Donald

Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia – When US President Donald Trump lands in Malaysia for Southeast Asia’s headline summit this weekend, he will be delivering Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim a diplomatic coup.

US presidents rarely visit Malaysia, a multiracial nation of 35 million people sandwiched between Thailand and Singapore, which for decades has maintained a policy of not picking sides in rivalries between great powers.

Trump is just the third US leader to travel to the Southeast Asian country, which is hosting a Sunday-to-Tuesday summit for the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), following visits by former US Presidents Barack Obama and Lyndon B Johnson.

After skipping ASEAN summits in 2018, 2019 and 2020, Trump, whose disdain for multilateralism is renowned, will be attending the gathering of Southeast Asian nations for just the second time.

The US president will be joined by a host of high-profile leaders from non-ASEAN countries, including Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi, Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, and South African President Cyril Ramaphosa.

Opting not to attend are Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Russian President Vladimir Putin, and Chinese President Xi Jinping, who Trump is expected to meet in South Korea at next week’s Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit.

Trump’s visit, in many ways, is emblematic of the delicate balancing act that Anwar’s government has sought to maintain as Malaysia navigates the headwinds of the heated rivalry between the US and China.

Malaysia is deeply entwined with both the US and Chinese economies.

The US, which has a large footprint in Malaysia’s tech and oil and gas industries, was the Southeast Asian country’s top foreign investor and third-biggest trading partner in 2024.

China, a major purchaser of Malaysian electronics and palm oil, the same year took the top spot in trade and was third for investment.

But Malaysia’s efforts to walk a fine line between Washington and Beijing have become increasingly fraught as the superpowers roll out tit-for-tat tariffs and export controls while butting heads over regional flashpoints such as Taiwan and the South China Sea.

“Optimally, Malaysia wants to productively engage both China and the US on a variety of issues,” said Thomas Daniel, an analyst at the Institute of Strategic & International Studies in Kuala Lumpur.

“It is in our interest,” Daniel told Al Jazeera.

Anwar has cast Trump’s visit as a chance to bolster economic ties, champion regional peace and stability, and elevate ASEAN’s standing on the international stage.

Anwar has also pledged to use the rare opportunity for face time with Trump to constructively raise points of difference between Washington and Kuala Lumpur, particularly the Palestinian cause.

“The through-line is autonomy: avoid entanglement, maximise options, and extract benefits from both poles without becoming anyone’s proxy,” Awang Azman Awang Pawi, a professor at the University of Malaya, told Al Jazeera.

During Trump’s visit, US tariffs on Malaysia, currently set at 19 percent, and China’s mooted export controls on rare earths are expected to be high on the agenda.

For Malaysia, the priority is preserving “rules-based” trade that allows for countries to deepen economic ties despite their political differences, said Mohd Ramlan Mohd Arshad, a senior lecturer at the MARA University of Technology in Shah Alam, near Kuala Lumpur.

A prolonged economic cold war between the US and China is the “worst thing” that could happen to Malaysia, Arshad told Al Jazeera.

Trump, who has made no secret of his ambitions for the Nobel Peace Prize, is also expected to witness the signing of a peace accord between Thailand and Cambodia, which engaged in a brief border conflict in July that left at least 38 people dead.

For Anwar, who has led a multiracial coalition of parties with diverse and competing interests since 2022, the balancing act also involves political considerations at home.

US support for Israel’s war in Gaza has been a bone of contention in Muslim-majority Malaysia, where the plight of Palestinians has inspired frequent public protests.

In the run-up to the summit, critics have demanded that Anwar rescind Trump’s invitation over his role in supporting the war, which a United Nations commission of inquiry last month determined to constitute genocide.

“A person like Trump, no matter how powerful, should not be welcomed in Malaysia,” former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, Anwar’s former mentor-turned-nemesis, said in a video message last month.

Defending the invitation, Anwar has stressed his view of diplomacy as “practical work” for advancing his country’s interests “in an imperfect world”.

“It demands balance, discipline, and the courage to stay the course even when the ground shifts beneath us,” he told a conference in Kuala Lumpur earlier this month.

As a small power, Malaysia has always put pragmatism at the centre of its foreign policy, said Sharifah Munirah Alatas, an international relations lecturer at the National University of Malaysia.

“Anwar and Malaysia cannot afford to do otherwise,” Alatas told Al Jazeera.

“And given the current highly unpredictable Sino-American tension induced by the Trump 2.0 era, ASEAN will remain actively non-aligned, without taking sides.”

Awang Azman, the University of Malaya professor, said that while Trump’s visit will elevate Malaysia and ASEAN’s profile by itself, the true test of the summit’s success will be tangible outcomes on issues such as the Thailand-Cambodia conflict and trade.

“It’s not just a photo op if a ceasefire accord and concrete trade language land on paper,” Awang Azman said.

“If either track stalls, the visit is still symbolically significant – given the rarity of US presidential trips to Malaysia – but the narrative will revert to optics over outcomes.”

United States President Donald Trump sanctions Russia’s two biggest oil companies – after scrapping a summit with President Vladimir Putin on the Ukraine war.

The European Union has also announced new measures targeting Russian oil and assets.

Will they bring an end to the war any closer?

Presenter: Bernard Smith

Guests:

Anatol Lieven – Director of the Eurasia programme at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft

Steven Erlanger – Chief Diplomatic Correspondent for Europe at The New York Times

Chris Weafer – CEO of Macro-Advisory, a strategic consultancy focused on Russia and Eurasia

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio reiterated the importance of the fragile Gaza ceasefire agreement while meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in West Jerusalem Thursday.

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum says she does not agree with US strikes on boats off the coast of South America, when asked about the recent deadly attacks on what the US has claimed are drug traffickers.

NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte visits the US as Trump proposes freezing the battle lines in the Russia-Ukraine war.

The White House has begun tearing down parts of the East Wing to make way for President Trump’s new ballroom – although the project reportedly hasn’t yet received formal approval. Soraya Lennie explains.

Following the September assassination of conservative influencer Charlie Kirk, United States President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance have shaped their political agenda by blaming the left for political violence.

“Political violence, it’s just a statistical fact that it’s a bigger problem on the left,” Vance said while guest-hosting The Charlie Kirk Show podcast on October 15 in the aftermath of Kirk’s killing. About a minute later, he added, “Right now that violent impulse is a bigger problem on the left than the right.”

A Vance spokesperson did not answer our questions. When referring to left-wing violence, a White House spokesperson recently pointed to a September 28 Axios article about a study by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a nonprofit policy research organisation.

Democrats, calling your political opponents Nazis has consequences.

Study: Left-wing terrorism climbs to 30-year highhttps://t.co/30NvIj9nzC

— Abigail Jackson (@ATJackson47) September 28, 2025

The study found that “2025 marks the first time in more than 30 years that left-wing terrorist attacks outnumber those from the violent far right”. The study also showed that for the 30 years before 2025, right-wing attacks had outpaced left-wing violence.

“The rise in left-wing attacks merits increased attention, but the fall in right-wing attacks is probably temporary, and it too requires a government response,” the authors wrote in the study.

Vance’s statement oversimplified political violence and drew from part of one study of a six-month period. The federal government has no single, official definition of “political violence”, and ascribing ideologies such as the left wing and the right wing is sometimes complicated. There is no agreed upon number of left- or right-wing politically violent attacks.

Research before 2025 largely points to higher levels of right-wing violence over longer periods of time.

Trump has used the administration’s statements about rising left-wing violence to label antifa as a domestic “terrorist threat”, and administration officials also said they will investigate what they call left-wing groups that fund violence.

Although political violence is a small subset of violent crime in the US, it “has a disproportionate impact because even rare incidents can amplify fear, influence policy and deepen societal polarisation”, sociology professors at the University of Dayton, Arthur Jipson and Paul J Becker, wrote in September after Kirk’s assassination.

In an email interview with PolitiFact, Becker said the report in question “indicates there MAY be a shift occurring from the Right being more violent but 5 vs 1 incidents in 6 months isn’t enough to completely erase years of data and reports from multiple sources showing the opposite or to dictate new policies”.

Study examined three decades of political violence

The CSIS, a national security and defence think tank, published a September report examining 750 “terrorist” attacks and plots in the US between 1994 and July 4, 2025.

The report defined “terrorism” as the use or threat of violence “with the intent to achieve political goals by creating a broad psychological impact”.

The authors wrote that it is difficult to pinpoint some perpetrators’ ideologies, which in some cases are more of what former FBI Director Christopher Wray called a “salad bar of ideologies”. For example, Thomas Crooks, who allegedly attempted to assassinate Trump in 2024, searched the internet more than 60 times for Trump and then-President Joe Biden in the month before the attack.

The full CSIS report gave a more complete picture of politically motivated violence:

• Left-wing violence has risen from low levels since 2016. “It has risen from very low levels and remains much lower than historical levels of violence carried out by right-wing and jihadist attackers.”
• Right-wing attacks sharply declined in 2025, perhaps because right-wing extremist grievances such as opposition to abortion, hostility to immigration and suspicion of government agencies are “embraced by President Trump and his administration”. The report quotes Enrique Tarrio, the former Proud Boys leader pardoned by Trump, who said, “Honestly, what do we have to complain about these days?”
• Left-wing attacks have been less deadly than right-wing attacks. In the past decade, left-wing attacks have killed 13 people, compared with 112 by right-wing attackers. The report cited several reasons, including that left-wing attackers often choose targets that are protected, such as government or law enforcement facilities, and target specific individuals.
• The number of incidents by the left is small. A graphic in the report showing the rise in left-wing attacks in 2025 as of July 4 is visually striking. It is based on a small number of incidents: four attacks and one disrupted plot.

Studies have not uniformly agreed on some attackers’ ideological classifications. The libertarian Cato Institute categorised the person charged in the shooting deaths of two Israeli embassy staffers in May 2025 as “left-wing”, while the CSIS study described the motivation as “ethnonationalist”. Ethnonationalism is a political ideology based on heritage, such as ethnic identity, which can create clashes with other groups. The Cato study counted only deaths, while the CSIS analysis was not limited to deaths.

“While Vance’s statement has a factual anchor for that limited timespan, it selectively emphasises one short-term slice rather than the broader trend,” Jipson, of the University of Dayton, told PolitiFact. “In that sense, it can be misleading: It may give the impression that left-wing violence is generally now more dangerous or prevalent, which is not borne out by the longer view of the data.”

The Cato analysis, published after Kirk’s death, said 3,597 people were killed in politically motivated US “terrorist” attacks from January 1, 1975, through September 10, 2025.

Cato found right-wing attacks were more common than left-wing violence. This research has been highlighted by some House Democrats.

Wrong again, JD. The data is clear: for decades, right-wing extremism has been the greater threat.https://t.co/TkxBZ08Xjg https://t.co/PCWv4EuP4H

— House Homeland Security Committee Democrats (@HomelandDems) October 15, 2025

Cato wrote that during that period, “terrorists” inspired by what it called “Islamist ideology” were responsible for 87 percent of people killed in attacks on US soil, while right-wing attackers accounted for 11 percent and left-wing “terrorists” accounted for about 2 percent. Excluding the September 11, 2001 attacks showed right-wing attackers were responsible for a majority of deaths. Measuring homicides since 2020 also showed a larger number by the right than the left.

Our ruling

Vance said, “Political violence, it’s just a statistical fact that it’s a bigger problem on the left.”

He did not point to a source, but a White House spokesperson separately cited an article about a study that examined political violence from 1994 to July 4, 2025. It found that, in the first six months of 2025, left-wing attacks outnumbered those by the right. It is based on a small number of incidents: four attacks and one disrupted plot.

The study also showed that for 30 years before 2025, right-wing attacks had outpaced left-wing attacks.

The study detailed that the left wing “remains much lower than historical levels of violence carried out by right-wing and jihadist attackers”. Research before 2025 largely points to higher levels of right-wing violence over longer periods of time.

The statement contains an element of truth because left-wing violence rose in the first six months of 2025. However, it ignores that right-wing violence was higher for a much longer period of time.

We rate this statement Mostly False.

Chief correspondent Louis Jacobson contributed to this fact-check.

US President Donald Trump has explained a decision to postpone plans for a meeting in Hungary with Russia’s President Vladimir Putin to discuss the Ukraine war, telling reporters he doesn’t want a ‘wasted meeting’.

Relations between the United States and China are tense, once again, with experts saying that the administration of US President Donald Trump “doesn’t quite know how to deal with China”.

The latest flare-up took place when Beijing, on October 9, expanded its restrictions on the export of rare-earth metals, increasing the number of elements on the list.

China has the largest reserves and the majority of processing facilities of rare-earth metals that are used in a range of daily and critical industries like electric vehicles, smartphones, laptops and defence equipment.

In a first, it also required countries to have a licence to export rare-earth magnets and certain semiconductor materials that contain even trace amounts of minerals sourced from China or produced using Chinese technology.

China’s actions on rare-earths also came after the US expanded its Entity List, a trade restriction list that consists of certain foreign persons, entities or government, further limiting China’s access to the most advanced semiconductor chips, and added levies on China-linked ships both to boost the US shipbuilding industry and loosen China’s hold on the global shipping trade. China retaliated by applying its own charges on US-owned, operated, built or flagged vessels.

“For the US, its actions on chip exports and shipping industry fees were not related to the trade deal with China,” said Vina Nadjibulla, vice president for research and strategy at the Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada.

Since then, the two countries have also been in an “information war”, said Nadjibulla, each blaming the other for holding the world hostage with its policies.

But beyond the rhetoric, the world is seeing China really up its game.

“For the first time, China is doing this extra-terrestrial action that applies to other countries as well [with its amped up export restrictions on rare-earths]. They are prepared to match every US escalation, and have the US back down,” Nadjibulla said. “This is a very different kind of a trade war than we were experiencing even three months ago.”

This was a “power play” by China in the run-up to a planned meeting later this month between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in South Korea because “China has decided that the leverage is on their side,” said Dexter Tiff Roberts, a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council Global China Hub, pointing out that after some initial noise with Trump saying there was no reason to meet Xi any longer, the meeting is back on.

“If you look at the approach of the Trump administration right now, they are all over the place,” said Roberts.

Roberts was referring not only to the multiple tariff threats that the US has issued both on China and on specific industries and the carve-outs that were soon announced on those, but also in its statements on the Trump-Xi meeting, with Trump saying it was not happening, only to reverse that two days later.

“The Trump administration doesn’t quite know how to deal with China,” said Roberts. “They don’t understand that China is willing to accept a lot of pain,” and will not be easily cowed by US threats.

Beijing, on the other hand, has realised that Trump is determined to get his big deal with China and wants his state visit to seal that, maybe because “he feels that is important to his credentials as a big deal maker,” added Roberts, but that he cannot get there without giving more to China.

“China saw that they could push harder in the lead-up to the meeting.”

Wei Liang, a professor at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies who specialises in international trade and Chinese economic foreign policy, agrees.

“Trump has a track record of TACO,” she said, referring to a term coined by a Financial Times columnist in May, which stands for “Trump always chickens out” in reference to his announcing tariffs and then carving out exemptions and pushing out implementation dates.

“He cares more than any other US president [about] stock market reactions, so definitely will be more flexible to making concessions. This is the inconsistency that has been captured by his negotiation partners,” Liang said.

China’s defiant stance also comes at a time of its own political concerns, Liang added.

While the domestic economy is “a black box” with no reliable data available on growth, employment and other criteria, the consensus among China experts is that the country has been hit by the tariffs, economic growth has slowed, and unemployment has ramped up.

As China started its four-day fourth plenary session on Monday where it plans to approve the draft of its next five-year national economic and social development plan, Xi can use the moment to tell his domestic audience that the country’s problems are stemming from Trump’s policies and the whole world is suffering because of those tariffs and it’s not related to Chinese policies, Liang said.

A possible decoupling

All of this also signals that Beijing seems to be prepared to “decouple” from the US more than ever, a significant change in mentality, as, in the past, the standard response to the idea was that it would be a “lose-lose” situation for both countries, Liang told Al Jazeera.

But in the last few years, China has diversified its exports to other countries, especially those in its Belt and Road Initiative, the ambitious infrastructure project that it launched in 2013 to link East Asia through Europe and has since expanded to Africa, Oceania and Latin America.

Even when it comes to things that it needs from the US – soya beans, aeroplanes and high-tech chip equipment – it can find other suppliers or has learned to work around that need, as is the case for the chip equipment, Liang pointed out.

In the meantime, especially in the years since the US-China trade war started under Trump as president in his first term, China has brought in a set of national security laws – including its version of the US Entity List, through which it is setting limits on those exports, Nadjibulla said.

“Everybody should have been preparing the way the Chinese have been preparing. We breathed a sigh of relief when there was a change in government [in the US after the first Trump administration], but China kept preparing,” she said.

“This should be a wake-up call for all countries to find other sources for its needs. Everyone should be redoubling their efforts to diversify, because we have now seen the Chinese playbook.”

US Vice President JD Vance says, one week into the Gaza ceasefire, he has “great optimism” the peace deal will hold. He declined to set a deadline for Hamas to disarm. Vance was speaking at a newly established centre in Israel for civilian and military cooperation.

Published on
21/10/2025 – 9:22 GMT+2

ADVERTISEMENT

Kenny Loggins has reacted to Donald Trump using his song ‘Danger Zone’ in the president’s “disgusting” AI-generated video showing himself wearing a crown, flying a “KING TRUMP” fighter jet and bombing a crowd of protesters with feces.

The video was published as a response to the historic “No Kings” protests which took place across the US on Saturday.

The American singer-songwriter recorded the hit song for the soundtrack of the 1986 Tom Cruise movie Top Gun. He has now called for Trump’s video to be taken down on copyright grounds.

In a statement to Variety, Loggins said: “This is an unauthorized use of my performance of ‘Danger Zone.’ Nobody asked me for my permission, which I would have denied, and I request that my recording on this video is removed immediately.”

He continued: “I can’t imagine why anybody would want their music used or associated with something created with the sole purpose of dividing us. Too many people are trying to tear us apart, and we need to find new ways to come together.”

“We’re all Americans, and we’re all patriotic. There is no ‘us and them’ — that’s not who we are, nor is it what we should be. It’s all of us. We’re in this together, and it is my hope that we can embrace music as a way of celebrating and uniting each and every one of us.”

Well put – especially considering the video has provoked widespread outrage online, with many expressing dismay over the way it shows Trump’s clear disdain for people exercising their right to protest.

Social media users accused Trump of having “the maturity and decorum of a 12-year-old boy”, while others commented: “Can’t believe that’s a president of a country.”

Many posts also pointed out that Trump’s “childish” and “disgusting” AI post revealed a transparent representation of his genuine feelings toward the American people. “It tells you everything you need to know about what he thinks about the people of America who are, in fact, America,” one person commented, while another added: “Him taking a dump on the country is the most honest thing he’s ever posted.”

This is far from the first time that Trump and his administration have used artists’ work without authorisation.

There is an extensive list of musicians who have objected to Trump’s authorized use of their songs. These include ABBA, The Rolling Stones, Bruce Springsteen, Rihanna, Neil Young, R.E.M., Woodkid, Beyoncé and Semisonic.

Sinead O’Connor’s estate previously issued Trump with cease-and-desist orders, while Isaac Hayes’ estate sued him for 134 counts of copywright infringement.

Céline Dion also condemned the use of her song from the Oscar-winning film Titanic, ‘My Heart Will Go On’, which was used at one of Trump’s rallies. Dion’s team questioned the song choice, writing: “And really, THAT song?”

Another band which added their name to the ever-growing list of artists who have sued Trump over the illegal use of their songs in campaign videos was The White Stripes. Last year, the rock band highlighted the “flagrant misappropriation” of their hit song ‘Seven Nation Army’. Jack White captioned a copy of the legal complaint in an Instagram post with: “This machine sues fascists.”

The most recent example to date is Metallica, who forced the US government to withdraw a social media video that used their song ‘Enter Sandman’ without authorisation.

This weekend’s “No Kings” protests saw millions of Americans marching against Trump’s administration, opposing the president’s “authoritarian power grab.”

The 18 October protest, the third mass mobilisation since Trump’s return to the White House, drew nearly 7 million people across all 50 states according to organisers. This figure would make it the largest single-day mobilisation against a US president in modern history.

Health officials in the United States are reviewing whether to remove aluminium from some common vaccines, as part of the Trump administration’s escalating attacks on vaccines.

The Department of Health and Human Services has reduced some vaccine access. The agency scaled back COVID-19 vaccine recommendations, approved COVID-19 vaccines for fewer people and aimed to remove the preservative thimerosal from US vaccines. Experts told PolitiFact scientific research did not support its removal.

During a September 22 news conference, in which US President Donald Trump told people not to take Tylenol during pregnancy, he also mentioned another objective. “We want no aluminium in the vaccine,” he said. The administration was already in the process of removing aluminium from vaccines, he added.

About two weeks later, on October 8, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, or ACIP, announced a new working group focused on the childhood vaccine schedule. Its discussion topics include vaccine ingredient safety and aluminium adjuvants.

Robert Malone, an ACIP member who has opposed COVID-19 vaccines, told Axios he expected the ACIP would determine there was “a lot of evidence” of “issues” with aluminium in vaccines. The committee would likely vote to re-categorise vaccines containing aluminium adjuvants so that people would have to discuss with their doctor before getting them, Malone told Axios.

That could have far-reaching ramifications. Here’s what to know about aluminium in vaccines.

A: Small amounts of aluminium are sometimes included in vaccines as adjuvants, or substances that boost the body’s immune response to the vaccine to ensure protection from infection.

That boost means people can get fewer vaccine doses in smaller quantities.

Q: When used, how much aluminium is in a vaccine?

A: Vaccines with aluminium adjuvants usually contain less than 1mg aluminium per dose, according to the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia.

That is a pretty abstract number. To help make it more concrete: a milligram is one-thousandth (1/1,000th) of 1g. One gram is about the weight of a raisin or a stick of gum. Imagine cutting one of those items into 1,000 equal pieces. One of the pieces would be about 1mg.

Here is another way to think about it.

People come in contact with and consume aluminium all of the time. It is one of the most abundant metal elements in the Earth’s crust, according to the US Geological Survey. It is naturally occurring in soil, air and water. Food is the main way people are exposed to aluminium. The average adult eats 7mg to 9mg of aluminium per day, according to the CDC.

A baby in its first six months might receive a total of about 4.4mg of aluminium from recommended vaccines. In the same period of time, a breastfed infant would ingest about 7mg of aluminium from breastmilk, and a formula-fed baby would ingest about 38mg from formula.

Q: How long have vaccines contained aluminium?

A: Aluminium adjuvants have been used in vaccines for more than 70 years, the CDC said.

“Aluminium is one of our oldest adjuvants; it’s been used in vaccines since the 1920s,” said Dr Peter Hotez, a Baylor College of Medicine professor and codirector of Texas Children’s Hospital Center for Vaccine Development.

Q: How do we know it’s safe to include small amounts of aluminium in vaccines?

A: Every vaccine’s safety and efficacy are tested in animal studies and human clinical trials before the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) licenses it for public use. Every vaccine containing adjuvants has been tested, and health agencies continuously monitor their safety, the CDC said.

Over several decades of use, vaccines with aluminium adjuvants have been proven safe, the FDA said.

Vaccines containing aluminium have been “given to billions of people worldwide now”, said Dr Kawsar Talaat, a professor at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

A growing body of research has also found that aluminium adjuvants do not cause aluminium toxicity or other adverse outcomes.

Q: Do aluminium adjuvants have any risks?

A: Rarely, some people have allergic reactions to aluminium in the same way they might have allergic reactions to other substances, Talaat said.

In 2022, researchers published a retrospective, observational study on more than 325,000 children that found an association between vaccine-related aluminium exposure and persistent asthma. Association is not the same as causation, meaning the study did not prove a link between aluminium in vaccines and asthma.

Experts from the CDC and the American Academy of Pediatrics encouraged more research on the subject because the backwards-looking observational study did not prove causation and also had limitations, including that it excluded many children who developed asthma before they turned two years old.

A 2025 study found no increased risk of asthma associated with childhood exposure to aluminium-absorbed vaccines.

Q: Which vaccines contain aluminium adjuvants?

A: At least 25 vaccines approved for use in the US have aluminium adjuvants, the CDC says. That includes vaccines that protect against HPV, hepatitis A and B and diphtheria, tetanus, and acellular pertussis (whooping cough).

Q: Which vaccines do not contain aluminium adjuvants?

The CDC’s list of vaccines without adjuvants includes vaccines against COVID-19, Ebola, meningococcal, polio and rabies. Additionally, most seasonal flu shots and the vaccine against measles, mumps and rubella do not contain aluminium adjuvants.

Q: Can we remove aluminium from vaccines?

A: Not quickly. If it could be done at all, it would take years to develop, test and license new, aluminium-free vaccines. Many of the vaccines with aluminium adjuvants do not have aluminium-free formulas.

“A vaccine is licensed based on all of its ingredients and the exact manufacturing process,” Talaat said. “If you were to take an ingredient out of a vaccine, you would have to start all over with the clinical trials and the manufacturing, and it is highly possible that some of these vaccines wouldn’t work without the aluminium in there.”

Although other adjuvants exist, they are newer and often more scarce than aluminium, which is abundant.

An immediate ban on aluminium in vaccines would drastically reduce people’s ability to protect themselves and others against numerous diseases.

“I think we’d see outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases,” Talaat said.

Q: Why do people think aluminium in vaccines is causing autism?

A: A 2011 study said vaccines with aluminium adjuvants “may be a significant” contributing factor to the rising number of autism diagnoses in kids, Nature reported.

A year later, a World Health Organization vaccine safety committee called the 2011 study “seriously flawed”. The 2011 study and another by the same authors compared vaccines’ aluminium content and autism rates in several countries, the WHO group said, but that cannot be used to establish a causal relationship.

“We studied aluminium, and have no link between aluminium and autism,” Talaat said.

Thousands converged on New York’s Times Square Saturday for a ‘No Kings’ protest against President Donald Trump. It was part of a nationwide event that comes amid military crackdowns in US cities, deportations and revenge indictments of political foes and in the wake of the Gaza peace deal.

Crowds packed the US capital on Saturday, part of nationwide ‘No Kings’ protests against President Donald Trump’s policies on immigration, education, and security. Al Jazeera’s Shihab Rattansi reports from the scene.

More than 2,600 rallies are planned in cities large and small, organised by hundreds of coalition partners.

Protesters have gathered in several United States cities for “No Kings” demonstrations against President Donald Trump’s policies on immigration, education and security, with organisers saying they expect more than 2,600 events across the country.

Saturday’s rally is the third mass mobilisation since Trump’s return to the White House and comes against the backdrop of a government shutdown that not only has closed federal programmes and services, but is testing the core balance of power as an aggressive executive confronts Congress and the courts in ways that organisers warn are a slide towards US authoritarianism.

The rallies started outside the US, with a couple of hundred protesters gathering outside the US embassy in London, and hundreds more holding demonstrations in Madrid and Barcelona.

By Saturday morning in Northern Virginia, many protesters were walking on overpasses across roads heading into Washington, DC.

Many protesters are especially angered by attacks on their motivations for taking to the streets. In Bethesda, Maryland, one held up a sign that said: “Nothing is more patriotic than protesting.”

Trump himself is away from Washington at his Mar-a-Lago home in Florida.

“They say they’re referring to me as a king. I’m not a king,” Trump said in a Fox News interview broadcast on Friday.

More than 2,600 rallies are planned on Saturday in cities large and small, organised by hundreds of coalition partners.

A growing opposition movement

While the earlier protests this year – against Elon Musk’s cuts in spring, then to counter Trump’s military parade in June – drew crowds, organisers say this one is building a more unified opposition movement.

Top Democrats such as Senate Leader Chuck Schumer and Independent Senator Bernie Sanders are joining in what organisers view as an antidote to Trump’s actions, from the administration’s clampdown on free speech to its military-style immigration raids.

“There is no greater threat to an authoritarian regime than patriotic people-power,” said Ezra Levin, a cofounder of Indivisible, among the key organisers.

Before noon, several thousand people had gathered in New York City’s Times Square, chanting “Trump must go now”.

The American Civil Liberties Union said it has given legal training to tens of thousands of people who will act as marshals at the various marches, and those people were also trained in de-escalation.

Republicans have sought to portray participants in Saturday’s rallies as far outside the mainstream of US politics, and a main reason for the prolonged government shutdown, now in its 18th day.

From the White House to Capitol Hill, GOP leaders disparaged the rallygoers as “communists” and “Marxists”.

They say Democratic leaders, including Schumer, are beholden to the far-left flank and willing to keep the government shut down to appease those liberal forces.

“I encourage you to watch – we call it the Hate America rally – that will happen Saturday,” said House Speaker Mike Johnson.

“Let’s see who shows up for that,” Johnson said, listing groups including “antifa types”, people who “hate capitalism”, and “Marxists in full display”.

In a Facebook post, former presidential contender Sanders said, “It’s a love America rally”.

Dana Fisher, a professor at American University in Washington, DC, and the author of several books on US activism, forecast that Saturday could see the largest protest turnout in modern US history – she expected that more than 3 million people would participate, based on registrations and participation in the June events.

“The main point of this day of action is to create a sense of collective identity amongst all the people who are feeling like they are being persecuted or are anxious due to the Trump administration and its policies,” Fisher said. “It’s not going to change Trump’s policies. But it might embolden elected officials at all levels who are in opposition to Trump.”

George Santos, serving a prison term on charges of fraud and identity theft, had been held in solitary confinement.

United States President Donald Trump has said that he will commute the sentence of former Republican Representative George Santos, who was serving a prison sentence for fraud and identity theft.

In a social media post on Friday, Trump acknowledged that Santos had made mistakes. But he celebrated Santos as a strong supporter of the Republican Party and noted that family and friends had raised concerns over the former lawmaker’s conditions in prison.

“George Santos was somewhat of a ‘rogue,’ but there are many rogues throughout our Country that aren’t forced to serve seven years in prison,” Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social.

“At least Santos had the Courage, Conviction, and Intelligence to ALWAYS VOTE REPUBLICAN!”

Trump added that Santos has been “horribly mistreated”, citing his isolation behind bars: “George has been in solitary confinement for long stretches of time.”

Santos became a well-known political figure after his election victory in 2022, when he flipped New York’s 3rd Congressional District from Democratic control to Republican.

Election observers noted it was one of the first times an openly gay Republican had won a seat in the House of Representatives.

But news reports quickly revealed that Santos had fabricated key details of his life story, and by December 2022, investigators had started to delve into his business dealings.

After a congressional committee found evidence that Santos had violated federal law, including by deceiving donors and stealing from his own campaign, the House of Representatives voted to expel him. Santos was less than a year into his term.

By 2024, Santos had entered into a plea deal with prosecutors to avoid a trial over the allegations. He was sentenced in April for deceiving donors and misleading 11 people, including members of his own family, into giving money to his campaign.

But Santos, a vocal Trump supporter, quickly began a push for the president to commute his prison time, claiming that his punishment was politically motivated.

Trump has also depicted himself as a victim of unjust persecution at the hands of political enemies. He is known to use the power of presidential pardon on behalf of his supporters.

At the beginning of his current term, for example, Trump controversially pardoned nearly all of those charged with participating in the attack on the US Capitol on January 6, 2021. That attack was part of a bid to violently overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, which Trump lost.

Santos and his allies have also drawn attention to his placement in solitary confinement. Though cells meant to maximise isolation are common in US prisons, critics argue they constitute “cruel and unusual punishment”, given their connection to mental health issues and heightened risks of suicide.

Santos entered the Federal Correctional Institution in Fairton, New Jersey, on July 25. He has written several columns about his experience with solitary confinement since then, reiterating his appeal for Trump to show mercy.

“I am not asking for special treatment. I am asking to be treated as a person – with attention, dignity, and the care any human deserves when in distress,” he wrote in an opinion column.

“And yes, I renew my plea to President Trump: intervene. Help me escape this daily torment and let me return to my family.”

The United States Treasury has sanctioned two Haitians, one a former police officer and the other an alleged gang leader, for their affiliation with the Viv Ansanm criminal alliance.

On Friday, a Treasury news release accused Dimitri Herard and Kempes Sanon of colluding with Viv Ansanm, thereby contributing to the violence wracking Haiti.

The sanctions block either person from accessing assets or property in the US. They also prohibit US-based entities from engaging in transactions with the two men.

“Today’s action underscores the critical role of gang leaders and facilitators like Herard and Sanon, whose support enables Viv Ansanm’s campaign of violence, extortion, and terrorism in Haiti,” Bradley T Smith, the director of the US Office of Foreign Assets Control, said in a statement.

Since taking office for a second term, US President Donald Trump has sought to take a hardline stance against criminal organisations across Latin America, blaming the groups for unregulated immigration and drug-trafficking on US soil.

Trump has termed their actions a criminal “invasion”, using nativist rhetoric to justify military action in international waters.

Viv Ansanm has been part of Trump’s crackdown. On his first day in office, on January 20, Trump issued an executive order setting the stage for his administration to label Latin American criminal groups as “foreign terrorist organisations”.

That process began several weeks later. In May, Viv Ansanm and another Haitian criminal organisation, Gran Grif, were added to the growing list of criminal networks to receive the “foreign terrorist” designation.

Since the assassination of Haitian President Jovenel Moise in 2021, a power vacuum has formed in Haiti. The last national elections were held in 2016, and its last democratically elected officials reached the end of their terms in 2023.

That has created a crisis of public confidence that criminal networks, including gangs, have exploited to expand their power. Viv Ansanm is one of the most powerful groups, as a coalition of gangs largely based in the capital, Port-au-Prince.

In July, Ghada Waly, the executive director of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, warned that the gangs now have “near-total control of the capital”, with 90 percent of its territory under their control.

Nearly 1.4 million people have been displaced in the country as a result of the gang violence, a 36 percent increase over 2024. Last year, more than 5,600 people were killed, and a further 2,212 injured.

In Friday’s sanctions, the US Treasury accused Herard, the former police officer, of having “colluded with the Viv Ansanm alliance”, including through training and the provision of guns.

It also noted that Herard had been imprisoned by Haitian authorities for involvement in the Moise assassination. He later escaped in 2024.

Sanon, meanwhile, is identified as the leader of the Bel Air gang, part of the Viv Ansanm alliance. The Treasury said he “played a significant role” in building Viv Ansanm’s power, and it added that he has been implicated in killings, extortion and kidnappings.

The UN Security Council echoed the US’s sanctions against Sanon and Herard, designating both men on Friday. It also agreed to extend its arms embargo on Haiti, which began in 2022.

In September, the UNSC also approved the creation of a “gang suppression force”, with a 12-month mandate to work with Haitian police and military. That force is expected to replace a Kenyan-led mission to reinforce Haiti’s security forces, and it is slated to include 5,550 people.

But on Friday, the Trump administration said that the UN had not gone far enough in its efforts to combat Haiti’s gangs. It called for more designations against individual suspects.

“While we applaud the Council for designating these individuals, the list is not complete. There are more enablers of Haiti’s insecurity evading accountability,” an open letter from US Ambassador Jennifer Locetta read.

“Haiti deserves better. Colleagues, we will continue pressing for more designations through the Security Council and its subsidiary bodies to ensure the sanctions lists are fit for purpose.”

Former US National Security Adviser John Bolton is making an initial court appearance as he faces charges in an 18-count indictment of mishandling classified information. Bolton, who served under Donald Trump in his first term, has become a vocal critic of the US president.

It was a major talking point in the final months of Donald Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign: If re-elected, the Republican leader pledged to make in vitro fertilisation (IVF) free for those seeking to get pregnant.

“Under the Trump administration, we are going to be paying for that treatment,” Trump told NBC News last year, adding that his plans would cover “all Americans that get it, all Americans that need it”.

“We’re going to be paying for that treatment. Or we’re going to be mandating that the insurance company pay.”

While that campaign promise remains unrealised, the Trump administration took a step on Thursday to make the procedure more accessible.

Speaking from the Oval Office, Trump announced a collaboration with the company EMD Serono, a subsidiary of the pharmaceutical giant Merck, to offer lower-priced fertility drugs on his upcoming prescription marketplace, TrumpRx.

“ EMD Serono, the largest fertility drug manufacturer in the world, has agreed to provide massive discounts to all fertility drugs they sell in the United States, including the most popular drug of all, the IVF drug Gonal-F,” Trump told reporters.

Expanding TrumpRx project

The announcement marks the third major pharmaceutical company to agree to provide discounted products on TrumpRx, a direct-to-consumer website slated to launch in 2026.

Trump had threatened drug companies in September with a 100-percent tariff on their products unless they started to build manufacturing facilities in the US.

But that tariff was postponed after the pharmaceutical manufacturer Pfizer announced a deal with TrumpRx on September 30, a day before the tax hike was slated to hit. AstraZeneca, another power player in the industry, followed suit last week.

In Thursday’s news conference, Trump once again credited his tariff threats with bringing the companies to heel.

“They’ll bring a significant portion of their drug manufacturing back to the United States,” Trump said of EMD Serono. “That’s for a lot of reasons, but primarily because of the election result, November 5th, and maybe most importantly because of the tariffs.”

In addition to the forthcoming discounts from EMD Serono, Trump indicated he would encourage insurance companies to expand coverage for IVF treatments.

In the US, laws vary by state as to whether health insurance must cover fertility treatments like IVF. Trump touted the guidance as a breakthrough in making reproductive healthcare more accessible and affordable.

“Effective immediately, for the first time ever, we will make it legal for companies to offer supplemental insurance plans specifically for fertility,” Trump said.

“ Americans will be able to opt in, do specialised coverage, just as they get vision and dental insurance.”

Those plans typically come at an extra fee, on top of regular health insurance rates. That raises questions about how effective the new insurance guidance will be.

More than 26 million Americans – roughly 8 percent of the population – are uninsured, according to US census data. Even more lack access to supplemental policies for dental and vision care.

The American Dental Association, an industry professional group, estimates more than 22 percent of US adults lacked dental insurance as of 2021.

Trump seemed to acknowledge gaps in coverage during his remarks, but he maintained that the new government guidance would offer some adults a pathway to parenthood.

“They’re going to get fertility insurance for the first time,” he continued. “So I don’t know.  I don’t know how well these things are covered.”

A campaign-trail controversy

The Republican leader also credited a 2024 court decision with propelling him to focus on IVF treatments.

IVF involves removing eggs from a patient’s ovaries and fertilising them in a laboratory environment. These eggs are then inserted into the patient’s uterus or frozen for future use.

The use of such treatments is on the rise in the US: In 2023, the American Society for Reproductive Medicine found that 95,860 babies were born as the result of an IVF procedure.

But in February the following year, a ruling from the Alabama Supreme Court prompted fears about whether IVF would remain widely available.

In a novel decision, the court – located in a strongly conservative state – ruled that embryos created through IVF could be considered children under state law, thereby making the destruction of such embryos potentially a criminal act.

The decision sent shockwaves throughout the IVF industry, with clinics in Alabama temporarily suspending services. Discarding embryos is standard practice in IVF: Generally, more eggs are collected than will ultimately be used, and not all fertilised eggs will be suitable to start a pregnancy.

Within weeks, the Alabama state legislature stepped in to shield IVF providers from prosecution. But the ruling created lingering concerns that IVF could be targeted by anti-abortion rights advocates.

On Thursday, Trump revisited that controversy, which happened in the midst of his re-election bid. He called the court’s ruling a “bad decision” and credited it with helping to make him aware of IVF.

“I wasn’t that familiar with it,” Trump said. “Now I think I’ve sort of become the father.”

Senator Katie Britt, who represents the state of Alabama, echoed that evaluation, praising Trump for taking steps to protect IVF.

Thursday was not the first time Trump has gestured at lowering costs for the fertility procedure. In February, he also issued a presidential order calling on his administration to start “protecting IVF access and aggressively reducing out-of-pocket and health plan costs”.

“ Mr President, this is the most pro-IVF thing that any president in the history of the United States of America has done,” Britt told Trump on Thursday. “You are the reason why the Republican Party is now the party of parents.”

Addressing the US birthrate

Trump, who previously called himself the “fertilisation president”  during a Women’s History Month event, also framed the new measures as progress towards increasing the US birthrate.

In April, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported that fertility remained at a historic low, rising slightly in 2024 to 1.6 births per woman.

Those numbers have fuelled a push within the Republican Party to ignite a new baby boom, with right-wing figures like tech billionaire Elon Musk going so far as to call the low birthrate “the biggest danger civilization faces by far”.

At Thursday’s meeting, top figures in the Trump administration echoed those concerns, including Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr.

“We are below replacement right now,” he said, referencing the number of births needed to outpace deaths in the US. “That is a national security threat to our country.”

Mehmet Oz, who serves under Kennedy as the administrator for Medicaid services, took a more positive approach, framing the new IVF guidance as the beginning of a reversal of that downward trend.

“There are going to be a lot of Trump babies,” Oz quipped. “I think that’s probably a good thing. But it turns out the fundamental creative force in society is about making babies.”

But it remains to be seen if insurance companies and employers will follow through with Trump’s guidance to offer supplemental fertility benefits for adults seeking to get pregnant.

Most Americans receive health insurance as part of their workplace benefits. Senator Britt argued the guidelines would put employers “in the driver’s seat”, allowing them to shape the benefits they offer to their workers.

“Employers are going to be able to decide how to cover the root causes of infertility, things like obesity and metabolic health, and other things that are impacting infertility,” she said. “We want employers to be the ones that can make those decisions, not the government.”

But for Democrats, the guidance fell far short of what Trump promised on the campaign trail.

“Donald Trump lied when he pledged to make IVF available to every family for FREE,” Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts posted afterwards on social media. “It’s insulting – a broken promise.”

A federal grand jury in Maryland has indicted John Bolton, United States President Donald Trump’s former national security adviser, over his handling of classified documents, charging him with retaining and transmitting national defence information.

The indictment, filed in federal court in Maryland on Thursday, charges Bolton with eight counts of transmission of national defence information and 10 counts of retention of national defence information, all in violation of the Espionage Act.

Each count is punishable by up to 10 years in prison if Bolton is convicted, but any sentence would be determined by a judge based on a range of factors.

Bolton’s lawyer Abbe Lowell said in a statement that his client “did not unlawfully share or store any information.”

Bolton served as US ambassador to the United Nations as well as White House national security adviser during Trump’s first term before emerging as one of the president’s most vocal critics. He described Trump as unfit to be president in a memoir he released last year.

The charges come two months after FBI agents searched Bolton’s home and office, seeking evidence of possible violations of the Espionage Act, which makes it a crime to remove, retain or transmit national defence records, according to partially unsealed search warrants filed in federal court.

In his Maryland home, agents seized two cellphones, documents in folders labelled “Trump I-IV” and a binder labelled “statements and reflections to Allied Strikes”, according to court documents.

In Bolton’s office, agents found records labelled “confidential”, including documents that referenced weapons of mass destruction, the US mission to the United Nations, and other materials related to the government’s strategic communications, according to court records.

The indictment levied Thursday alleges Bolton transmitted confidential information via personal email, used private messaging accounts to send sensitive documents that were classified as top secret and illegally retained intelligence documents in his home, according to the Department of Justice.

Bolton is accused of sharing more than 1,000 pages of information about government activities with relatives, according to the indictment.

The indictment says the notes Bolton shared with the two people included information he gleaned from meetings with senior government officials, discussions with foreign leaders, and intelligence briefings.

Prosecutors said a “cyber actor” tied to the Iranian government hacked Bolton’s personal email after he left government service and accessed classified information. A representative for Bolton told the government about the hack but did not report that he stored classified information in the email account, according to the indictment.

“These charges stem from portions of Amb. Bolton’s personal diaries over his 45-year career – records that are unclassified, shared only with his immediate family, and known to the FBI as far back as 2021,” Bolton’s lawyer Abbe Lowell said in an emailed statement. “Like many public officials throughout history, Amb. Bolton kept diaries – that is not a crime.”

Trump, who campaigned for the presidency on a vow of retribution after facing a slew of legal woes once his first term in the White House ended in 2021, has dispensed with decades-long norms designed to insulate federal law enforcement from political pressures.

In recent months, he has actively pushed Attorney General Pam Bondi’s Justice Department to bring charges against his perceived adversaries, even driving out a prosecutor he deemed to be moving too slowly in doing so.

Asked by reporters at the White House about the Bolton indictment on Thursday, Trump said: “He’s a bad guy.”

Bolton served as national security adviser during Trump’s first term from 2018 to 2019. In that time, he clashed with the president over Iran, Afghanistan and North Korea before getting fired in 2019.

He has subsequently criticised Trump’s approach to foreign policy and government, including in a 2020 book titled The Room Where it Happened, which portrayed the president as ill-informed on foreign policy.

The search warrant affidavit said a National Security Council official had reviewed the book manuscript and told Bolton in 2020 that it appeared to contain “significant amounts” of classified information, some at a top-secret level.

Earlier this month, New York Attorney General Letitia James, who led a legal case against Trump over alleged fraud in his businesses, was charged with lying on a mortgage application, drawing accusations of political vindictiveness by the White House.

Former FBI Director James Comey was indicted on September 25 on charges of making false statements and obstructing a congressional investigation, which he denies. Trump has feuded with Comey since the Russia investigation, which examined possible ties between Trump’s 2016 election campaign and Moscow.

The Justice Department has also launched investigations into US Senator Adam Schiff and Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook. Schiff and Cook have not been charged, and both reject any suggestion of wrongdoing.