parliament erupted into an uproar on Thursday over reports that illegal migrants being deported to the country on an American military plane had faced mistreatment, including being shackled during the long intercontinental journey.

More than 100 illegal immigrants were returned to India on Wednesday. While deportations are nothing new — India is a big source of unauthorized migration to the United States — most have relied on commercial flights.

The use of a military aircraft, along with the claims of mistreatment, appear to have hit a nerve, creating a political headache for Prime Minister Narendra Modi days before he is expected to visit President Trump in Washington.

Mr. Modi’s has described the president as a “dear friend.” Officials in India had hoped their declared willingness to work with the United States on taking back migrants would avoid the embarrassment and back-and-forths seen in countries like Brazil and Colombia.

In India, much of the outrage on Thursday was in response to reports in local media, citing accounts of deportees, that they were shackled for over 40 hours and that their access to toilets was restricted.

A video put out by the U.S. Border Patrol showed the deportees boarding the plane in shackles. A spokesman for the U.S. Embassy in New Delhi declined to comment on reports that women and children were shackled.

Sukhpal Singh, a 35-year-old chef from the Indian state of Punjab, who had been arrested upon entering the United States through Mexico in January, was among them, according to his father.

“He told me that he was handcuffed, as were the other adults. His feet were also shackled,” his father, Prempal Singh, said in a telephone interview.

“Everyone around him was tied — adults, both male and female were chained.”

On Thursday, opposition lawmakers staged a protest in Parliament, some wearing handcuffs and carrying signs that read “humans, not prisoners.” They demanded to know how many Indians in the United States were facing imminent deportation.

“Why did we not send our own planes to bring back the Indians, with dignity and respect, instead of a military plane landing on our soil?” Mallikarjun Kharge, the president of the Indian National Congress, said.

In a scramble to control the damage, India’s foreign minister, S. Jaishankar, told Parliament that deportation procedures “provide for the use of restraints,” and he said American officials had confirmed to them that women and children were not shackled.

“We are, of course, engaging the U.S. government to ensure that the returning deportees are not mistreated in any manner during the flight,” Mr. Jaishankar said after the protest.

He told Parliament that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement looks after the needs of the deportees, including food and medical requirements.

“During toilet breaks, deportees are temporarily unrestrained if needed in that regard,” he said.

But his response revealed the delicate balance that his government needs to walk — between containing the domestic uproar and demonstrating its strictness on illegal immigration to the Trump administration.

“Our focus,” he said, should be on a “strong crackdown on the illegal migration industry.”

The Israeli defense minister said Thursday that he had ordered Israel’s military to draft a plan to allow Gazans to voluntarily leave the enclave, a move that comes after President Trump’s proposal for a massive resettlement of Palestinians and a U.S.-led takeover of the territory.

It was far from clear whether the proposal would be carried out, where the Israeli authorities hoped the Gazans would go, or how many people they imagined would leave.

But Israel Katz, the defense minister, praised Mr. Trump’s initiative, saying it could “allow a large population in Gaza to leave for various places in the world.”

Mr. Katz said his plan for Gazans to leave the enclave would include “exit options via land crossings, as well as special arrangements for departure by sea and air.” He made no mention of whether they would be allowed to come back home after the war.

On Tuesday evening, Mr. Trump argued that the roughly two million Palestinians in Gaza should leave during a joint news conference with visiting Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel.

He also proposed that the United States “take over” and “own” the Gaza Strip, although administration officials later tried to soften his comments.

The plan has evoked furious opposition across much of the world, and some critics have argued the moves could amount to ethnic cleansing if implemented.

“It is a fantasy to think that ethnic cleansing in the 21st century can be condoned,” Turki al-Faisal, a former Saudi intelligence chief, said in an interview on Wednesday with CNN. “The problem in Palestine is not the Palestinians — it is the Israeli occupation,” he added.

In devastated Gaza, many vowed to remain despite the hunger, cold and fear of renewed fighting between Israel and Hamas. Both sides are currently observing a six-week truce — the first stage of a cease-fire deal mediated by Qatar, Egypt, and the United States — and there is no guaranteeing how long it will hold.

But Mr. Trump’s statements have already prompted celebrations among Israel’s far-right, many of whom have long promulgated so-called “voluntary emigration” as the solution to the conflict with the Palestinians.

In the weeks after Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, attack ignited the war, Mr. Netanyahu’s aides lobbied its allies, including the United States and the United Kingdom, to pressure Egypt to admit hundreds of thousands of Gazan civilians.

Israel’s partners largely dismissed the proposal, in part because they feared the Israeli authorities would not allow Gazans to return home after the war.

Senior members of Mr. Netanyahu’s hard-line coalition government have publicly called for Israel to rule the territory indefinitely and build Jewish settlements there.

Many modern wars have generated waves of refugees. But Gazans, unusually, have mostly been trapped inside the Palestinian enclave with little way out.

More than 100,000 left in the first several months of the war before Israel conquered the border crossing with Egypt, shuttering the gateway. That left roughly two million still in the Gaza Strip, many of them displaced and living in tents.

Many Palestinians have resisted leaving: the mass displacement of their parents and grandparents in the wars surrounding Israel’s 1948 establishment remains one of their greatest collective traumas.

But neighboring countries like Egypt and Jordan have also shown little interest in taking them in, treating them as an economic burden and a source of potential domestic upheaval.

During an interview with Fox News on Wednesday evening, Mr. Netanyahu said that Palestinians could “relocate and come back” if necessary. “The actual idea of allowing Gazans who want to leave to leave — I mean, what’s wrong with that?” he said. “They can leave, they can then come back.”

Mr. Katz, the Israeli defense minister, argued that countries like Spain and Norway, which have been critical of Israel’s conduct of the war in Gaza, were obligated to take them in or else “their hypocrisy would be exposed.”

José Manuel Albares, Spain’s foreign minister, appeared to shoot down the idea in an interview with the country’s public broadcaster on Thursday morning.

“Gazans’ land is Gaza and Gaza must be part of the future Palestinian state,” said Mr. Albares.