TOP NEWS

Sanaa, Yemen – Ahmed Yahya, 28, fills his taxi with 10 litres of petrol as he begins his workday early in the morning.

“I feed my taxi with fuel first so that it can help feed my family,” Yahya, a taxi driver, said as he wiped the dust from his front window at a petrol station on the outskirts of Sanaa.

Up until earlier this week, Yahya used to pay 4,750 Yemeni riyals, the equivalent of roughly $8.90 in Houthi-controlled areas of Yemen. The price had remained unchanged for about four years in territory under the rebel group’s control – including the capital Sanaa.

But then, on Monday, the Houthis announced a roughly 10 percent increase in the price of petrol, up to 5,250 Yemeni Riyals ($9.80). After years of economic misery, Yahya described the price hike as another “painful surprise to an already devastated people”.

The Houthi-run Yemen Petroleum Company said the diesel and petrol price increase was the result of a “global increase in fuel prices”, and promised that it would be temporary. The increase in global oil prices this year comes off the back of the impact of the United States-Israel war on Iran. But, more recently, the Houthis’ own capture of Yemen’s southern Red Sea coast from government forces last week, and attacks on Saudi Arabia, have played a major role in increasing prices.

“When I heard the announcement of the new fuel price, I was shocked and frustrated. We’re hardly surviving, and this price increase will make survival even harder,” said Yahya, as he lamented another burden in a country where 18 million already face acute food insecurity – a lack of reliable access to enough food.

‘Rent or food?’

Yahya, a father of three, has been working as a taxi driver for five years. Although the job helps make ends meet, he feels financially insecure, especially with the ongoing changes in food and fuel prices.

“My family spend about 75,000 Yemeni riyals [$140] a month on food expenses such as flour, rice and cooking oil. With the fuel price rise, we will need at least 85,000 Yemeni riyals [$159] a month for the same food items,” said Yahya.

The resumption of fighting in Yemen in the past few months, after a four-year period of relative calm in the country’s war, has contributed to the price rises. But for Yahya, relatively safe in Sanaa, it’s the increased expenses that are the more troubling development.

“When prices rise, they affect what we eat, drink, and how we live,” he said. “Let me give you an example: I pay 25,000 Yemeni riyals [$47] in rent every month. With the increase in food prices, putting money aside to pay the rent has become more challenging. What is the priority? Rent or food?”

An April report by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) said that Yemen’s internal conflict has led to significant macroeconomic vulnerabilities and a marked decrease in income per capita, leaving more than half of the population in urgent need of humanitarian assistance.

“It [the conflict] has caused widespread food insecurity, disease outbreaks, mass family displacement, and limited access to clean water,” the report said.

Risky and costly transportation

One of the links between the renewed fighting and the increase in prices is the longer distances needed to transport products across the country, as truckers avoid roads near the front lines.

“A truck carrying goods from the south to the north or vice versa now takes up to a week to reach its final destination. Before the renewed fighting, a similar journey would have taken three days or less,” explained Saleh Abdullah, a shopkeeper in Sanaa.

The increased transportation costs, including the higher fuel prices, are passed on to the consumer.

“This means no family is immune to this trouble,” Abdullah said. “Whether it is the flour, the baby milk, the fruits, the vegetables, or anything else, families will feel the pain of price increases.”

“Some customers become angry at us when we sell products at a higher price,” he added. “We didn’t impose prices. We just react and adapt to the changes in the country or the region.”

Ibrahim Abdu, an employee at the Nehm customs checkpoint in Sanaa governorate, said the number of trucks arriving in the capital has declined over the past few weeks.

“Fighting has cut off many roads, and merchants have avoided risking their products and drivers,” he told Al Jazeera.

‘A hunger multiplier’

Years of war have taken a heavy toll on Yemen’s economy, disrupted businesses, and pushed millions of people into poverty and food insecurity. Against this bleak backdrop, the country’s humanitarian tragedy has been worsening.

Ahmed Mohammed, a former humanitarian worker in Hodeidah, describes the fuel price rise as a “hunger multiplier” in war-torn Yemen.

“If a breadwinner struggles to buy a family three meals a day, he may be able to afford only two given the rising price of food commodities. This will deepen hunger among families,” said Mohammed.

He added: “War is ugly, and one of its ugliest aspects is seeing a family unable to afford a kilogramme of flour, sugar or rice.”

The UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) warned this week that the violence threatens to trigger a humanitarian crisis as more people are displaced, pressuring communities with limited resources.

A multi-faceted impact

Wafiq Saleh, an economic researcher and executive director of the Taiz Centre for Yemeni-Gulf Studies, said the 10 percent hike in fuel prices in Houthi-controlled areas deals a blow to Yemeni consumers.

“Its impact will manifest as a major inflationary wave, placing a heavy burden on the most vulnerable and income-deprived segments of society,” Saleh told Al Jazeera.

While this price increase may appear modest in percentage terms, its effects extend far beyond the petrol station, rippling through various goods and services and creating new hardships, according to Saleh.

“Petroleum products serve as intermediate inputs for a wide range of goods and services. Consequently, a 10 percent rise in fuel prices does not merely increase people’s expenses by 10 percent; it triggers a cascading effect on prices,” he said.

“The most severely affected sectors include agriculture – which relies on diesel for crop irrigation – and the transport and services sectors, where rising costs immediately drive up passenger fares and food prices.”

He added that the increase would also affect water and electricity services, many of which rely on diesel-powered generators, further increasing the cost of basic services.

Small- and medium-sized enterprises are similarly affected.

“Small enterprises are operating on narrow profit margins, and they may be forced to either cease operations or pass the increased costs on to the final consumer,” Saleh said.

Russians head to the polls from Friday to Sunday to elect members of the State Duma, the lower house of Russia’s parliament, in the first parliamentary election to be held since the country launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

The vote comes as Russians face a slowing economy as well as Ukrainian drone strikes on refineries and warehouses far from the front line.

United Russia, the governing party that backs President Vladimir Putin, is expected to keep its dominant position.

The authorities are presenting the election as a chance for voters to have their say. Critics argue that with no genuine opposition on the ballot, the result is largely settled in advance.

So why are the elections worth watching? Here is what you need to know:

How do Russia’s elections work?

Starting Friday and lasting through Sunday, Russians will elect members of the lower house, the State Duma.

They will also cast ballots in local elections.

Voters in 11 regions will elect their governors, and 39 regions will elect members of regional legislatures.

Voting is spread over three days to boost turnout among the 111 million eligible voters and includes areas Russia occupies in Ukraine. Electronic voting is allowed.

Half of the Duma’s 450 seats are filled by party lists and the other half are contested in single-ballot races.

What is United Russia?

Russia’s governing party, formed in 2001 from a merger of pro-Kremlin parties, has backed Putin and dominated the parliament ever since.

United Russia won more than two-thirds of the Duma’s seats in the 2021 election. It is again poised to dominate the body.

The party’s list is led by political heavyweights: Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, Russia’s top diplomat for 22 years, and Sergei Sobyanin, Moscow’s powerful mayor.

In an apparent bid to add fresh faces to what is widely seen as a party of bureaucrats, its third-highest-ranking official is war correspondent Yevgeny Poddubny, who was badly wounded by a Ukrainian drone.

Members of United Russia have pledged to back the war effort and Putin’s maximalist goals in what the Kremlin calls the “special military operation” in Ukraine.

Who else is running in Russia’s elections?

Alongside United Russia, other “systemic opposition” parties that vote in sync with the government on key issues are also expected to remain.

The liberal Yabloko Party, the only registered political party that opposes the war, was initially on the ballot, but the Supreme Court ordered it removed in August.

It cited, among other reasons, that the antiwar stance was akin to seeking the violation of Russia’s territorial integrity. Yabloko now runs only single-ballot races.

The Communist Party has been a leading force in the Federal Assembly since the 1990s, led for more than three decades by 82-year-old Gennady Zyuganov, a former Soviet official.

Throughout Putin’s rule of more than a quarter-century, the Communists have criticised some aspects of government policy but carefully avoided any criticism of him. They steadfastly support the war in Ukraine.

Alexander Bratersky, a political analyst and independent journalist, told Al Jazeera that the race for second place is worth watching.

If the Communist Party nab second, it would “suggest voters are angry about economic hardship and falling living standards”.

The Liberal Democratic Party, an ultranationalist force that has been a significant presence in the legislature since the early 1990s, will also likely retain some influence in the Duma.

Like the Communists, it staunchly supports the war and boasts of having multiple veterans as members.

Other smaller parties round out the ballot.

The party known as A Just Russia has been on Russia’s political scene for 20 years. A social-democratic party, it competes with the Communists for older and middle-aged voters nostalgic for the Soviet past, and it supports the war in Ukraine.

The New People Party was founded shortly before the last parliamentary election in 2021, seeking to position itself as a liberal voice representing younger voters and technocrats. It won just more than 5 percent of the vote, allowing it to form a small faction.

Bratersky described the party as “a liberal-leaning party backed by some Kremlin people who are more technocratic and more pro-peace”.

He said it appeals to the “middle-class audience”, and after the Kremlin banned Yabloko, it has been viewed as its substitute.

“So, if they come third with a good number of votes, this is a sign that those who are antiwar used them as their legal avatar,” he said.

Other parties seeking seats include Communists of Russia, a small rival of the main Communist Party; the Party of Pensioners; the Green Party; the Party of Direct Democracy; and the Motherland Party.

Why do the elections matter to the Kremlin?

While these elections may seem routine, the fact that they are the first since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine is what makes them important, Bratersky told Al Jazeera.

He said that Putin has linked the elections to support for the war: Endorsing United Russia at its party congress in August, Putin said the party’s duty was “to do everything for victory” in the war in Ukraine.

“This shows that the Kremlin is a bit worried since the elections are the only legal way to show disrespect for the Kremlin,” Bratersky said. “Even Putin’s core fans hate United Russia as a corrupt force.”

How have past elections gone?

Since Putin first came to power in 2000, United Russia has won every Duma election, usually by a wide margin.

The results have repeatedly been disputed.

In 2011, allegations of vote-rigging set off the largest street protests of Putin’s rule.

After the 2021 vote, independent monitors and statisticians said the party’s real support was far lower than the official count.

The authorities have rejected claims of widespread fraud. Opposition parties and critics of the war have increasingly been kept off the ballot.

Leopardus tilcayo is the first new living cat species named and described in more than a century.

A tiny wild cat that lives in Bolivia’s lush cloud forests has been identified as a previously unknown species, marking the first time in more than a century that a new living feline species has been formally named and described.

Called “tilcayo” by local communities, the cat is part of a group called tiger cats, which are found across much of South America.

It was discovered in the Yungas forest, a mountainous region where forests are often covered by clouds and surrounded by high humidity, according to the researchers.

Given the scientific name Leopardus tilcayo, the cat measures 46cm (18 inches) long and weighs about 1.4kg (3 pounds), making it smaller than an average domestic cat.

“Its fur is light brown … with irregularly shaped rosettes across its body,” according to Paola Nogales-Ascarrunz, a National Geographic Explorer and one of the authors of the study describing the newly identified species published on Thursday in the journal Current Biology.

Little is known about the cat’s biology and lifestyle. Remains of small rodents in scat samples suggest they may form part of its diet, while camera-trap evidence indicates it could be more active at night, Nogales-Ascarrunz said.

Tiger cats are so-called cryptic species, meaning they cannot easily be distinguished merely by appearance, evolutionary biologist and study co-lead author Jonas Lescroart of the University of Antwerp in Belgium said.

Observing the Bolivian cat drew interest because “its characteristics did not match the descriptions, most of them based on Brazilian cats”, Nogales-Ascarrunz said. “This made us wonder, what tiger cat do we actually have in Bolivia?”

The team analysed DNA from 38 cats sampled across several South American countries, including eight museum specimens. The study found that tiger cats are in fact five genetically distinct species.

“We never expected this Bolivian tiger cat to be a separate species, and no one had ever proposed it as a different animal, subspecies or otherwise,” Jonas Lescroart said.

Genetic analysis suggested that the tilcayo lineage separated from other tiger cats about 1.4 million years ago.

The research team also described a new tiger cat subspecies in Peru’s Yungas, naming it Leopardus tigrinus antisuyo, after Antisuyu, the region of the old Inca Empire that included the area it inhabits.

Italy’s defence minister warns of severe economic fallout if Bab al-Mandeb becomes impassable, bypassing EU delays.

Italy will deploy warships to ensure safe passage for its commercial vessels through the Bab al-Mandeb strait, Defence Minister Guido Crosetto said, adding that Rome would not wait for a joint decision from the European Union.

“We have the capabilities to protect the passage,” Crosetto said, warning that if the waterway became impassable, the economic consequences would be severe.

The Italian defence minister said that Rome “must not allow bureaucratic delays in decision-making to exacerbate an already complex situation”.

Bab al-Mandeb links the Red Sea to the Gulf of Aden, forming one of the world’s busiest shipping corridors between Europe and Asia and a critical route for oil, gas and container traffic heading to and from the Suez Canal.

Roughly 12 to 15 percent of global trade has historically passed through the narrow waterway, which separates Yemen from Djibouti and Eritrea on the African side and is only about 30km (19 miles) wide at its narrowest point.

The strait’s importance has grown sharply since Iran effectively seized control of the Strait of Hormuz earlier this year amid its war with the United States and Israel, choking off the world’s most important oil chokepoint and pushing much of the Gulf’s crude exports towards alternative routes.

Saudi Arabia, in particular, has increasingly relied on pipelines and Red Sea shipping to bypass Hormuz altogether, making the Bab al-Mandeb strait one of the last major arteries still open to Gulf oil reaching global markets.

Control of the strait has been contested for years, as Yemen’s government, Houthi rebels and, at times, forces in the region have held stretches of its coastline at different points since the war in Yemen began in 2015.

The significance of the strait has been hit dramatically in the past few weeks, when the Iran-backed Houthi movement launched a rapid offensive that brought the entirety of Yemen’s western Red Sea coast under its control, including several strategically located islands.

The advance has given the Houthis effectively unrestricted access to the waterway, a development seen as a major setback for international shipping, given the group’s history of attacking vessels it associates with the US or its allies in the region.

The US and the European Union have already carried out military operations aimed at better protecting merchant ships from Houthi attacks in the area, though those efforts have struggled to fully secure the route as fighting in Yemen has escalated.

The ex-Oklahoma state trooper’s nomination had stalled in the Senate as ICE faced growing scrutiny over its operations.

The White House has withdrawn the nomination of former Oklahoma state trooper Lance Schroyer to lead United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), without giving a reason for the decision.

The withdrawal was announced on Thursday. Schroyer, a senior adviser to Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin, was nominated by President Donald Trump in June but had yet to receive a hearing before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

Republican Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, who chairs the committee, had refused to hold a hearing until the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) provided information he had requested about civilian deaths during ICE enforcement operations.

“I don’t have a concern with who the nominee was. I had asked them to give me an update on the internal investigation into civilian deaths,” Paul told The Associated Press news agency.

Paul said he had intended to hold a hearing on Schroyer’s nomination but learned that it had been withdrawn when the White House made the decision public.

ICE remains under scrutiny

Schroyer had little experience in immigration and had not previously worked at ICE or led a major law enforcement agency. Two US officials told the Reuters news agency when he was nominated that he had been a surprise choice for the position.

When announcing Schroyer’s nomination in June, Trump said on Truth Social that he had “firsthand experience getting Illegal Aliens OFF our streets” and called on the Senate to confirm him “IMMEDIATELY”.

The withdrawal comes as ICE remains under scrutiny over its enforcement operations as the Trump administration carries out its immigration crackdown.

Critics have raised questions about how the agency has recruited and trained officers as it rapidly expanded its workforce. Federal immigration officers have also shot and killed multiple people during enforcement operations, including two US citizens in Minneapolis earlier this year.

ICE arrests have continued to increase, reaching nearly 51,000 in August, the highest monthly total of Trump’s second administration.

ICE has not had a Senate-confirmed director since 2017. David Venturella is serving as acting director after Todd Lyons resigned earlier this year.

The White House has not indicated when it might announce another nominee to lead the agency.

Recurring floods disrupt daily life in Tunis, raising questions about drainage, transport and flood preparedness.

Tunis, Tunisia – Heavy rain brought parts of Tunisia’s capital to a standstill on Thursday, flooding roads and homes, trapping people in cars and disrupting electricity and internet services.

Home to nearly three million people, the Greater Tunis region has faced repeated flooding in recent years. Thursday’s flooding came only months after severe January rains caused widespread disruption across the capital and other parts of the country, leaving several people dead and causing significant damage.

Weather warnings had been issued in advance, but the decision to suspend classes in Tunis was announced only shortly before it took effect. Parents rushed to schools to collect their children as the rain intensified and traffic backed up across the capital.

Videos shared online showed flooded streets, cars stranded in rising water and what appeared to be power lines catching fire. Residents also reported power and internet cuts and water entering homes.

‘The road became almost unrecognisable’

Fatma, a 35-year-old employee in Tunis, said the situation deteriorated quickly as she struggled to get home safely.

“At about 4pm, the road became almost unrecognisable. The tunnel leading to Bab Saadoun was completely closed because of the rain,” she told Al Jazeera.

“Most people were stranded by the roadside for hours, waiting for public transport that never came. I saw three cars that filled with water and broke down, and people carrying their children on their shoulders.”

“Every season, the same thing happens. Roads close and traffic comes to a complete standstill. All the drains start overflowing with waste,” she said.

The National Institute of Meteorology had warned of locally heavy thunderstorms on Thursday, including heavy rain over short periods that could cause flooding, disrupt traffic and overwhelm drainage networks. It also warned of potential power cuts.

Residents question flood preparedness

“Tunisia has become used to these disasters. Every year, we end up flooded even when there is little rain,” said Intissar, 33, from the Lafayette area of Tunis.

She blamed local authorities for failing to carry out preventive work before the rainy season.

“This is work that should have been done during the summer,” she said.

But she also acknowledged the role of residents.

“We cannot deny the responsibility of citizens who dump waste that blocks drainage channels,” she said.

At a government meeting in August, officials called for drainage networks and waterways to be cleaned and flood-protection work to be accelerated. The government said 29 flood-protection projects were under way across the country.

The flooding comes as Tunisia prepares for a national march in Tunis on Saturday, with organisers calling for the release of four activists detained in connection with the Al-Soumoud Flotilla. The march is scheduled for 5pm, as rain is forecast to continue through Saturday.

A struggle to get home

Fatma said the lack of reliable public transport, combined with repeated flooding, was making it increasingly difficult for people to manage without cars.

“The problem makes people look for their own solutions. That is why most people are trying to find a way to buy a car, because it has become difficult to live without one with these recurring problems,” she said.

The flooding also came as students returned to schools and universities this week, adding pressure to roads and public transport.

For Fatma, the disruption is becoming a familiar pattern.

“This shows that the state has no vision. It is caught off-guard just like citizens are,” she said.

Report says ‘reasonable grounds’ US was behind the deadly strike against a school in Minab in February.

The ruling comes amid legal battle over Trump’s changes to the Kennedy Center, including his effort to rename it.

A United States federal judge has ordered the Kennedy Center to provide 30 days’ notice before making major physical changes to the building, including demolition, after President Donald Trump said the Washington performing arts venue could be “ripped down”.

US District Judge Christopher Cooper issued the order on Thursday, saying it would “avoid any confusion” following the centre’s sudden closure this week.

The Kennedy Center closed on Wednesday and will remain closed for at least seven days to assess what its executive director Matt Floca called “acute risks to public safety” from structural deterioration. Officials have cited a partial ceiling collapse earlier this month and problems with the building’s roof terrace canopy.

The temporary closure came a day after the center’s board voted to close the facility for an extended renovation. The Trump-aligned board has argued that the building, which opened in 1971, is in serious disrepair.

Trump said on Wednesday that his administration’s efforts to restore the centre deserved recognition and warned that without them, “it’s going to close. It’ll end up being ripped down”.

The judge’s order followed a request from Democratic Representative Joyce Beatty, an ex officio Kennedy Center board member who has challenged Trump’s efforts to overhaul the institution. Judge Cooper rejected Beatty’s request for an emergency hearing but ordered that any major physical changes, including demolition, would require 30 days’ notice.

On Wednesday, an AFP news agency photograph showed Trump on board Air Force One examining a placard that appeared to depict the Kennedy Center being demolished. The image showed the words “Kennedy Center DEMOLIS…” above a picture of heavy machinery clearing rubble.

The AFP image was viewed millions of times on social media and made headlines in many US news outlets. The photograph was included in Beatty’s court filing on Thursday.

The legal dispute follows Judge Cooper’s earlier rulings that blocked efforts to add Trump’s name to the Kennedy Center without congressional approval.

Assailant sprayed vinegar at Representative Ilhan Omar, admitting political motives were behind the assault during her townhall.

The man who sprayed apple cider vinegar at Democratic United States Representative Ilhan Omar during a town hall meeting in her district in Minneapolis was sentenced to a 14-month prison term after he pleaded guilty to an assault charge.

Appearing before District Judge Joan N Ericksen on Thursday, 55-year-old Anthony James Kazmierczak pleaded guilty to planning the January 27 assault, admitting he targeted the congresswoman over opposing political views. He had been charged with assaulting a US officer.

It has been nearly eight months since Kazmierczak lunged towards the congresswoman and sprayed her with a dark water-and-vinegar mixture from a syringe, which landed on Omar’s clothing and skin.

The attack was captured on video and showed Kazmierczak, who sat in the front row of the town hall, leaping from the audience, after which he could be heard yelling, “You must resign” and that Omar was “splitting Minnesota apart”.

Kazmierczak was promptly subdued by Omar’s security team before being arrested. Omar was not injured in the attack and proceeded with the town hall.

The assault came as Omar had been calling for the abolition of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency and the resignation of then-Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem over her management of federal border agents in Minneapolis during the shootings during “Operation Metro Surge,” President Donald Trump’s federal immigration crackdown in the state of Minnesota. The crackdown involved more than 2,000 officers in Minneapolis and Saint Paul and provoked intense civil unrest and led to the deaths of two US citizens, Renee Nicole Good and Alex Pretti, at the hands of federal agents.

In an earlier hearing, Kazmierczak could not explain what happened in the assault.

“It’s fuzzy,” he told US Judge Ericksen when asked what he remembered. 

The government sentencing memorandum, submitted to the court by prosecutors, said he had texted at least three people indicating his actions were premeditated, though he refused to answer questions about his specific intent.

He also messaged a neighbour to arrange for dog care and contacts for a bail bond company.

The sentencing memo said Kazmierczak had long struggled with alcohol abuse, had “a history of mental and emotional health concerns”, and also had a string of health issues tied to a 2022 diagnosis of Parkinson’s disease. His lawyer, John Fossum, had argued that Kazmierczak had not been taking his mental health medication before the attack, lowering his inhibitions and contributing to what happened.

“I’ve spent enough time in jail thinking,” Kazmierczak said Thursday. “I really apologise to her for having put her through that,” he said, referring to Omar.

Kazmierczak wrote to Omar after the attack, “I’m sorry if I scared you.”

In social media posts, Kazmierczak had denounced former President Joe Biden and referred to Democrats as “angry and liars”, writing that Trump wants the US to be “stronger and more prosperous”.

“This assault is yet another example of a dangerous national trend: people channeling political hatred into criminal acts,” said US Attorney Daniel N Rosen after Kazmierczak pled guilty in May.

Omar, a Somali-American refugee and naturalised US citizen, has faced sustained mocking and anti-immigrant rhetoric from Trump throughout her congressional tenure.

Frankfurt grapples with a rare malaria outbreak tied to air travel, marking three deaths in recent months.

A third person has died from malaria after a recent cluster of cases linked to Frankfurt Airport, in what German officials have described as an extremely rare air-traffic-related ⁠outbreak of the tropical disease.

In a statement on Thursday, city administration said the person died at Frankfurt hospital and was one of two infected residents living in the Schwanheim district, in the immediate vicinity of the airport.

The two new malaria cases in the neighbourhood had been reported on Tuesday.

“Both individuals ‌had become infected with the malaria-causing parasite Plasmodium falciparum, even though they had not travelled to a malaria-endemic region and had not worked at the airport,” the statement said.

According to the city’s public health department, the two newly infected people contracted the disease from a mosquito flown into Germany on an aircraft or in luggage.

Six Frankfurt airport workers had contracted malaria tropica, the most dangerous form of the disease, in July, authorities said. Two later died.

Malaria is a potentially life-threatening mosquito-borne disease that is extremely rare in Germany.

The malaria parasite is spread between ⁠humans by some types of mosquitoes, but not through direct human-to-human contact.

Frankfurt Airport operator Fraport said it set up traps to catch ⁠mosquitoes and sent the insects to a laboratory in Antwerp in Belgium in July and August, but ‌results were not available yet.

Health authorities have warned doctors near the airport to consider malaria in patients who come in with a fever.

Airport workers and residents have been urged to seek medical advice in case they display symptoms including fever, chills, headaches, confusion, seizures and breathing difficulties.

An airport spokesperson said local public health authorities had the power ‌in ‌principle to order airlines to disinfect aircraft.

British monarch highlights AI’s potential darker capacities, urging safety and humanity-focused development.

The United Kingdom’s King Charles has warned Artificial Intelligence (AI) industry leaders of the “existential dangers” posed by the technology if it falls into the wrong hands.

The monarch’s comments on Thursday add to a global debate over whether, and how to regulate the industry.

Charles hosted AI giants, including the cofounders of Nvidia and Google DeepMind, along with leaders from OpenAI and Anthropic at a summit at his Dumfries House estate in Scotland, to address safety concerns before it was “too late” to rein it in.

“There seems urgency in adequately considering the existential dangers of such technologies falling into the wrong hands, and being used in potentially catastrophic ways,” Charles told guests at the opening of the conference.

“Those in our world who value our humanity and its vital moral component are anxiously seeking your reassurance that we will not lose control of our destiny,” he told the industry leaders.

“Those who have created these technologies are now increasingly warning that AI risks developing darker capacities, perhaps even to take life,” or be used in “potentially catastrophic ways”, the king also said.

In recent weeks, global figures have weighed in on whether the industry should regulate itself or allow governments to produce guidelines on how the rapidly evolving technology develops.

In May, Pope Leo XIV said ⁠”the world does not need an artificial intelligence that diminishes humanity” and must be “disarmed”.

Meanwhile, US President Donald Trump has dismissed concerns about the technology as a “hoax”.

Slow the pace of AI development

Last week, two Anthropic researchers warned that the rapidly advancing technology could lead to human extinction in the not-too-distant future.

Anthropic Chief Executive Dario Amodei has also called for companies to slow the pace of AI development.

However, that has prompted an ⁠international debate about whether some executives were trying to get ahead of a possible government backlash and set the rules to keep the lead of particular companies.

“The development of AI – its substance and its pace – are both intriguing and deeply concerning in equal measure,” the British monarch said.

He urged industry leaders to harness it “with safety at its heart” and “to ensure that it remains firmly in the service of humanity, community and the natural world”.

The summit in Scotland is not expected to produce any binding agreements.

Chelsea announce that Clearlake will acquire the stakes of Todd Boehly and director Mark Walter.

Xabi Alonso said Chelsea’s ambition was “very clear” after Clearlake Capital took full control of the Premier League club, ending Todd Boehly’s chairmanship.

Chelsea announced late on Wednesday that Clearlake, led by co-founders Behdad Eghbali and Jose E Feliciano, would acquire the stakes of Boehly and director Mark Walter.

US billionaires Boehly and Walter partnered with Clearlake to buy the London club from Roman Abramovich in May 2022 in a sale mandated by the British government.

Prior to the new deal, private equity company Clearlake had owned 61.5 percent of the club, with Boehly and Walter carving up the remaining shares with another investor, Swiss billionaire Hansjorg Wyss.

Chelsea said Wyss would “remain an important stakeholder and partner in the ownership group”.

Boehly and Walter are among the co-owners of the Los Angeles Dodgers baseball team, while Walter recently sold the Los Angeles Lakers basketball franchise for $12.5bn.

The Financial Times reported that the pair were set to receive 950 million pounds ($1.27bn) for their combined stakes in Chelsea, in a deal that values the club at about five billion pounds, including debt.

In a new statement on Thursday, Chelsea said: “Our ambition is clear: to compete at the highest level, to win major trophies, and to build sustained success”.

Blues boss Alonso, who started at Chelsea on July 1 , told reporters that the change was “an important day for the club”.

“Thanks to the former owners for what they’ve done. I was not here, but I know they played an important role,” he said on the eve of Chelsea’s Premier League match at Brentford on Friday.

“And now that Behdad is taking more control, almost full control, I think it’s good that the main one is clear.

“I have very good relations with Behdad. He was the one that came to Madrid to explain to me the project, to convince me and we are working well together.”

“We know where we want to be, we know that everything takes time, but the ambition for that is very clear,” the Spaniard added.

Since the takeover in 2022, Chelsea’s highest Premier League finish is fourth in 2024/25, when the club won the UEFA Conference League and FIFA Club World Cup.

Former Real Madrid and Bayer Leverkusen coach Alonso has a brief to revitalise the underachieving Chelsea squad, which finished a dismal 10th in the Premier League last season.

The Blues have made a mixed start to the new campaign, taking seven points from their four Premier League games to sit sixth in the table.

Boehly and Walter have also sold their stakes in Chelsea’s partner club, French Ligue 1 side Strasbourg, giving full control to Clearlake.

Public broadcaster RTE says the country’s participation cannot be justified amid ‘appalling and ongoing loss of lives in Gaza’.

Ireland has become the second country, after the Netherlands, to announce a boycott of next year’s Eurovision Song Contest over Israel’s participation.

Irish public broadcaster RTE said in a statement on Thursday that the country’s participation could not be justified “given the appalling and ongoing loss of lives in Gaza” and that the humanitarian crisis in the enclave “continues to put the lives of so many civilians at risk”.

RTE, which manages Ireland’s selection and participation in Eurovision, added that it remained “deeply concerned by the continued denial of independent access [for] international journalists to the territory”.

The decision marks the second consecutive year that Ireland will neither participate in nor broadcast the competition, which is the world’s most popular television music show.

Earlier this month, Eurovision organisers said they were excluding any country involved in an armed conflict from hosting the competition.

However, the Dutch public broadcaster Avrotros said the exclusion of countries in conflict was not “sufficient”.

Avrotros announced last month that it was withdrawing from the 2027 competition.

It said Eurovision could “no longer be considered neutral” given Israel’s participation in “a large-scale military conflict” in Gaza.

Both Ireland and the Netherlands were among five countries that withdrew from Eurovision 2026 in Vienna earlier this year. Spain, Slovenia and Iceland also decided not to participate.

Eurovision Director Martin Green said on Thurday that organisers “fully respect” Ireland’s decision and that they “will be missed”.

“The Eurovision Song Contest is at its best when broadcasters and their artists from different countries come together to share music, celebrate creativity and create connections between audiences,” Green said.

“That power to bring people together is at the heart of what makes the Contest so special, and is even more important now in an increasingly difficult and divided world.”

The 2026 show, which Bulgaria won, attracted 132 million viewers, 34 million fewer than its 2025 edition.

Thousands of protesters gathered outside the venue in the Austrian capital during the final in mid-May to oppose Israel’s participation.

The European Broadcasting Union organises the annual music competition. It has faced accusations of applying a double standard for refusing to exclude Israel, despite banning Russia following its invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

Iran’s missiles and drones have downed dozens of US aircraft, damaged or destroyed hundreds of the United States’ buildings at its bases in the Middle East, and drained its inventories of military equipment worth billions of dollars, the Pentagon conceded earlier this week.

On Wednesday, Tehran unleashed another unlikely weapon in its war against the US: a maths equation.

Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, who has also been a lead negotiator during talks between Tehran and Washington at different stages during the past six months, typed out a version of the Taylor equation, a formula used by central banks to determine interest rates, in a post on X loaded with a wartime message.

“Let’s see if a hike could open SOH or produce a single barrel,” he wrote, referring to interest rate hikes and the Strait of Hormuz, a crucial waterway Iran has effectively blocked for global shipping.

“You can’t 25bp [basis points] a chokepoint,” he added, seemingly again referring to the strait. “It’s SOH risk premium, and We set it.”

Hours after Ghalibaf’s post, the US Federal Reserve did raise the benchmark interest rate by 25 basis points.

Early in the war, which was launched by the US and Israel against Iran on February 28, Ghalibaf frequently used financial arguments to mock how the conflict was being conducted by the administration of US President Donald Trump, to point to Iran’s ability to hurt Washington economically unless it changed its approach.

Now he’s turned to maths.

“This is a spectacular bit of agitprop from Iran, a country which, if nothing else in 2026, has demonstrated an impressive ability to needle its US opponent,” Chris Beauchamp, chief market analyst at IG Group, told Al Jazeera.

But what exactly is Ghalibaf trying to say? What is the Taylor equation, has the Iran war influenced the US interest rate, and does Tehran “set it”, as the parliament speaker has suggested?

What is the Taylor equation that Ghalibaf cited?

The rule is a formula economists use to estimate where a central bank should set interest rates based on inflation and the strength of the economy.

Developed by economist John Taylor in the early 1990s, the rule links the US federal funds rate to inflation and the “output gap” – the difference between actual economic output and its potential.

In its simplest form, the formula is:

Interest rate = inflation + 0.5(output gap) + 0.5(inflation − 2%) + 2%.

This means the recommended interest rate rises when inflation moves above the 2 percent target or when economic output exceeds its potential. It falls when inflation weakens or the economy operates below potential.

However, the equation is a benchmark, not a set rule that is strictly followed. Policymakers at the US Federal Reserve weigh other economic factors when setting interest rates.

Is the Iran war a factor in the US interest rate hike?

Trump’s tariffs, the energy shock following the US-Israeli war with Iran, and heavy investment associated with the artificial intelligence boom, taken together, have kept inflationary pressures strong, experts say.

On Wednesday, when the US Federal Reserve raised interest rates by 25bp, it was the first increase in three years.

Fed Chairman Kevin Warsh, in his speech following the rate hike, said renewed fighting between the US and Iran, which has pushed up petrol prices, helped convince Fed officials to support higher rates.

“There’s no hiding from hot spots around the world,” Warsh said.

IG Group’s Beauchamp said, “The Iran war, indirectly, is a huge driver of last night’s hike, though no one wants to admit it.”

“The energy spike has combined with the rise in yields to drive the Fed into a corner with no way out,” he said.

Susannah Streeter, chief investment strategist at the Wealth Club, said there is “no denying” that Iran’s retaliatory action against the US and its allies across the Gulf region has “intensified concerns about energy supplies and led to hotter inflation forecasts”.

“The ongoing geopolitical turmoil and elevated crude prices certainly were key issues behind the Fed’s decision to hike rates,” she said.

Is Iran ‘setting’ the US interest rate?

In short, no.

Wealth Club’s Streeter cautioned that while the war in the Middle East and rising oil prices were certainly an element in the Fed’s decision, they weren’t the “only factors at play”.

“The spending might of AI hyperscalers has also pulsed through the veins of the economy, with strong capital investment and resilient domestic demand adding to inflationary pressures, so policymakers will have been looking at the whole picture,” she noted.

“So, while Tehran has arguably had an influence on some of the forces feeding into US monetary policy, particularly through the impact of the conflict on oil supplies and prices, it is not ‘setting’ US interest rates.”

Streeter said the US Federal Reserve was responding to a much broader set of economic conditions.

“Iran’s actions have affected the inflation outlook, but the decision on where to set interest rates ultimately rests with the Federal Reserve, and there are plenty of other data points policymakers use,” she noted.

What’s behind Ghalibaf’s maths mocking?

In March, Iran’s parliamentary speaker had repeatedly used social media to comment on markets and energy prices, including mocking efforts by the Trump administration to influence oil futures and arguing that financial manoeuvring could not create “actual fuel” at petrol stations.

Last month, Ghalibaf posted a graphic bearing the phrase “Make America Hungry Again” – a play on Trump’s slogan “Make America Great Again” – together with statistics on food insecurity and hunger in the US.

“You can’t cover up defeats with false claims,” he said.

Islamabad, Pakistan — More than 16 months after India and Pakistan fought a four-day air war, firing missiles and drones at each other, the South Asian neighbours came the closest since then to a military face-off — this time in the Arabian Sea.

Indian and Pakistani naval vessels collided on Tuesday, setting off tit-for-tat accusations. Pakistan’s government summoned India’s top diplomat in Islamabad on Wednesday, mirroring action New Delhi had taken hours earlier when it summoned Pakistan’s charge d’affaires and lodged a protest of its own over the incident.

The collision is the first direct military encounter between the nuclear-armed neighbours since their four-day conflict in May 2025, when Indian air strikes and Pakistani retaliation brought both countries closer to full-scale war than at any point in decades.

So far, details of what happened remain disputed. Neither government has released video, track data or an independent account – and each statement places the blame on the other’s vessel.

But analysts say it underscored the risks of unintended incidents in the seas that could potentially escalate into broader crises, when India and Pakistan have few military and diplomatic mechanisms left in place to defuse tensions.

Two accounts

According to Pakistan’s Foreign Office statement issued on Wednesday evening, the navy has been conducting its biennial SEASPARK-26 exercise inside its exclusive economic zone since September 1 .

A country’s EEZ extends 200 nautical miles (370km) from its coast. Its territorial waters are only 12 nautical miles (22km) from the coast, with the rest of the EEZ in international waters. While vessels from other countries can pass through a nation’s EEZ in international waters unencumbered, they cannot exploit the waters economically: that right belongs only to the country whose EEZ it is.

Pakistan said that an Indian vessel, identified as the guided-missile destroyer INS Kolkata, had “repeatedly” tried to enter the exercise area since September 7 .

On September 15 , it said, Kolkata made a “dangerous” change of course that brought it into contact with a Pakistani vessel identified in local media as PNS Hunain, an offshore patrol vessel.

“Pakistan strongly rejects this belligerent Indian action,” the Pakistani Foreign Office said, calling it a violation of a 1991 bilateral agreement requiring warships to stay at least three nautical miles (5.5km, 3.4 miles) apart in international waters.

India’s Ministry of External Affairs said the warship was on “routine surveillance” in international waters when a Pakistani vessel approached at high speed and manoeuvred unsafely.

Neither government has named the vessels in its own on-record statement, and India has not confirmed or denied the Kolkata identification.

The two navies last collided in June 2011, when Pakistani frigate PNS Babur brushed against Indian frigate INS Godavari in the Gulf of Aden, while escorting a merchant vessel freed from Somali pirates.

Each side blamed the other then too. That row faded within weeks.

The risks

Retired Vice Admiral Ahmad Saeed of the Pakistan Navy said the pattern — two ships pressing close without a clear intent to collide — was familiar from Cold War-era “bumping” incidents between Soviet and US ships in the Black Sea.

But he argued that India and Pakistan are worse placed to manage similar encounters.

“There’s no bilateral Incidents at Sea agreement, the kind the US and USSR signed in 1972, and no navy-to-navy hotline,” Saeed told Al Jazeera. “Article 10 sets a distance, but it gives no manoeuvring rules and no procedure for investigating an incident afterwards. That gap is exactly why each side can just accuse the other.”

Article 10 of the 1991 confidence-building agreement between the two nations requires warships to stay at least three nautical miles (5.6km, 3.5 miles) apart in international waters.

Saeed said the greater risk was what might follow the collision: sharper tactics such as fire-control radar lock-ons or helicopter overflights and eventually “a contact with actual casualties.”

Muhammad Shareh Qazi, a Lahore-based security and maritime analyst, however, pointed to the same 1991 agreement, which he said requires 30 days’ written notice before a military exercise, as well as international collision regulations that apply to both countries as signatories to the UN maritime convention.

“If this collision really had the potential to escalate militarily, you’d have noticed by now,” Qazi said. “There’s a tool for that, called chaff, fired just above the bow or stern purely to signal you could escalate if needed. Nothing like that happened here.”

Both navies also have their own internal accountability channels, he added, with a captain found to have acted without authorisation facing a court martial process separate from any diplomatic protest.

On fishermen routinely detained for straying across the Sir Creek boundary, which is not demarcated between India and Pakistan further south, Qazi said the link to incidents further out at sea was indirect but real.

“Clear demarcation could help close those ambiguities over time, by reducing the ambiguity around where and how these interactions are expected to occur,” he added.

Saeed was more cautious about how contained an incident like this would remain.

“This hasn’t stayed quiet. Both governments went public with protests within a day of each other,” he said, adding that what made the moment riskier than 2011 was that “both publics are primed after last year’s conflict, which was not the case in 2011.”

Similar close-quarters confrontations have become more frequent between China and the Philippines in the South China Sea.

In the most recent flare-up, on July 24 , Philippine officials said a Chinese vessel came within about seven metres (23 feet) of a Philippine fisheries boat near Scarborough Shoal, the Philippine-claimed reef that China has controlled since 2012, and that Chinese coast guard ships fired water cannon at Philippine vessels.

Whether this week’s collision follows that pattern or fades like the 2011 incident depends less on the ships than on what comes next diplomatically, Qazi said.

“If, in the next 24 to 48 hours, an official statement suggests there was a genuine cause to manufacture an incident for the purpose of escalation, then yes, there may be a real possibility of this happening again,” he added.

In address to European parliament, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney listed areas where he wants to boost cooperation.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has welcomed the prospect of his country becoming the European Union’s first associate member, saying such an alliance is aimed to be a “beacon for democracies” and not to “dominate others”.

Speaking in the European Parliament in Strasbourg, Carney said Canada “welcomes” von der Leyen’s ambition to make the country an associate member.

“We are not fair-weather allies. We do not pursue zero-sum deals. We hold common values for which we have always fought, and in whose defence we must always remain vigilant,” Carney said to applause from European lawmakers.

“Canada and Europe are each strong. Europe and Canada are stronger together.”

“I am not proposing a third bloc in order to become a great-power rival – only with better manners,” he continued. “We do not seek power to dominate others. On the contrary, we are pursuing resilience so that no one can control our open markets, impair our sovereignty, threaten our territorial integrity, or undermine our freedoms, our democracies, our rule of law.”

Carney listed a slew of areas where he wanted to ramp up cooperation.

“Canada and Europe should secure our strategic autonomy through deep cooperation in the full range of strategic capabilities, including critical minerals, defence industrial capacity, AI and compute, energy security, space and payments.”

He also said the EU and Canada should move towards “seamless digital trade” and allow young people from both sides to work and study on either side of the Atlantic.

The EU and Canada have been facing stiff rivalry and pressure from Trump’s administration on trade, among other matters, and from an increasingly assertive China.

Trump threatened late on Wednesday to take action against the EU if it moves forward with von der Leyen’s proposal of associate membership for Canada.

“If they do that, if I think it’s at all a hostile act, I will put very serious tariffs or stop trading with Europe on many things,” Trump told reporters, calling the proposal “laughable”.

“If it’s a good intention, that’s fine. If it’s a bad intention, we’ll put very heavy tariffs on Europe,” he added.

The European Commission (EC) said von der Leyen’s proposal – which is yet to be fleshed out and will need to be approved by EU member states to go forward – was not a hostile act.

“As our President (von der Leyen) made clear yesterday, the proposed strengthening of our partnership with Canada is not against anyone else, but for our common strength,” said Olof Gill, an EC spokesperson.

The Aichi-Nagoya Asian Games get under way this weekend under the shadow of a housing crisis that has organisers scrambling to placate athletes and officials from participating nations.

The tournament has been mired in complaints over housing options for athletes travelling to Japan, after the host nation decided not to build a dedicated Games village for the 17,000 competitors and officials.

To cut costs this year, organisers are relying on a cruise ship, temporary wooden cabins and hotels, but this temporary accommodation has met with criticism in the days leading up to the continental competition.

On Monday, South Korean officials slammed beds in shipping container-style huts as the “worst-ever”, as the South Korean basketball chief said the beds were too short to stretch out in.

Here’s everything we know:

Why are the Asian Games facing an accommodation crisis?

The official housing committee said the issue arose because they expected 15,000 athletes and officials, but numbers increased as new sports were added.

This year’s Games will feature several newcomers, including mixed martial arts, padel and surfing, as well as virtual taekwondo and teqball, which ‌‌combines aspects of football and table tennis.

Ahead of the Games’ opening, chief organiser Hideaki Omura said efforts are being made to ensure athletes are comfortable.

“If there are different opinions, then we will respond to them appropriately,” Omura, who also serves as governor of Aichi prefecture, told the AFP news agency.

“At this point, while we are responding to individual opinions, we have been improving everything as issues arise, and we will continue to respond that way.”

He added that a committee of former athletes, including Olympians, gave a favourable assessment of the plans for the huts built this year.

“We explained everything to them and had them take a look around, and they said it looked functional and good,” he said.

Where will the Asian Games athletes stay?

Alternative housing options range from a cruise liner and wooden containers to hotel rooms.

On Tuesday, the Italian cruise ship, Costa Serena, which will host 4,000 athletes and officials, arrived in Nagoya.

The shipping container-style huts in the dock area of Japan’s biggest port will host 2,000 other athletes and officials.

On Thursday, Japan’s deputy Chef de Mission Hisashi Mizutori told a news conference that athletes have been going through entry procedures since the cruise ship village opened a day earlier.

“There have been cases where coaches, team officials and athletes have been assigned to the same room. There are also situations where room assignments were made purely based on the numbers, such as assigning five twin rooms for a group of five men and five women,” Mizutori said.

“While the numbers match on paper, practically it creates challenging situations such as men and women being assigned together, coaches being assigned with athletes, or trainers who need to accommodate a lot of medical equipment being assigned together.”

He added that the Japanese Olympic Committee (JOC) had also anticipated accommodation “challenges” and secured hotels in the city as a backup.

“We are currently working to coordinate and negotiate adjustments wherever possible. For cases where that proves too difficult, we are considering using the backup accommodations that Team Japan prepared in advance as alternatives.”

Why are participating nations and athletes complaining about the accommodation?

Jung Jae-yong, vice president of the Korea Basketball Association (KBA), slammed the cabins hosting the men’s basketball team.

“Athletes who are over two metres tall cannot even stretch their legs out on the beds. It’s unreasonable.”

Jung also accused the organisers of failing to respond to South Korea’s concerns about the housing options.

“The organisers have still not said anything,” he said, adding: “We are very concerned and discussing extensively with the Korean Sport and Olympic Committee what to do about this.”

Player Byeon Jun-hyeong, from the basketball team, posted a video on social media showing a leaking sink and a soaked floor in his hut.

“Please help us,” he posted.

Philippine Olympic Committee president Abraham Tolentino also said that while all his athletes had been given a room, “some officials, like coaches, were moved to different hotels and Airbnb”.

Why will cricketers get the best accommodation at the Asian Games?

Head of Japan’s cricket association, Naoki Alex Miyaji, said in early September that cricket would get better accommodation than other sports.

According to Miyaji, the cricket tournament is being run by the Asian Games organising committee in collaboration with the Asian Cricket Council.

He said that the two bodies had been discussing accommodation options “for a long time”.

“The participating teams in cricket are being offered hotel accommodation,” Miyaji said.

“Many other sports are being accommodated in much more limited facilities, such as a cruise ship or container hotels.”

What other issues have hit the Asian Games?

While the opening ceremony has yet to take place, several events such as basketball, football, cricket, hockey and modern pentathlon have already begun.

On Thursday, Tropical Storm Dujuan was located off Japan’s Pacific coast as of 03:00 GMT and heading northwest towards central Japan, where Nagoya is located.

Last week, torrential rains hit Nagoya and the surrounding areas, forcing schools to close and suspending train services. Several hundred athletes were also forced to leave their accommodation.

Kosei Inoue, Japan’s chef de mission for the Games and a senior executive board member of the JOC, said at a news conference on Thursday that some competitions have already experienced “delays or postponements, and there is also a possibility that a typhoon could approach on September 21”.

“Under these circumstances, we are holding thorough meetings within the JOC to ensure that we are fully prepared and capable of responding appropriately to these situations.”

President Donald Trump says the United States is “hopefully toward the end” of its war with Iran, claiming that he has directly spoken to officials in Tehran, raising the prospect of renewed diplomacy even as fighting has erupted in Yemen.

However, there is still no confirmation from Tehran that direct negotiations with Washington have resumed. Just a day earlier, a senior Iranian official publicly rejected talks unless Iran’s conditions were met. Tehran, which has, in effect, closed the Strait of Hormuz, has been demanding that the US honour the terms of the deal signed in June.

Trump’s comments come as the conflict has expanded into Yemen, putting increasing pressure on global energy supplies amid an Iran-imposed blockade of the strait through which a fifth of global oil and gas passes. Oil prices crossed $100 per barrel last week and continue to rise as Iran-linked Houthis have damaged Saudi oil installations amid renewed fighting.

So, what is the latest on the diplomatic front, and will the war end soon?

What is Trump saying?

“Well, hopefully we are toward the end of the war,” he told reporters on Wednesday. “They want to make a deal. We’ll see how that works out.”

When asked by a reporter whether he had recently heard from the Iranian side, Trump said he had spoken with them “directly”.

The comments come after Trump on Monday said he was open to talks, and added that Iran “wants to make a deal, quickly and badly” and that he would decide whether Washington would engage with Tehran.

However, Mohsen Rezaei, secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, accused Trump of sending “mixed signals” and said “no talks until Iran’s conditions are met”.

Trump’s claim that he has heard from Iran “directly” is significant because negotiations between Washington and Tehran have repeatedly depended on intermediaries, including Qatar, Pakistan and Oman. This is not the first time that Trump has claimed direct communication with Iran.

Former Iranian diplomat Abbas Khameyar dismissed Trump’s claims. “I don’t think there has been any additional effort beyond what was already under way in recent weeks,” he told Al Jazeera.

There is a US narrative, he stated, “with tweets and statements by President Trump claiming that the Iranians are calling, pleading and asking for a meeting. But nobody believes this, and matters have not unfolded in that way.”

He added that Iran’s diplomatic activity has not moved beyond the framework already in place in recent weeks, centred on securing enforcement of the existing Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) rather than opening new negotiations.

What is the latest on the US-Iran diplomacy front?

On Thursday, Iran’s semiofficial Tasnim news agency reported that Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi held a telephone call with Pakistani army chief Field Marshal Asim Munir, who has been leading the high-stakes diplomatic and mediation efforts between Washington and Tehran.

Araghchi held the phone call while still in Beijing, during which they discussed and consulted on the latest regional developments and issues of mutual interest, according to Tasnim.

A day earlier, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi called on the US and Iran to exercise restraint and “reopen the Strait of Hormuz at an early date”, following his meeting with Araghchi in Beijing.

Araghchi, in a statement after the meeting, said that Tehran seeks “the restoration of calm to the region and friendly and peaceful relations with our neighbours”.

“In this regard we have begun dialogue with the countries of the region,” he added.

In a post on X, Araghchi described consultations with Chinese officials as “successful”, saying Tehran values the strategic partnership it has built with Beijing.

“Today’s decisions will decide the future strategic balance in the region, with immeasurable knock-on effects,” Araghchi said on Thursday.

China has avoided direct involvement in the war, but President Xi Jinping, at the BRICS summit in New Delhi over the weekend, offered Beijing’s willingness to play a role in peace efforts. He called on BRICS nations to advance peace in the Middle East.

Huiyao Wang, president of the Center For China and Globalization think tank in Beijing, says China’s role in international affairs is increasing in importance during the current geopolitical turmoil.

“China has an enormous role to exercise if needed. So the mere fact that the two fighting parties have no end in sight shows the need for a big guarantor to come in … I think the US wants to end this war and they also need China’s help,” Wang told Al Jazeera.

Meanwhile, US media outlet Axios is reporting that Trump is expected to meet Gulf leaders on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly next week to discuss the conflict, which has hugely affected oil exports from the Middle Eastern countries.

Diplomatic efforts have repeatedly stalled since a Pakistan-brokered MoU signed by Washington and Tehran collapsed last month, as the two sides accused each other of violating their commitments.

The MoU was supposed to kick-start a 60-day period for peace talks between the warring sides and included provisions for the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, which has become a major flashpoint in the war.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said earlier this month that Tehran would return to the agreement if Washington did the same.

What do we know about the Houthi meeting with US officials?

US officials met representatives of Yemen’s Houthi movement at the US embassy in Muscat over the weekend, five sources told Reuters news agency. Oman helped organise the meeting.

The Houthis told US officials they did not intend to attack American vessels and remained committed to their 2025 ceasefire with Washington, according to two sources.

One source said they also pledged not to target Israeli or other commercial vessels, with the exception of Saudi ships.

The conflict had largely subsided in recent years after a 2022 ceasefire between the Saudi-backed government and the Iran-aligned Houthis, but reignited in July.

In recent weeks, the Houthis have seized Yemen’s entire Red Sea coastline to cement their grip on the key Bab al-Mandeb strait – a vital maritime route connecting Asia with Europe – while declaring a blockade on Saudi shipping.

The strategic waterway is a critical maritime corridor linking the Red Sea with the Gulf of Aden and has become an alternative shipping route as the US war against Iran choked the Strait of Hormuz.

On September 12, 2026, United States President Donald Trump stood in Dublin alongside Irish Prime Minister Micheal Martin and said in a cool tone that the Houthis “called us, and they don’t want to fight us”, adding that the group was “allowing ships to pass” and that the situation would “work out very well”.

His remarks came just as Houthi forces had completed their takeover of the coastal town of Dhubab and Perim (Mayyun) Island, which divides the Bab al-Mandeb strait into two shipping channels, after seizing the strategic port of Mocha. This gave them a direct presence at the entrance to one of the world’s most important waterways.

Trump was speaking against the backdrop of a Houthi announcement that they would blockade Saudi oil supplies to Asia and Saudi commercial shipping, signalling the collapse of the traditional “security-for-oil” formula.

What is happening at Bab al-Mandeb is not an isolated event, but the latest in a long series of US retreats from security commitments that for decades underpinned the “security-for-oil” relationship between Washington and the Gulf states.

This is not a passing political position, but a profound shift in the regional security landscape: the United States is choosing not to intervene militarily against an armed group designated as terrorist that controls one of the world’s most important straits and whose actions go beyond the logic of conventional deterrence.

Trump’s remarks: Substance and strategic context

In Dublin, Trump said the Houthis had contacted the US administration seeking to avoid confrontation with Washington. He said they were “allowing most ships to pass” and that the problem was limited to “one country”, which he did not name – an apparent reference to Saudi Arabia – promising to “take care of fixing that”.

He also said the United States had “tight control” over the Strait of Hormuz and that about 25 ships were passing through it each day on average, despite maritime sources denying this.

On the ground, Trump’s remarks suggested that the Houthis remain wary of US military force and American deterrence, which has already put considerable pressure on their regional backer, Iran. They were therefore prepared to bargain, just as they accepted US conditions in 2025.

At the same time, Trump’s directives – as relayed by US military and civilian officials – revealed a clear hierarchy of priorities: Iran as the principal threat, securing the Strait of Hormuz as the vital artery for oil and gas flows, and avoiding another military front in Yemen.

This reflects a narrow strategic logic. From Washington’s perspective, Bab al-Mandeb is less vital to American oil interests than to flows towards China and other Asian markets that compete with the US economy. And because Trump believes the Houthis “are not targeting American ships”, direct intervention would, in his view, place an unjustified additional burden on US forces already exhausted by the Iranian front.

Trump’s position also cannot be separated from domestic politics. The US-Iran war has eroded his political support after he promised to keep the United States out of Middle Eastern wars.

According to The Los Angeles Times, Trump told Fox News that he “might not do it because of the elections”, referring to avoiding further military escalation before the congressional elections. Opening a new front in Yemen could further complicate matters for Republicans in closely contested House and Senate races.

Meanwhile, Saudi circles denied an Axios report claiming that Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman had called Trump twice on the eve of the Houthi takeover of the coast on September 10, urging him to strike the Houthis, and that Trump had refused.

The sources pointed to Axios’s own July 29 report on Saudi Defence Minister Prince Khalid bin Salman’s visit to Washington, which said he had told the US vice president that the kingdom could manage the confrontation with the Houthis itself and did not need US military intervention. They regarded the two accounts as contradictions in the reporting of Axios’s Barak Ravid.

Observers in Riyadh see the restrained US position as part of a broader policy: the administration currently has no intention of taking direct military action against the Houthis. At the same time, Admiral Brad Cooper, commander of US Central Command, travelled to Riyadh for urgent coordination talks with Prince Mohammed, indicating that Washington is seeking to “intensify its support” for Saudi Arabia while avoiding direct military involvement – a formula well understood in Riyadh.

Trump sought to reassure Saudi concerns by describing the crown prince as a “good friend” and promising that “everything will work out very well”. But he offered no specific military commitment, and the White House announced no explicit guarantees to protect Saudi energy infrastructure or maritime routes.

This reluctance also follows a series of US decisions that have demonstrated a growing retreat from its security commitments in the Gulf. During his first term, Trump did not respond to the 2019 Aramco attack, for which the Houthis claimed responsibility but which was believed to have originated from Iraqi factions to the north. The attack temporarily knocked out half of Saudi oil supplies.

In February 2026, the United States joined Israel in attacking Iran without consulting its Gulf allies and has since faced growing difficulties defending them against Iranian attacks. US forces are now heavily preoccupied around the Strait of Hormuz, limiting their ability to respond to another front in Yemen.

Paradoxically, Washington, now bogged down in Hormuz, appears to need Saudi help in containing Iranian disruption at Bab al-Mandeb, rather than the other way round.

Since the war began on February 28, Riyadh has resisted all US pressure to become involved in a confrontation with Iran for two reasons. First, it believes such pressure carries an implicit aim of portraying the Saudi front as part of the Israeli front. Second, it was not consulted over the launch of the war and is not prepared to be worn down in a conflict serving Israeli objectives.

The erosion of the US umbrella and the fate of the ‘security-for-oil’ formula

Since the 1970s, the US-Gulf relationship has rested on a clear but implicit bargain: the United States provides a security umbrella protecting the Gulf states and energy routes, while the Gulf states ensure a steady flow of oil to the global economy at reasonable prices.

This was more than a bilateral understanding between Riyadh and Washington. Gulf security meant oil security, and oil security meant the security of the Western economy, making the bargain a pillar of the international energy system for decades.

Today, there are mounting signs that this formula is beginning to collapse.

First, strategic abandonment: Trump’s refusal to defend Bab al-Mandeb, and his response to the Houthis’ request that the US stay out of the conflict in return for allowing American ships to pass – effectively a political deal – marks a watershed. For the first time, the United States is clearly hesitating to defend energy security and a pivotal ally against a direct threat to global energy infrastructure. This is not temporary hesitation, but a redefinition of the US commitment.

Second, the redirection of priorities: Washington’s focus on the Strait of Hormuz and avoidance of a front in Yemen point to a new approach: not a comprehensive security umbrella, but selective protection of direct US interests. Hormuz matters because it carries Gulf oil to markets on which the US economy depends, while Bab al-Mandeb – from Trump’s perspective – primarily serves exports to China and Asia, interests Washington does not consider worth further military investment.

Third, military exhaustion: the US military is exhausted by the war with Iran and its stocks of advanced interceptor missiles have been depleted. This is structural rather than temporary, reflecting a growing inability to manage multiple fronts.

Fourth, domestic politics: the erosion of Trump’s political support because of the Iran war makes further military expansion politically costly. What was once a guarantee of Gulf security – US power – has become hostage to domestic electoral calculations.

Does this mean the end of the “security-for-oil” formula? Not necessarily. But it does point to a fundamental shift from a bilateral US-Gulf arrangement to a more complex, multilateral one.

The US umbrella has not disappeared, but it has contracted. The United States still maintains forces in the region and remains focused on the Strait of Hormuz, but its commitment is no longer comprehensive or unconditional.

Saudi strategic hedging

For years, Riyadh has been pursuing alternatives through strategic hedging. Its announcement of a 14-state multinational defensive maritime alliance – including Turkiye, Pakistan, Egypt, Sudan and Djibouti – is an attempt to fill the US security vacuum, while US or European naval forces are also deployed around the strait as part of similar Western coalitions.

Saudi Arabia is also strengthening its air and missile defences, developing its naval capabilities and deepening defence ties with countries including Turkiye and Pakistan. These efforts have included the “Strategic Mutual Defence Alliance” with Pakistan and the Mecca alliance with Turkiye and Pakistan in August 2026.

What we are witnessing is not the end of the US umbrella, but its shift from a “comprehensive guarantee” to “conditional and limited support”, forcing Gulf states to rethink their collective security.

The Saudi position on industrialised countries’ disregard for supply security

Saudi Arabia now faces one of its most serious security challenges: the Houthis control Bab al-Mandeb, are choking Saudi trade and have already launched drone and missile attacks towards Saudi territory.

Saudi oil exports to Asia fell from around 3.4 million barrels a day in June to just 128,000 in August, before partially recovering to 700,000 this month. Oil prices have meanwhile exceeded $107 a barrel, while the price of a gallon of petrol in the United States has risen by 35 percent.

The real danger is the simultaneous disruption of two maritime chokepoints: Hormuz, through which about 20 percent of global oil and gas supplies pass, is almost closed because of the US-Iran war, while Bab al-Mandeb, which accounts for 10-12 percent of global oil, is under Houthi control. Closing both could block about a quarter of global supplies.

Even without complete closure, the continuing threat creates a permanent “risk premium” on prices, according to economic analysts. Although Saudi Arabia benefits in the short term from higher prices, it is strategically harmed by instability because Vision 2030 depends on foreign investment, tourism and stability, not temporary wartime oil revenues.

Riyadh has long played a leading role in stabilising oil markets, frequently using its position as a swing producer to limit volatility. But amid the indifference of industrialised countries to supply security and the threats facing energy sources and routes, Saudi Arabia cannot put aside the dangers to its own security, sovereignty and people for countries that disregard the geopolitics of energy.

For this reason, Saudi Arabia has previously declared that it “will not bear responsibility for any disruptions or shortages in global oil supplies” resulting from Houthi attacks on its oil facilities.

This is more than a warning. It redefines the implicit social contract with its allies: Saudi Arabia is no longer prepared to act as guarantor of last resort for global energy security without something in return.

Its message is that the international community – particularly the major industrialised countries that benefit from oil flows – must share responsibility for protecting maritime routes, rather than leaving Riyadh to bear the cost alone.

‘Collective responsibility’ as a new security doctrine

The Saudi Ministry of Defence reinforced this approach in its statement on the proposed maritime alliance, stressing that “the security of international maritime routes is a collective responsibility that requires effective and sustainable international partnership”.

This is more than a diplomatic appeal. It amounts to a reformulation of the regional security contract: Saudi Arabia is not asking industrialised countries to defend Saudi interests, but to help protect their own interest in the continued flow of oil on which their economies depend.

In July 2026, Saudi Arabia announced a “Multinational Defensive Maritime Alliance” of 14 founding states: Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, Pakistan, Turkiye, Egypt, Jordan, Yemen, Bangladesh, Nigeria, Sudan, Djibouti and Somalia.

At least 43 countries and organisations attended the founding meeting in Riyadh. The alliance may mark an important turning point, reflecting an implicit Saudi acknowledgement that the US umbrella is no longer sufficient and that Riyadh must build its own security capabilities with regional allies.

US exposure: A deeper strategic reading

Trump’s statements downplaying the Houthi takeover of Bab al-Mandeb and his refusal to intervene reflect not only a political decision, but a structural weakness in US deterrence.

The United States is unable to manage multiple fronts. Its concentration around the Strait of Hormuz limits its ability to respond in Yemen; fighting has depleted stocks of advanced interceptor missiles; and the unpopularity of the war and approaching congressional elections constrain its freedom of action.

From the perspective of countries in the region, the US military presence in the Gulf is no longer an unconditional security guarantee. The question of whether allies could be abandoned again is pushing decision-makers from Riyadh to Abu Dhabi, Kuwait and Doha to diversify their security and defence partnerships.

That means deeper defence ties with Turkiye and Pakistan, stronger air and missile defences and naval capabilities, maintaining open channels and seeking risk-reducing understandings with regional powers including Iran, and multinational maritime alliances to protect navigation.

But these alternatives have limits. Can any regional alliance fully compensate for the absence of a major power such as the United States when confronting threats on the scale of Iran and its proxies? US intelligence, logistical and interception capabilities have no regional equivalent, leaving a security gap that cannot quickly be filled.

The new regional order: Towards multipolarity

What we are witnessing is not merely a passing security crisis, but the emergence of a new regional order marked by the decline of unilateral US dominance. The United States is no longer the sole security power in the Gulf, as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkiye and Iran gain weight and Gulf states diversify their partnerships and seek more collective regional security arrangements.

Trump’s response to the Houthi takeover of Bab al-Mandeb is therefore not simply a political position, but a sign of a tectonic shift in the regional security order. The “security-for-oil” formula that governed US-Gulf relations for decades has not formally ended, but it no longer provides the guarantees on which it was built. The US security umbrella remains, but it has become selective, conditional and subject to domestic US calculations unrelated to the interests of the Gulf states.

Saudi Arabia, caught between the hammer of the Houthis at Bab al-Mandeb and the anvil of Iran at the Strait of Hormuz, is pursuing a different approach: insisting that protection of maritime routes become a “collective responsibility” and that it should no longer bear alone the cost of protecting the interests of industrialised countries dependent on its oil.

This position – backed by the announcement of a multinational maritime alliance – marks the beginning of a redefinition of the regional security contract, although significant questions remain over whether ambition can be translated into capability.

Oil prices above $107 a barrel may be only an early sign of what lies ahead. If US exposure continues and regional understandings guaranteeing freedom of navigation remain out of reach, the world could face an energy crisis comparable to those of the 1970s, but without a US security umbrella ready to contain it.

Bab al-Mandeb is therefore more than a maritime strait. It reflects the end of one era and the beginning of another, in which Gulf security is no longer an American gift but a collective responsibility still searching for new arrangements.

Saudi Arabia, meanwhile, appears to favour a combination of deterrence and avoiding all-out war. Rather than sliding into open-ended attrition, it seeks to support national allies on the ground, enable the Yemeni state to restore its sovereignty, contain the logic of the militia and build a national doctrine that limits external penetration.

Yemen’s stability is no longer a purely Yemeni matter, but a first line of defence for the Red Sea and Bab al-Mandeb and for the cohesion of the Arab sphere, with Riyadh and Cairo remaining central pillars in confronting projects of disintegration and fragmentation.

Within this emerging order, the Saudi-Egyptian partnership is becoming a cornerstone of regional security. Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s expected visit to Cairo and summit with President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi give practical expression to the principle of “collective responsibility”.

Riyadh and Cairo recognise that the security of the Red Sea and Bab al-Mandeb is not a local matter: it is vital to the Suez Canal and Egyptian economy, and forms strategic and security depth for Saudi Arabia.

By coordinating diplomatic and military action, supporting the full liberation of Yemen and containing the reach of the militias, the two countries are helping shape an autonomous regional security order intended to fill the vacuums left by retreating international powers, protect international navigation and confront shared threats from a position of parity and capacity.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.