Economy

Rising goods and fuel costs are cited as key factors in the sharp drop in consumer confidence.

United States consumer confidence has fallen to its lowest level since 2014, just over one month before the congressional midterm elections.

Consumers pointed to higher costs for goods and services as the primary reason for the decline, according to The Conference Board, which released its monthly report on Tuesday.

“The Consumer Confidence Index deteriorated notably in September, following two prior months of softening,” Dana M Peterson, chief economist at The Conference Board, said in a release announcing the report.

Consumers pointed to higher prices at the pump as one of the driving factors. The average price for a gallon (3.78 litres) of petrol has jumped 37 cents over the past month, according to the American Automobile Association (AAA), which tracks daily petrol prices. The average price stood at $4.45 on Tuesday, compared with $4.08 a month ago.

“Oil and gas prices in particular rose to new heights, reflecting September’s surge in fuel costs. Comments about war/conflict eased this month but remained elevated,” Peterson said.

The consumer confidence report comes a day ahead of a key inflation report that the Federal Reserve uses to gauge the state of inflation, the personal consumption expenditures (PCE) index, which was up 3.7 percent in June from a year earlier.

The US central bank raised interest rates for the first time in three years earlier this month, driving up costs of credit cards and car and bank loans. It is set to make another decision on interest rates at its October 27-28 meeting, putting pressure on Republicans as consumer sentiment tumbles across political affiliations.

Consumer confidence fell among all political affiliations, according to the report, the second-to-last major consumer confidence reading before the midterm elections, which will determine the balance of power in Washington, DC.

US consumers think the Democratic Party would handle the economy better than their Republican counterparts, with 42 percent saying Democrats would do a better job compared with 34 percent for Republicans, according to a recent Marist poll.

US markets are only slightly lower as the trading day comes to a close. The tech-heavy Nasdaq closed down 0.08 percent, the Dow Jones Industrial Average declined 0.2 percent and the S&P 500 was down 0.1 percent.

Trump retaliated against Canada’s counter-tariffs on $20bn worth of US imports by banning $1bn of Canadian goods.

The United States is implementing a ban on nearly $1bn in imports from Canada, including alcoholic beverages, dairy products and motorcycles.

The ban took effect early Tuesday and is likely to further strain already-tense relations between the two neighbours.

Ottawa and Washington DC have long been allies and trade partners, with approximately $880bn worth of annual two-way trade. That relationship has been upended during US President Donald Trump’s second term as he unleashed tariffs on most trading partners, including Canada, and referred to the northern neighbour as the 51st state of the US.

Most recently, the US slapped 50 percent levies on Canadian goods worth $20bn, including dairy and motorcycles, on August 22 after trade negotiations failed. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney retaliated, saying Ottawa will match US tariffs “dollar for dollar in order to protect Canadian workers, farmers, families and businesses”. Canada levied tariffs of 15 percent, 25 percent and 50 percent on US exports of a similar value.

Tuesday’s ban was Trump’s punishment for Canada’s retaliatory tariffs.

“The impact of such a ban will be minor, it is only $1bn while we trade hundreds of billions with Canada,” Professor Gary Shields at Wayne State University’s School of Business told Al Jazeera. “It is, however, rather astonishing how President Trump treats our allies in Canada and Europe, while rolling out the red carpet for China’s dictator when he visited the US last week”.

“It is a tit-for-tat. It will not reduce people’s taxes and won’t put money in their pockets. It is kind of personal and a way of showing off toughness,” Shields added.

Canada’s economy grew by an estimated 0.2 percent in August after remaining unchanged in July, according to Statistics Canada. But the new US-Canada tariffs, tighter financial conditions and a shrinking population should further weaken growth in late 2026 and early 2027, Michael Davenport, senior Canada economist at Oxford Economics, said in a note provided to Al Jazeera.

America.gov for now functions like a chatbot comparable to ChatGPT or Claude, pointing users to official gov’t websites.

The administration of United States President Donald Trump has launched a new website called America.gov aimed at simplifying access to government information.

The website functions much like a chatbot comparable to OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Anthropic’s Claude and points users to official government sources for questions such as passport renewals.

The president announced the new site on Tuesday alongside several Cabinet officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy.

In a speech, the president claimed that the website would not store user information and used the opportunity to tout simplified access to information about elections and applications for citizenship.

The site is powered by Google’s Gemini AI and xAI’s Grok, according to the chief design officer, Joe Gebbia.

The executive order announcing the new site calls it “a unified digital front door to the Federal Government for every individual in the United States seeking Federal information or services”.

It also says the site will provide “an entry through which an individual may sign in, communicate in plain language, receive accurate answers, and, where authorized and technically available, complete Government transactions without being required to navigate the websites of multiple agencies.”

White House officials told Al Jazeera that the website will abide by the security protocols of the government agency users inquire about, and it will be retained by those agencies and not America.gov, for example, Medicare.

Al Jazeera tested the answers the website provides to see how they align with the president’s views.

When asked “who is the fake news?”, it said, “I don’t label news outlets or comment on media.” When asked who won the 2020 presidential election, it said Joe Biden. When asked whether the department in which Pete Hegseth is secretary is the Department of Defense or Department of War, it said, “Department of Defense (DoD). That is still the name in statute until Congress changes it.”

When asked about obtaining specific records, such as individual tax information, citizenship records, political donations or Securities and Exchange Commission filings, it directed users to the government websites that provide that data for individuals.

However, in the presentation announcing the new site, Rubio showed that, in the future, the website may be able to help Americans apply for passports directly through the site and even take and upload their passport photos.

The website was created in coordination with the National Design Studio, which is part of the Executive Office of the President and was established by Trump in August 2025.

Tehran, Iran – Iranians are stocking up on food and medicines as fears grow that the country will face dire shortages as the United States tightens an embargo on the country.

The Iranian government had managed to keep household staples flowing during the early months of the war. But a US naval blockade and pivot to draconian sanctions have led to fears that imports will be limited.

More recently, the US announced a ban on Iranian airlines worldwide and is pressing other countries to cut trade ties with Iran in a bid to isolate the country.

Addressing the United Nations General Assembly last week, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian condemned Washington for its blockade on his country, saying it will prevent food and medicine from reaching the Iranian people.

On Saturday, US President Donald Trump rejected Iran’s offer for a seven-day truce that would see it reopen the Strait of Hormuz in exchange for economic relief and other conditions.

As the war enters its eighth month and hopes for a diplomatic solution dim, Al Jazeera looks at how some Iranians are faring under a US embargo.

Consumers

Tehran’s stores remain stocked, but shoppers are keeping an eye on shop shelves. Their anxiety has deepened since a flurry of social media posts urging people to ensure they have several days of food before a possible new round of fighting with the US.

At one shopping centre, Ali, 51, was loading a trolley packed with rice, flour, pasta, pulses, cooking oil and canned food.

He is stocking up because he is convinced that Iran’s adversary is seeking to “starve” the people to push them to turn on their government.

“This is not a war in the traditional sense. It targets the people to put pressure on the authorities,” he said.

With flights to some nearby countries suspended, imports of certain medicines and mobile phone headsets are hard to find. The prices of those still available in shops have been pushed up.

Haj Pasandideh, a 71-year-old grocer, said he believed warehouses were well-stocked with basic goods at the moment. But the problem lies in the daily price increases due to Iran’s weakening rial, prompting him to bulk-buy goods before the expected hikes.

He sometimes caps cooking oil at one bottle per sale to ensure as many customers can purchase the goods as possible.

Exporters crushed

Farmers are also on edge due to the embargo, unable to ship out their produce and forced to sell to local markets.

The war has worsened the economic situation, even after years of sanctions that have pushed the country from being a regional exporter of agricultural and food products to being one of the region’s main importers.

Mehran, an apple grower, told Al Jazeera that due to the difficulties of exporting, he had sold only a third of this year’s harvest, all of it inside Iran.

Some neighbouring countries have halted trade with Iran in recent months, he said, while trucks now spend days at crossings they once cleared in a day, causing fruit to spoil before it reaches buyers.

“The blockade has not only closed the sea and air but also the land routes but in an undeclared manner,” he said.

Pharmaceutical shortages

The war has also deepened an already-dire shortage of medications. Some pharmacies Al Jazeera visited in southern Tehran had run out of infant formula and dozens of other types of medications.

Although officials have assured Iranians that substitute products were available, pharmacy staff expressed concern about the increasing number of customers searching for infant formula in vain.

“Imported medicines are disappearing fast, and lately people have been coming in to buy certain items before they need them for fear they will run out in future,” Mahsa, a 23-year-old pharmacy assistant, told Al Jazeera.

She said the health authorities had introduced “smart systems” to track the quantity and type of medication each person buys.

Breaking the blockade

The prospect of a prolonged siege and deteriorating economic conditions have driven some Iranians to call for a military solution.

On Tehran’s main thoroughfare, several people told Al Jazeera that another round of fighting with the US was unavoidable. Some urged the government to break the blockade by force before it is tightened further.

Mohsen, a 23-year-old economics student, believes Washington’s goal is to strangle the Iranian economy and the cost will ultimately be felt by Iranian citizens.

Iran possesses many strong cards that it must use to break the air and sea blockade before they develop into a land blockade that would completely choke Tehran, he said.

Alireza Taghavinia, an Iranian international relations expert, told Al Jazeera that the gap between Washington and Tehran was too wide to be bridged. “The siege imposed by force will only be lifted by force,” he said.

In a worst-case scenario, falling living standards could bring protesters onto the streets, he added.

“The enemy is counting on stirring up chaos inside Iran because it believes no military strike will achieve its objectives without internal unrest,” he said.

Reserve Bank of Australia lifts benchmark rate to 4.6 percent amid stubborn inflation.

Australia’s central bank has raised interest rates to a 15-year high, spelling higher mortgage payments for millions of Australian households.

The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) on Tuesday lifted the benchmark rate by 0.25 percent to 4.6 percent, its highest since 2011.

The RBA said inflation remained elevated and that previously flagged “upside risks” had materialised, including higher energy prices due to the United States-Israel war on Iran and rising tech costs.

“There continue to be heightened uncertainties about the outlook for domestic economic activity and inflation,” the bank’s monetary board said in a statement.

“The Middle East conflict remains unresolved, and there are scenarios where inflation is higher and activity lower than forecast,” it said.

“Global oil supply disruptions are maintaining upward pressure on global and domestic energy prices and inflation. A period of prolonged uncertainty may also cause growth to be lower overseas and in Australia.”

Australia’s annual rate of inflation stood at 3.5 percent in July, well above the central bank’s 2–3 percent target.

Central banks typically raise their benchmark interest rate when policymakers believe prices are rising too fast.

Higher interest rates raise the cost of borrowing, including mortgages, cooling consumer demand and bringing down inflation.

The latest hike is set to heap further strain on Australian households already grappling with three previous increases this year.

In a research report earlier this month, Roy Morgan said nearly one-third of Australian mortgage holders, or nearly 1.8 million people, were at risk of “mortgage stress” – where households spend 25-45 percent of after-tax income on payments – as of July.

Australia’s Treasurer Jim Chalmers, who is not responsible for setting interest rates, acknowledged that the hike would mean greater hardship for many Australians.

“We know a lot of Australians are under pressure and this will make things harder,” Chalmers said in a post on X.

“Inflation and interest rates are going up around the world but we know that doesn’t take the sting out of today’s decision.”

Chalmers said the government would take responsibility for “our part of the fight against inflation”.

“That means continuing to manage the budget responsibly, rolling out tax cuts and cost of living help, and addressing the longer term challenges in our economy in an uncertain global environment,” he said.

DEVELOPING STORYDEVELOPING STORY,

OpenAI has cancelled the release of its latest AI model over safety concerns, according to media reports.

The move to scrap the release of GPT-6.1 Astra, reported by the Wall Street Journal and CNN on Monday, comes amid heightened concerns about AI’s potential to do catastrophic harm following a slew of incidents involving AI agents going rogue.

More to follow…

Gold hits seven-week low; silver follows suit and records a nearly 5 percent loss.

Gold prices are falling as concerns of rising fuel prices stoke inflation worries on the back of the war between the United States and Iran.

Spot gold prices fell by 3.3 percent to reach a more than seven-week low at $4,146.51 per ounce on Monday.

Rising oil prices, a higher US dollar and Treasury yields stoked inflation concerns, creating further headwinds for the metal.

This is the lowest level for gold values since August 5. US gold futures also fell by 3.3 percent to $4,178.40.

Although gold is traditionally considered an inflation hedge, higher interest rates dent ⁠its appeal as investors prefer yield-bearing assets.

“There might be no notable direct impact on regular people due to that. However, investors who had turned to gold will see a hit, especially under the current high inflation rates,” Sherif Othman, CEO of the Maryland-based Poise Investment Advisors, told Al Jazeera.

“Gold does not yield interest, so when Treasury yields go up, investors turn away from gold, impacting its value”, he added.

The Fed lifted benchmark rates by a quarter ⁠percentage point earlier this month and flagged that at least one more hike is likely in the coming months.

The US dollar was steady near a two-month high, and oil prices spiked about 3 percent as US President Donald Trump rejected an Iranian offer ⁠to resolve the conflict and reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

Such factors triggered several policymakers to warn that inflation risks remain elevated and that interest rates may need to rise, with Cleveland Fed President Beth Hammack among the latest officials to reiterate that view.

Higher Treasury yields and the US dollar are “creating a perfect storm to push the metals prices sharply lower,” according to Jim Wyckoff, a market analyst at American Gold Exchange.

Spot silver also fell by 4.7 percent to $61.27 per ounce, platinum declined 2.9 percent to $1,726.30 and palladium lost 4.4 percent to $1,211.45.

Amid tight Iowa midterm races, President Trump emphasises steel industry revival with project announcement.

Just weeks before the midterm elections, United States President Donald Trump has announced that a Minnesota-based steel manufacturer intends to build a $15bn steel mill project in Iowa, as the White House tries to highlight its focus on domestic manufacturing.

On Monday, joined by executives from Mesabi Metallics, which recently opened Minnesota’s first new iron ore mine in 50 years, Trump announced the project. It is expected to begin production in 2030 and could bring more than 1,700 jobs to the region, with an initial production capacity of 7.5 million tonnes per year.

The first phase of construction for the project will generate 5,000–6,000 construction jobs, a White House official told Al Jazeera.

The plant in Iowa will use iron ore from the Mesabi Iron Range in nearby Minnesota. Mesabi, which is owned by Indian conglomerate Essar Group, invested more than $2.5bn to build the mine in Minnesota.

“President Trump is delivering on his promise to rebuild American industry, re-shore manufacturing, and create new jobs. Today’s announcement underscores the president’s historic efforts to revitalize the US steel industry—supporting local communities, strengthening supply chains, and protecting our national security,” White House Spokeswoman Taylor Rogers said in a statement to Al Jazeera.

The steel industry has loomed over the first half of Trump’s second term in office. The president imposed 50 percent tariffs on steel and aluminium imports last year in an effort to boost domestic production, but also threatened to increase prices of products that use those materials, from soda cans to washing machines to cars.

“These are your 232 tariffs, the steel tariffs at work. Without those tariffs, this mine does not get built, and this steel plant does not get built”, US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said in the Oval Office on Monday.

Trump also solidified the US government’s stake in US Steel, which was acquired by Japan’s Nippon Steel in June 2025. As part of the deal, the US government received a so-called “golden share”, which gives the president the authority to appoint a board member to weigh in on decisions that would impact domestic steel production.

Midterm stakes

The announcement comes a little more than a month ahead of the US midterm elections, and the economy is top of mind for US voters.

Among Republicans, Trump is losing steam on his handling of economic issues, with a new September 21 Ipsos poll finding that 56 percent approve of his handling of the economy, down from 80 percent.

Iowa is in play as a seat Democrats could flip in the midterm elections, with Republican Ashley Hinson facing Democrat Josh Turek in November and with polls suggesting a tight race.

Hinson joined the president in the Oval Office for the announcement.

A poll conducted by the Republican-aligned pollster the Trafalgar Group showed Hinson with a two-point lead, while an InsiderAdvantage poll, which is considered more nonpartisan, found Turek leading by two points.

California jury finds Apple infringed two Taction patents but did not willfully violate them; Apple plans to appeal.

Apple has been ordered to pay more than $5.7bn for using patented technology from Taction Technology to power haptic feedback, the vibrations users feel when they receive a notification or press a button.

A jury in federal court in the Southern district of California found that the iPhone maker infringed two patents owned by the San Diego-based company.

“We’re happy the jury found for Taction and vindicated its patent rights,” said Taction attorney Lance Yang following the verdict on Friday.

The verdict is the culmination of a legal battle that began in 2021, when Taction first filed its lawsuit against Apple. In 2023, a federal judge ruled that Apple had not infringed Taction’s patents, but an appeals court revived the case last year.

“Apple is capitalising on Taction’s innovation and success by selling devices that infringe Taction’s patents. Apple is utilising Taction’s patented inventions without license or authority from Taction. Taction has brought this action to remedy Apple’s infringement,” Taction said in the original 31-page complaint.

It also claimed that Apple “at a minimum believed there was a high probability that the accused products were covered by Taction’s patents, but willfully blinded itself to Taction’s patents and the infringing nature of the Accused Products”.

The jury, however, found that Apple did not wilfully infringe the patents.

Apple said it plans to appeal the verdict.

“Apple’s Taptic Engine is fundamentally different from Taction’s technology, which Taction’s own testing of Apple’s products confirmed during trial,” Apple said in response.

The verdict comes at a pivotal moment for the company, amid transitions in its C-suite. In September, John Ternus took over as CEO from Tim Cook, who led Apple for 15 years. The leadership change comes as the Cupertino, California-based tech giant lags behind other major technology companies in rolling out its artificial intelligence products.

Apple shares fell on Monday, declining about two percent as trading got underway.

The United States and China have unveiled a list of goods recommended for reduced tariffs following last week’s summit between Presidents Donald Trump and Xi Jinping.

The release of the list on Sunday comes after Trump and Xi agreed to work towards lowering tariffs on $60bn worth of trade.

The agreement, which covers $30bn of each side’s imports, identifies 77 Chinese goods and more than 1,600 US products to be considered for more favourable tariff treatment.

Chinese goods on the list include microwave ovens, fish hooks, artificial flowers and weighing scales.

US exports identified for lower tariffs include poultry, dairy products, noodles, eggs, peanuts, canned tomatoes, pure-breed breeding horses, and silk.

US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said the agreement would improve market access for about 30 percent of US exports to China and also benefit US consumers.

“The Trump Administration will continue to pursue fair, balanced, and reciprocal trade with China by ensuring compliance with commitments on agricultural and energy purchases, pursuing balanced trade in non-sensitive goods, and securing market access for American farmers, manufacturers, businesses, and workers,” Greer said in a statement.

China’s Ministry of Commerce, which confirmed the list on Monday, shortly after the White House announcement, said the sides would discuss “a reciprocal tariff reduction framework of $30 billion for $30 billion, aiming to reach a consensus”.

“This arrangement will help stabilize China-US trade, create better conditions for Chinese exports of relevant products to the US, meet domestic market demand, and strengthen trade cooperation in agricultural products, energy, manufactured goods, and consumer goods,” the ministry said in a statement.

While Trump and Xi’s summit was heavy on pomp and ceremony, their talks wrapped up on Friday with few concrete announcements on the myriad divisions between the superpower rivals, which span everything from trade to artificial intelligence and Taiwan.

Trump and Xi, who have held three face-to-face summits since last October, are expected to meet again at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in Shenzhen, China, in November, and the Group of 20 gathering in Miami, Florida, in December.

Trade between the US and China, the world’s two largest economies, has declined substantially since Trump, a longtime critic of free trade policies, returned to the White House in January last year.

Two-way trade totalled $495bn in 2025, down 25 percent from the previous year, according to the US Trade Representative.

Deborah Elms, head of trade policy at the Hinrich Foundation in Singapore, said the latest announcement did not point to a major shift in US-China trade.

“Instead, both sides have largely listed goods that do not move the needle on overall trade flows,” Elms told Al Jazeera.

“They may reduce some prices in the US for consumers, but none is going to make a dramatic difference in inflation figures or result in meaningful sighs of relief by most US buyers,” Elms added.

“The same is broadly true with the Chinese list. Although there are many different agricultural products on the list, most are not actually exported to China or not exported in meaningful quantities.”

John Green’s nine-year hiatus from fiction has ended, and his adult debut, “Hollywood, Ending,” comes right on time to explore the dark side of fame.

The novel centers on former child actor Juniper Castillo and Hollywood newbie Kai Laramie, who are cast in the artsy biopic “Andy Warhol Never Gets Old,” with hotshot movie star Matthew Malone in the title role. It’s Juniper’s chance to establish herself as an adult actor and Kai’s first foray into the spotlight, a position he quickly realizes doesn’t come without a personal cost.

“There’s no way I could have written this book without spending a lot of time on film sets,” Green told The Times in a recent call.

Over the last two decades, several of the author’s bestselling young-adult novels have been adapted for the screen. His debut, “Looking for Alaska” (2005), was adapted as a Hulu limited series in 2019, the same year Netflix released the feature film adaptation of his co-authored holiday anthology, “Let It Snow” (2008). On the big screen, “Paper Towns” (2008) made its film debut in 2015, while his bestseller “The Fault in Our Stars” (2012) became a box-office hit in 2014. Most recently, his 2017 novel, “Turtles All the Way Down,” received a feature film adaptation in 2024.

“I hope the book is a love letter to movies. But I also wanted to be honest about how difficult it is to make a work of art that, in order to be commercially successful, has to be loved by millions of people,” Green said. That’s where the Hollywood machine comes in. “It’s really hard to figure out how to get millions of people to pay to watch something, and that challenge leads to all kinds of compromises and sacrifices.”

While Green’s young-adult novels have often explored the teenage experience, he never felt confined by the YA genre. “I think teenagers have infinite intellectual capacity,” he said, adding that he doesn’t really think about which shelf will hold his novels inside a bookstore. In “Hollywood, Ending,” his main characters are navigating their early 20s, a period which Green finds especially interesting.

“The questions in this novel explore how it feels in those early years of adulthood when there are still so many possibilities, so many directions you might go,” he said.

The following conversation has been edited for length and clarity.

How did you land on Andy Warhol as a celebrity figure and metaphor to use in telling this story about Kai and Juniper?

I think Andy Warhol saw so much of our world coming. He saw that three-dimensional experience was going to be rendered in two dimensions. He’s most famous for taking cylindrical soup cans and making them flat, but he also saw celebrity culture coming.

There’s the famous quote about everybody being world-famous for 15 minutes. I think he understood that normal people were going to experience celebrity, and he also saw the way that the repetition of images, as I write about in the novel, would lead to a certain desensitization. So I think everything from screen-based experience to the ways that technology was going to reshape our lives, he was the patron saint of all of that.

One of the images that really struck me is when you talk about him dying wigless and being too uncomfortable with that to have friends come and visit him in the hospital.

I think Juniper says at one point that fame is a kind of armor. I don’t know how Warhol thought of his wigs, but I wanted it to be a sort of emblem of protection for him.

Your wife, Sarah, is an Andy Warhol scholar. Was that a major strength while you were writing this?

There’s a huge advantage to being able to fact-check something by shouting down the hall. I also wanted to include Warhol partly as a love note to Sarah … She co-wrote a book about Andy Warhol’s relationship with money and business called “Andy Warhol Enterprises.” After 25 years, our way of looking at art and the art that we’ve shared together is so deeply intertwined that anything I write is unimaginable without her. She’s my first reader and most important reader … It’s only thanks to her that Warhol’s in the book.

You really humanize the young actors in “Hollywood, Ending,” which, unfortunately, is a unique thing. This is an intimate, vulnerable portrayal of behind-the-scenes Hollywood — why was that important for you to examine?

I wanted to write about the machine that takes private experience and commodifies it, and I think that machine is especially challenging to navigate when you’re young, when you’re in early adulthood, because you don’t yet have those relationships that are going to carry you through. You don’t have the love that you need to survive all that you’ve got to survive. When my work became very successful, I was in my 30s. I was married. I had two kids. I lived in Indianapolis. I had best friends. I was pretty grounded, and it was still very disorienting.

How so?

It’s a completely different life to have everybody have opinions about your work than it is to take your kids to school every day. So I was thinking partly about that, but I was also thinking about the influencers I’ve known, and the actors I’ve known who’ve had to go through that [while] much younger, and what that’s been like for them as well.

You do a really good job of examining the dark side of the attention economy. Why was this especially of interest?

Well, it used to be that the attention economy was mostly a problem for actors and other celebrities, but now the attention economy is something we all participate in. We’re all taking our private experiences and packaging them up for public consumption on Facebook and Instagram and Twitter and Reddit, and I think we gain something from that, or we wouldn’t do it. But we also lose a lot.

I wanted to try to be honest about what we gain, and also be honest about what we lose. My last novel, nine long years ago, was about a young woman with OCD. I also have OCD, and I had to make a decision when I was promoting that book, about whether I would talk about having OCD, and I decided that I would, and that became a huge part of talking about the novel — talking about my own experiences with mental illness, and it was a gift in many ways because so many people have said to me that it helped them to see that it’s possible to have a good and fulfilling life while living with a serious mental illness, and it was helpful for me because it helped me feel less alone in it.

But it was also complicated because there are real costs when you share something. It’s not yours anymore in ways that are a relief, but also in ways that are difficult.

You’re offering it up for scrutiny in a way that can be really scary.

It is really scary to have your private life scrutinized in that way, right? And there’s an element of judgment that comes with creative expression that’s a natural and healthy part of conversations about what art is and what art should be, but being in the middle of those conversations isn’t always fun.

I think you capture that in Kai’s experience. He is really pressured to come out and talk about his traumatic experience, and he doesn’t want to. The “machine” wants to sell tickets and exploit his trauma in the process.

It’s one thing to try to make good art. It’s another thing to try to make good art that lots of people interact with, and a portion of that second issue is inevitably finding ways to interest an audience, and nothing interests an audience quite like a personal story, especially a personal story of overcoming difficulty.

Was the movie star Matthew Malone based on anyone specifically?

I have aphantasia, this brain condition that causes me not to be able to imagine anything visually. I have no visual imagination, and so I can’t see actors when I’m writing. I can’t see characters when I’m writing. I can’t see anything. Everything’s made out of language, and so there’s no way I could have cast the movie in my mind or had somebody in mind for the character. It’s been great to hear all the folks who people were thinking of. I’m curious who you were thinking of.

I thought of Tom Cruise a couple of times. Have other people said that?

A couple people have said that as well. Yeah.

That’s so interesting about your work with language solely. Do you think that’s been a strength with you as a writer? Because you create such vibrant visuals for your readers.

It’s the only way I’ve ever been. I never knew that other people had this vibrant visual imagination until I was in my 40s, and my wife said I think maybe the reason you don’t have a sense of direction and you have to open up all the cabinets when you put away the dishes and you don’t know whether there’s a rug in the living room is because you don’t have a visual imagination, and I was like, of course I don’t. Nobody does, and she was like, you can’t picture an apple in your head? And I was like, no, nobody can picture an apple in their head. They say they can, but they mean it metaphorically … And Sarah explained to me that, in fact, the vast majority of people can see an apple, which still seems fictional to me, like science fiction stuff.

Some people don’t have that inner voice in their head (anendophasia).

I do have an inner voice. I think. But this all gets to something really interesting about being a person, though, which is that you’re stuck the whole time you’re here inside of one consciousness and looking at the world through one set of eyes. And I have no idea what it’s like to be you. The great thing about writing fiction for me is that act of imagination, that attempt to empathize, that attempt to escape the self and imagine what it would be like to be somebody else with some clarity, but of course, there’s always a limit to my ability to do that, and that problem has fascinated me my whole career.

Your books have meant so much to so many people, and in recent years, I’ve reported quite a bit on your book, “Looking for Alaska,” being one of the most commonly banned books. How do you feel about that?

I’m really concerned about attempts to limit intellectual freedom in the U.S., especially when it comes to libraries and schools. We have professionals we’ve trained to make collection decisions and to make curricular decisions in schools, and those professionals are teachers and librarians, and I’m very disturbed when other people come into that conversation and try to usurp the work that teachers and librarians are doing. I think a lot of times authors get most of the credit for the fight against book bans, and the truth is, all the credit should go to the teachers and librarians who are often putting their jobs on the line, making really difficult decisions to try to do the best by the kids that they’re representing and working with.

John Green will be in conversation with Julia Whelan to discuss “Hollywood, Ending” at 7 p.m. Tuesday, Oct. 13, at a ticketed ALOUD event hosted at Saban Theatre. 8440 Wilshire Blvd., Beverly Hills.

Private dinner will be the first one-on-one meeting between the two men, according to reports.

Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei is set to dine one-on-one with US President Donald Trump at the White House.

The meeting on Sunday evening, confirmed by Trump, comes after months of open conflict between the artificial intelligence startup and the Trump administration.

The private dinner would be the first one-on-one meeting between the two men, according to US media, including Axios, which first reported the dinner.

Trump confirmed the dinner on Sunday evening and reaffirmed his stance against slowing the pace of AI development.

Trump also reiterated his belief that new regulations would open the door for China to outpace the United States in AI advancement.

Although he acknowledged Amodei’s concern that going too fast on artificial intelligence could expand risks, Trump said it was more important for the US to maintain a technological edge over China.

“We’re about maybe a year and a half up on China,” Trump told Fox News while attending the Presidents Cup golf tournament in Illinois.

“We’re leading, and we’re building tremendous, trillions of dollars’ worth of places. And why should we give that up?”

The meeting comes two days after a federal appeals court upheld the Pentagon’s decision to classify Anthropic as a “supply chain risk”, which prohibits the US military from using its models.

The startup was sanctioned by the Trump administration after refusing in February to allow its tools to be used for fully autonomous weapons or domestic mass surveillance.

Trump also badmouthed Amodei, saying he was trying to be “a perfect little angel” after the Anthropic chief called for a pause in AI development.

Amodei was absent from the state dinner held for Chinese President Xi Jinping on Thursday, attended by AI industry leaders, including Amodei’s rival Sam Altman of OpenAI.

Despite mounting calls to slow down AI development due to the risk of losing control of the technology, the US government believes that the sector’s major players – OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, and Meta – cannot afford to slow down for fear that China will gain the upper hand.

Trump and Mike Johnson, the speaker of the House of Representatives, are set to meet with leading AI executives on Tuesday.

Tehran, Iran – Hours after US President Donald Trump rejected a diplomatic solution put forward by Iran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, explosions were heard in the waterway, according to Iranian media.

Reports of blasts near southern Iran’s Qeshm Island in the Strait of Hormuz suggested that multiple antiship missiles and drones were fired at vessels transiting the waterway against Tehran’s wishes.

While Iranian authorities did not confirm any attacks in the Strait of Hormuz that day, shipping continues to be attacked in the waters, including an Indian cargo ship last week, which killed a sailor.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) maintains that the strait is closed to any ship that does not coordinate with Iranian authorities. On Sunday afternoon, it released video of what it said was a second US underwater drone seized this month.

Tehran has issued instructions to shipping companies transiting the Strait of Hormuz to use a temporary route approved by Iranian authorities and pay relevant fees. But it has also said the strait will not fully reopen until the US blockade on Iranian ports ends.

Iran’s Persian Gulf Strait Authority announced on Saturday that it would blacklist any shipping charterer company which orders crews to use routes it considers to be unauthorised.

It also published what it described as an apology from an unnamed shipowner blaming commercial pressure from its charterer for trying to pass through the strait.

Washington still insists that its warships are successfully guiding oil tankers out of the strait via a different route. US Energy Secretary Chris Wright told Fox News on Sunday that the “running average” of crude oil in transit was nearly 13 million barrels per day.

A September 19 operational update by US Central Command claimed that its forces had helped move more than one billion barrels of crude out of the Gulf over roughly two months.

The US military also says its forces have redirected 122 commercial vessels to enforce the naval blockade of Iran’s ports, halting all Iranian crude exports.

Tehran has claimed that the US is providing false information regarding Strait of Hormuz traffic to project control over the key waterway. Shipping has been severely disrupted since the US and Israel started their war on Iran on February 28.

Andreas Krieg, associate professor at King’s College London, said Iran’s strategy of launching maritime attacks has spread the economic costs of the conflict beyond its borders.

While Iran has suffered economically from war damages, the US naval blockade and sanctions, it would be a mistake “to assume that reaching that threshold produces submission”.

“The next Iranian move is therefore likely to be an attempt to increase the pain experienced by the Gulf rather than simply absorb further American pressure,” Krieg said.

“That could mean more aggressive vessel interdictions in Hormuz, attacks on energy infrastructure, greater Houthi pressure around Bab al-Mandeb and pressure from Iranian-aligned groups against alternative Saudi export routes. We are already seeing how pressure on Hormuz, the Red Sea and Saudi infrastructure can interact.”

More escalation on the way

At the United Nations General Assembly in New York, Iran projected a message of defiance while also proposing to reopen the Strait of Hormuz within a week if its seven conditions were met.

They included lifting the blockade on Iran, the release of frozen Iranian funds and an end to attacks on all fronts, including Israel’s assault on Lebanon. The demands mostly amounted to a return to the June memorandum of understanding between the US and Israel.

Tehran has added that reopening the strait must be undertaken through a bilateral arrangement already finalised with Oman, the only other country with territorial waters in Hormuz.

US President Donald Trump told reporters he rejected the offer, but Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on Sunday they were adamant about the conditions and would await an official response through mediators, such as Pakistan, Qatar and Oman.

Abolfazl Shekarchi, chief spokesman of the Iranian armed forces, warned that if the US further intervenes in the Strait of Hormuz, “it will get slapped”.

“The Americans have no way out other than withdrawing from the West Asia region. The sooner they leave, the fewer losses they will incur and the region will certainly become safe after that,” he said.

Iranian army spokesman Mohammad Akraminia  said conditions were deteriorating so badly for the US that it might launch another “military aggression” on Iran.

Krieg said that as the US moves to isolate Iran via sanctions, Tehran, unable to respond with mutual financial measures against Washington, will be forced to rely on continued coercion in the Strait of Hormuz.

“The most likely level remains controlled attrition rather than an immediate return to the massive air campaign of the opening months,” Krieg said.

“Over the coming weeks, I would expect further attacks or attempted attacks on tankers, US-enabled shipping and regional infrastructure, followed by limited US strikes against IRGC maritime assets, coastal missile positions, drones or vessels involved in those operations. That tit-for-tat cycle has already re-emerged around Hormuz.”

The Venezuelan economy has had a modest recovery after years of contraction under US sanctions. In this interactive infographic, we break down indicators, facts, and figures to examine the recent economic trends and, most importantly, their impact on the Venezuelan people.

(Click on the crosses for more information and scroll between plots.)

(Click here to download the full infographic.)

The US president said he would end a so-called ‘EV mandate’ that steered consumers to electric vehicles.

United States President Donald Trump has announced new fuel economy standards that roll back requirements adopted under his predecessor, arguing they will lower automobile prices and encourage manufacturers to expand production in the US.

In a social media post on Saturday, Trump said the new standards would “TERMINATE” what he called former US President Joe Biden’s “EV (electric vehicle) mandate”, accusing the previous administration of imposing costly requirements on carmakers and steering consumers towards electric vehicles.

“These new Standards will take the waste out of building cars in America. That means LOWER PRICES, saving families thousands on a new, beautiful, and safe car,” Trump wrote.

The changes form part of a broader Trump administration effort to reverse Biden-era policies supporting lower-emission vehicles, increasing the gap between US policy and global trends favouring electric vehicles.

While Trump and US Republicans have used the term “EV mandate” to describe higher fuel efficiency requirements instituted under Biden, a Democrat, there are no federal guidelines or laws that require Americans to buy electric cars or bar the sale of ones powered by petrol.

At the centre are Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards. This system, established by the US Congress in 1975, requires automakers to meet average fuel economy targets across all cars and light trucks they sell, meaning that a brand that sells an inefficient vehicle would also have to sell a more efficient one to help comply with the government’s standards.

Under rules finalised by the Biden administration in 2024, the required fleetwide fuel economy was scheduled to rise from 39.1 miles per gallon (mpg) to about 50.4mpg by 2031. The administration said then the measures would reduce fuel consumption and emissions to combat climate change while helping motorists save money at the pump.

As a result, auto manufacturers have ramped up production of EVs to help meet the Biden-imposed fuel economy requirements. The Republican-controlled US Congress, however, gutted consumer tax incentives last year for electric vehicles as part of Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

Trump did not provide details regarding what the new fuel economy standards would be. But in December 2025, he announced a proposal that would set the industry fleetwide average for light-duty vehicles at roughly 34.5mpg by 2031, more than 30 percent lower than the Biden-era rule.

In a reposting of Trump’s announcement, US Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said an announcement would be “COMING MONDAY”.

Al Jazeera has reached out to the White House for comment.

Diesel prices have hit record highs as the tensions between the United States and Iran, along with the war between Russia and Ukraine, disrupt key oil and fuel trade routes.

On Friday, the average price for a gallon (3.79 litres) of diesel was $6.50, up from $5.61 a month earlier, according to the American Automobile Association (AAA), which tracks fuel prices daily.

The spike has prompted the administration of US President Donald Trump and Republican lawmakers to consider restricting US diesel exports ahead of upcoming midterm elections.

A Reuters/Ipsos poll conducted in August found that 47 percent of voters said the cost of living was the single most important factor in deciding how they would vote in the midterms — more than twice the share who cited the next-most important issue, “democratic values and norms”.

A new Marist poll also found that Americans have more confidence in Democrats than Republicans to handle the economy, with 42 percent choosing Democrats compared with 34 percent for Republicans.

Amid that voter sentiment, US Energy Secretary Chris Wright said on Thursday that he was in touch with major oil refiners to gauge interest in a potential voluntary restriction on diesel exports, according to the Reuters news agency.

That followed remarks by Trump on Tuesday that he supported restricting diesel exports from the US, the world’s largest diesel exporter.

Energy analysts and industry groups have warned that an export ban could have unintended consequences, potentially pushing up fuel prices in the US and abroad.

Why are diesel prices so high?

Even though the US is the world’s largest diesel exporter, diesel is traded on a global market.

Disruptions to refineries in Russia and the Middle East have reduced the amount of fuel available worldwide, putting more pressure on US producers to fill the gap. In Russia, for example, drone attacks have damaged major refineries, forcing a cutback or halt in production.

“While US refineries are running at full tilt and higher than normal, the global gaps remain,” Rachel Ziemba, senior adjunct fellow at the Center for a New American Security, told Al Jazeera.

It comes as US diesel supplies are also shrinking. As of September 11, inventories had fallen to 107.9 million barrels, the lowest in more than four decades, according to the US Energy Information Administration.

With global supplies tightening, diesel prices have risen around the world — including in the US. Because American producers can sell their fuel into the global market, they are drawn to the soaring global prices rather than simply setting a lower price for domestic consumers.

Why is the US considering an export ban?

In Washington, DC, leaders have flirted with the idea of pushing US companies to stop or slow exporting diesel.

Republicans have been pushing for a slowdown or outright ban of exports in an effort to lower costs for consumers ahead of the pivotal midterm elections, where cost of living is becoming a critical issue.

Such a move, they hope, would reduce local diesel prices, which is significant as diesel is used in trucks to haul food and most products, Ziemba said, adding that US diesel exports are equivalent to about 40 percent of domestic consumption.

On Tuesday, Chuck Grassley, a Republican from Iowa, called on the president to put in place a temporary halt on exports.

“I encourage President Trump to put a temporary embargo on diesel exports through executive action,” Grassley said.

Republican Senator Dan Sullivan of Alaska made a similar call: “The cost of diesel is just too damn high. I’m calling for a temporary pause of American diesel exports so that we can rebuild our reserves ahead of winter,” Sullivan said in a statement on Tuesday.

In the House of Representatives, Congressman Tim Burchett of Tennessee introduced two bills that would restrict US diesel exports: One would impose a ban through January 2027, while the other would restrict exports if the national average price reaches $5 a gallon.

The administration has not made any official policy announcements, and the White House told Al Jazeera that the president is evaluating all options.

Oil and gas industry experts say that a ban could drive up prices rather than bringing them down.

“Diesel trades on a world market, just like corn. farmers don’t sell cheaper to Americans, and refiners can’t either since they buy crude at global prices. force a lower price and they’ll make less diesel. less supply means higher prices, not lower,” Patrick De Haan, head of petroleum analysis at GasBuddy, said in a post on X.

How would an export ban work?

A ban would prevent or restrict US refiners from selling diesel to buyers overseas, theoretically leaving more fuel available in the domestic market.

Analysts at Wood Mackenzie, a research and consulting firm, say that keeping more diesel stateside would ultimately fill up US storage tanks but also force refineries to cut production. That could affect other markets that rely heavily on US fuel, including Latin America and Europe, forcing them to compete with other global buyers for supplies and driving up prices for the global market.

Wood Mackenzie says China is the only major producer with enough spare refining capacity to potentially make up much of the shortfall.

“China is currently the only country with material spare refining capacity that could cover the loss of US refinery throughputs. However, China may well decide it is not in its interest to intercede,” analysts said.

Wood Mackenzie has warned that a ban could quickly fill US diesel inventories, forcing refiners to cut crude runs and potentially increasing US petrol imports.

That was also the view of an S&P Global analysis, which found that a complete ban could also mean that production would be reduced as storage capacity is filled up with unsold diesel. According to the analysis, that could lead to production cuts of as much as 750,000 barrels a day, which could put the US into being a net importer of petrol in the fourth quarter of this year.

Who would an export ban affect?

An export ban would affect US refiners and consumers, as well as countries that rely on US diesel.

“They [export bans] may provide temporary relief, but diesel is a global commodity. Treat one part of the system, and the effects travel elsewhere. Trade-offs are inevitable. Refiners are unlikely to cheer a blanket ban. Voluntary, controlled export reductions would generally be less disruptive in the short term,” Maksim Sonin, visiting scholar at Stanford University’s Precourt Institute for Energy, told Al Jazeera.

Disruptions to US exports could reduce the amount of fuel available on the global market. Wood Mackenzie analysts say countries in Europe and Latin America that rely heavily on US fuel could be forced to compete with other producers for supplies.

“If implemented, it would lead to European and Asian product prices increasing as the buyers of US fuel, mostly in Latin America, scramble to find new supplies, bidding up supplies. European crack spreads could widen, and overall we might see more disruptions,” Ziemba added.

“Given these issues, the US may opt for a mixture of carrots and sticks aiming to incentivise refineries to keep producing, perhaps including penalties if they cut production. There may be voluntary export quotas rather than a formal ban, and there may be exemptions for countries that provide crude oil to the US, like Mexico,” Ziemba said.

That could put pressure on consumers not only at the petrol pump but in the skies as well.

Airlines for America, an airline industry trade group, has also warned that an export ban could lead to higher prices for airlines and travellers, according to the Reuters news agency. The trade group did not respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment.

The broader concern from analysts is that restricting exports could reduce US refinery production rather than simply redirecting diesel to US consumers, potentially putting upward pressure on fuel prices both domestically and internationally.

“It’s unlikely to help US consumers much given how it fails to solve underlying problems and could backfire if refineries hold on to production. The best way to address this is to end the conflicts prompting the shortages,” Ziemba said.

Iran says it has put forward a plan to the United States to reopen the Strait of Hormuz within seven days, as Qatar passes messages between the two countries at the United Nations General Assembly in New York.

Speaking on the sidelines on Thursday, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the timetable could begin as soon as Washington accepted the proposal.

Both sides have described the indirect contact facilitated by Qatar in New York positively, but neither has indicated any diplomatic breakthrough as the war approaches its seven-month mark.

Analysts have told Al Jazeera a firm peace deal remains unlikely, with Iran still wanting to follow the approach set out in an earlier agreement, which would give it and Oman a main role in managing the strait before moving on to discussing terms for a broader peace deal.

For its part, the US, which has claimed to be “in total control” of the Strait of Hormuz, wants Iran’s nuclear programme to be the subject of discussions straight away.

Iran has previously made clear that it will not engage with broader peace talks, including addressing the issue of its nuclear programme, until the US naval blockade of its ports in and around the Hormuz strait is lifted, sanctions are repealed and the US provides a guarantee of an end to strikes, among other conditions.

Here’s what we know.

What has Iran proposed?

Araghchi told reporters in New York that Iran had presented its plan to the US through intermediaries. “If certain conditions are met, the Strait of Hormuz would be open on the end of the seventh day and [peace] talks would restart,” he said.

He did not give details but said the proposal resembles the June 17 memorandum of understanding (MoU) signed by Iran and the US, which briefly eased the conflict before breaking down. “The moment they accept this plan, from the next day, this timetable can start, and after seven days, the strait will be open,” he said.

Under the June agreement, Iran undertook to allow ships to pass through the strait without paying tolls for 60 days – that was the period of time given for peace talks to take place. But the MoU left open what would happen after that period.

Araghchi did not say whether the same arrangement formed part of his new proposal. Nor did he spell out what Washington would have to do before the seven-day timetable began, how either side would verify those steps, or what rules would govern shipping once the strait reopened.

It is highly unlikely Iran would be offering to cede control of the Strait of Hormuz, analysts say.

Urban Coningham, a research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute, told Al Jazeera that Tehran is unlikely to receive the sanction relief it has previously demanded and, therefore, sees the strait as its primary ticket to helping it recover from the war economically.

“Hormuz is a clear Iranian red line,” he told Al Jazeera. “The Iranians will not get reparations for the war, so control of the strait is the only way they can recover economically. I cannot see them backing down from that.”

Why does the June agreement matter?

The MoU signed in June set out an immediate halt to military operations on all fronts, including in Lebanon, where Israel has launched strikes and occupied part of the country, and triggered a 60-day period for negotiations on a lasting peace settlement. It included US waivers for Iranian oil exports and provisions to restore maritime traffic through the strait.

It deferred other issues, including the future of Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile, to broader peace talks.

But the agreement unravelled the following month amid renewed confrontation over shipping routes through the strait.

Coningham told Al Jazeera that Iran’s latest proposal follows this earlier model: “Open the strait within seven days, then start talks on the nuclear file.”

But “the US does not want to compartmentalise the issues, it wants them discussed as one package”, he said.

How else does this new proposal place pressure on the US?

Coningham also sees a political calculation in making the offer publicly at the UN as Americans contend with high fuel prices. “By explicitly saying this may be the only chance before the midterms, Iran is putting pressure on Trump over oil and gas prices and the strait,” he said. “It is a tactic to put more pressure on the US.”

The strait, which runs between Iran and Oman, is a vital route for oil and gas exports from the Gulf. Disruption to shipping has driven up energy prices far beyond the region, giving both governments an economic reason to reach an agreement despite their differences.

With the US midterm elections approaching, a deal to get it reopened could give Trump a chance to bring down fuel prices before voters go to the polls – potentially giving the Republican Party a much-needed electoral boost before the midterms.

Trump has presented the electoral calculation differently, however. In his address to the General Assembly on Tuesday, he accused Iran of waiting to see how his Republican Party performs in November and predicted a deal would happen after the vote. He also threatened to “annihilate the Islamic Republic” if there was no agreement.

Trump claimed the election did not affect his own decision-making on Iran: “The only thing that does is that Iran will never have a nuclear weapon.”

That leaves an open question about whether the prospect of lower energy prices is enough to persuade his administration to accept Iran’s proposed order of talks. Coningham doubts it. “Trump is prepared for this to go on through the midterms,” he said. “The same problem remains where the proposal does not answer questions about the nuclear file.”

Where do broader US-Iran peace talks stand?

Araghchi met US envoy Steve Witkoff and Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner on Tuesday in talks mediated by Qatar. The Iranian foreign minister described the exchange as productive and said messages continued to pass between the sides.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said it would be wrong to describe the meeting as a major breakthrough, however.

Burcu Ozcelik, a senior research fellow for Middle East security, told Al Jazeera that the major blockage for Washington and Tehran is that each is making different assumptions about how much pressure they can exert on the other. The Trump administration is unlikely to revive the failed MoU, she said, because it assesses its naval blockade and tighter sanctions as working.

“The US appears to believe it can wait this out until Tehran is prepared to make meaningful concessions,” Ozcelik said.

“But Iran remains defiant despite indications that it is hurting economically.”

Tokyo, Japan – Nearly eight years after moving to Japan for work, Abdul feels more accustomed to life in the East Asian country than in his native Bangladesh.

But as the Japanese government moves to tighten the rules for permanent residency and public sentiment towards immigrants sours, Abdul is reconsidering his future.

“I don’t know what the Japanese government will do in the future, if they’ll make things stricter again,” Abdul, a tech engineer who lives in northern Tokyo with his Bangladeshi wife, told Al Jazeera.

Abdul, who is preparing to apply for both permanent residency and citizenship, is aware of the possibility that he may soon have to leave.

“I have to be prepared if both of my applications are rejected,” said Abdul, who asked not to be identified by his real name.

“Right now, I am starting to look for opportunities outside of Japan.”

Under rules set to come into effect in phases from October 1, applicants for permanent residency will need to show that their annual household income exceeds the Japanese average – a stipulation that will be applied retroactively for applications submitted since April – and demonstrate Japanese-language proficiency.

Applicants will also be required to have a pension pot equivalent to 30 years of payouts.

In an announcement detailing the changes, Japan’s Immigration Services Agency stressed the need for foreigners to “live independently” and have “a stable life without the risk of becoming a burden”.

Sarah Nelkin, an American who has lived in Japan for the last 14 years, is among the many long-term residents who fear they will not qualify under the new rules.

A lover of Japanese animation and video games, Nelkin first moved to Japan as a university student and has since built a career in the country’s bustling entertainment industry.

Like Abdul, Nelkin, who submitted an application for permanent residency shortly before the announcement of the changes, is anxious about what the future holds.

If her application is rejected, she plans to apply to become a Japanese citizen – which would mean giving up her US citizenship, as Japan does not recognise dual nationality.

“I’ve lived my entire adult life in Japan … I would rather not give up my American passport. My mother lives in the US, and I want to retain my citizenship for a lot of reasons, like visiting family,” Nelkin told Al Jazeera.

“But at this point, I might have to give up my American nationality.”

Risa Hagiwara, a professor of economics at Meikai University in Urayasu, Japan, said the changes reflect a shift towards a “selective and conditional” immigration policy that is in tension with Japan’s need for labour amid a shrinking population.

“Japan needs foreign workers because of labour shortages. But if the conditions for long-term settlement become substantially more difficult, this could potentially reduce Japan’s attractiveness to foreign workers who are considering Japan as a place to build their long-term lives,” Hagiwara told Al Jazeera.

Hot-button issue

Immigration has become an increasingly hot-button topic in historically homogenous Japan.

Japan’s foreign resident population remains small compared with developed peers such as the United Kingdom and France, where 10 to 15 percent of residents were born overseas.

But it has been growing fast, hitting a record 4.12 million people, or about 3 percent of the total population, as of the end of 2025, according to government data.

By some estimates, Japan’s foreign-born population could reach the OECD average of 10 percent by 2070.

Meanwhile, the number of Japanese nationals fell by more than 900,000 between January 2025 and 2026 amid the country’s rock-bottom birthrate, according to government figures.

Hagiwara said that Japan is at a crossroads as foreign-born residents play an increasingly important role in Japanese society.

“If Japan wants to rely on foreign workers to address labour shortages, it also needs to consider what happens after they come to Japan,” Hagiwara said.

“The question is increasingly not only ‘how many foreign workers does Japan need?’, but also ‘what kind of society does Japan want to build with the people who come here?’” she said.

Japan’s mooted immigration shake-up comes amid a broader rightward shift in the country’s politics.

While campaigning for the leadership of the conservative Liberal Democratic Party last year, Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi said the country should “reconsider, at least for now, policies that allow in people with completely different cultures and backgrounds”.

Takaichi’s subsequent coalition agreement with the right-wing Japan Innovation Party (JIP) pledged a firm stance against foreigners who break the rules, as well as steps to address “potential social friction” from a growing foreign population.

At the same time, the far-right, anti-immigration Sanseito party has gained ground with its “Japan First” messaging, winning a record 15 seats at the most recent lower-house election to become the third-largest opposition party.

Public opinion has also moved against immigrants.

In a recent survey by the Institute of Social Science at the University of Tokyo, 56.3 percent of Japanese people said they opposed accepting more foreigners, up from 35.6 percent in 2024.

Nelkin and Abdul have both felt the change in sentiment.

“Before 2024, I never felt any discrimination against foreigners, but recently there has been a shift … especially online,” Abdul said.

Nelkin said peers have become outspoken in their dislike of foreigners.

“Even seemingly decent people are just saying racist stuff,” she said.

“I’ve worked for this country and specifically avoided breaking any rules, and they’re saying you are never enough,” she added. “That’s really hard.”

Flights operated by Iranian airlines to and from the UAE suspended as part of broader efforts to enforce US aviation sanctions on Iran.

The United Arab Emirates has halted flights operated by Iranian airlines, joining several other countries in adopting United States sanctions aimed at pressuring Tehran’s aviation sector.

On Thursday, a statement carried by the Emirati WAM news agency said, “The General Civil Aviation Authority announced the suspension of all flights operated by Iranian airlines to and from the UAE.”

It said the decision was “based on the US sanctions imposed on Iranian airlines preventing them from using airports around the world”.

The UAE has joined Oman, Iraq, Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkmenistan in restricting or suspending access for Iranian airlines amid the new US sanctions threat.

Dubai, the UAE’s commercial hub, is a major destination for Iranian carriers, with multiple daily flights, a large Iranian community and close business links.

An Iran Airtour flight from Tehran to Dubai was cancelled shortly before its scheduled departure on Thursday morning, after tickets had already been issued, according to the AFP news agency.

The UAE, which was repeatedly hit by Iranian missiles and drones throughout the US-Israel war on Iran, suspended trade and financial exchanges with Iran last month.

On Wednesday, the UAE’s central bank blocked transactions involving Iran’s Bank Melli, claiming the financial institution had violated rules on money laundering, terrorism and arms proliferation.

The US Treasury announced sweeping sanctions on Iran’s aviation sector earlier this month, targeting 27 airlines and dozens of companies that support them. The measures aim to cut off Iran’s air links entirely, warning that any airport or company still servicing Iranian carriers risks being cut off from the US dollar system.

Iran’s Civil Aviation Organization spokesman Majid Akhavan said: “Diplomatic and aviation talks are under way to remove the restrictions and restore flights” to the UAE.

Akhavan added that Turkmenistan also turned back a flight from Tehran to Dushanbe on Thursday.

“Turkmenistan’s refusal to allow the Iranian aircraft to pass through its airspace meant the flight could not continue on its route and had to return,” Akhavan told the Iranian IRNA news agency.

Several smaller Iranian airlines continue flying to China and Armenia, both of which have resisted US pressure, while routes to Turkiye remain open for some carriers.

The lawsuit comes two months after the state filed a similar lawsuit against competitor Kalshi.

New York State has filed a lawsuit against prediction market company Polymarket amid allegations that it violated state laws against illegal gambling.

The suit, filed on Thursday by New York State Attorney General Letitia James, comes two months after the state filed a similar lawsuit against competitor Kalshi. That followed the state suing Coinbase and Gemini for offering users the ability to bet on “sports, entertainment, and elections, in violation of New York laws”, according to a release from the attorney general’s office at the time.

The state accused all the companies of operating without licences from the State Gaming Commission.

“Our gambling laws exist to protect New Yorkers, prevent the potential harms of problem gambling, and ensure funding for educational and public benefit programs,” James said in a statement announcing the suit.

“By skirting New York’s laws, Polymarket is targeting the most vulnerable and depriving New York families of critical services and support. My office will never hesitate to take action to defend our laws and keep New Yorkers safe.”

The suit also alleges that the company encouraged gambling among young people. It accuses Polymarket of targeting users as young as 18, while state law requires users to be at least 21 years old to take part in mobile sports betting.

“By running an unlicensed gambling operation, Polymarket has done more than just knowingly violate state law, they have put New Yorkers at risk, especially those underage who are most vulnerable to problem gaming,” New York Governor Kathy Hochul said in a statement.

The more than 30-page lawsuit claims that Polymarket, which is valued at more than $20bn, has advertised sports betting in particular since July 2025. It pointed to a post on X from August 17, 2025, about the launch of its US mobile app that said it was “BAD NEWS (For sportsbooks)”.

Prediction markets allow users to wager on so-called event contracts, covering political events, sports, elections and even award shows. Concerns about the role of prediction markets came to a head earlier this year when wagers were made in the hours before the United States and Israel first struck Iran, prompting widespread backlash in Washington.

Polymarket pushed back on the allegations.

“We chose to engage with them directly on the substance and address their concerns,” chief legal officer Neal Kumar said in a statement.

“They preferred the media hit. Any time the [attorney general’s] office wants to swing by, our door is open for a conversation about how we protect consumers and offer fair, transparent and legal markets.”

Kalshi is facing similar allegations in New York State. Kalshi has been critical of reporting on lawsuits against it and allegations that it is akin to a sports betting or gambling platform.

Polymarket did not respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment.

The Polymarket lawsuit comes days after reporting from the Wall Street Journal that alleged a wave of users had linked stolen bank debit cards and then used them to make wagers, effectively draining the accounts. According to the report, when CEO Shayne Coplan was made aware of the issue, he responded: “Just keep growing and pay a fine if regulators ever find out.”

Political pressure

New York State’s lawsuit joins a growing list of states that have sued prediction market platforms, including Arizona, Massachusetts, Nevada and many others. Those states are at odds with the federal government, as the Commodity Futures Trading Commission has claimed that the federal agency exerts authority over the regulation of prediction markets.

Polymarket has close ties with the family of US President Donald Trump. The prediction market platform has investment from 1789 Capital, a venture capital firm backed by Donald Trump Jr, the president’s eldest son, who also serves on the company’s advisory board.

The red carpet was rolled out, and a trade truce was extended. Yet, beneath the pomp and pageantry of Chinese President Xi Jinping’s state visit with US leader Donald Trump on Thursday, Washington and Beijing remain locked in a much deeper strategic rivalry.

Xi arrived in Washington, DC on Wednesday evening for talks on Thursday, and Trump was there to meet him personally on the tarmac.

The meeting was the first state visit by a Chinese leader to the US in 11 years. But it is also the third time in less than a year that the two men have met face to face, as the two powers remain uneasily gridlocked in competition over AI, rare-earth metals, the question of Taiwan, and the Iran war.

Overhanging it all is the paused, but simmering, trade war between their two nations.

Almost as soon as Trump began his second term in the White House in January 2025, up went tariffs on Chinese goods as he accused China of facilitating the flow of fentanyl, a deadly drug, to the US. Beijing responded with its own levies, then restricted exports of valuable rare-earth metals which are crucial for the development and manufacture of everything high-tech, from smartphones to fighter jets. At one point, tariffs were heading towards 150 percent before being paused to allow time for talks.

Finally, the two leaders called a truce on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in South Korea on October 30, and they met once more, in May, when Trump travelled to Beijing.

As Xi landed in Washington on Wednesday this week, the Trump administration announced that the two countries had agreed to extend an October 2025 truce which had offered some respite from the punishing tariffs, produced an agreement from China to buy more soyabeans from the US and delayed the ban on rare-earth exports from China until January 10. The prospect of a much-longed-for trade deal appeared to be in the air when US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told Fox News he had met Chinese ‌Vice Premier He Lifeng before Xi’s visit to “see if we could ⁠do a bigger deal as opposed to just a series ⁠of smaller things”.

But analysts have, for the most part, shot down such hopes. Beyond tariffs, they say, the simmering conflict between the two powers now encompasses new US sanctions on buyers of Russian oil – namely China – and sweeping investment and research restrictions, never mind the intensifying race for dominance in artificial intelligence.

“The two-month extension isn’t a bridge to a grand bargain – it’s a temporary sandbag holding back a structural flood,” Beijing-based Einar Tangen, a senior fellow at the Center for International Governance Innovation, told Al Jazeera.

Theatrics or continued thaw in tensions?

In fact, the truce is little more than “transactional theatre” – an attempt at good optics before the upcoming US midterm elections – Tangen said.

Trump’s deeply unpopular war on Iran has already inflicted severe damage to his chances in that vote. Democrats are leading in the polls amid concerns about the rising cost of energy, triggered by the war which the US started. Trump ultimately needs wins on other issues.

The current truce with China serves a purpose, therefore, but is fragile enough to be undone the moment political utility shifts for Trump, Tangen said.

“Success in January won’t be measured by what is solved, but by whether the knot is left tight enough to hold, but not kill,” said Tangen.

Phillippe Le Corre, professor of international relations and Asian studies at France’s ESSEC Business School, said the length of the truce extension indicates clearly that a more permanent deal remains out of grasp.

“The extensions are getting shorter and shorter, which means they haven’t found a common ground on many issues,” Le Corre told Al Jazeera.

“The two-month extension is a terrible outcome for the US. Nothing is resolved, and many Damocles’ swords are still hanging over Washington’s head,” he added.

Trump’s entire China policy, Le Corre argued, is in fact short-sighted. “That is bringing the world a lot of uncertainty,” he said.

Some analysts are more hopeful, but not much. Sun Chenghao, a fellow at the Center for International Security and Strategy at Tsinghua University in Beijing, described the extension of the trade truce as a “useful interim step”. It shows that both sides want to preserve the recent easing of tensions, which is meaningful progress, he said.

“From China’s perspective, a sustainable agreement needs reciprocal benefits and greater policy predictability,” Sun told Al Jazeera. “Additional purchases cannot indefinitely compensate for uncertainty over tariffs, technology restrictions and market access.”

The extension’s value, however, will depend on whether it produces “concrete commitments” from Beijing and Washington, Sun added.

A game of ‘economic chicken’

There is motivation to get a deal done, analysts say. Any escalation in the US-China trade war will be costly for both sides.

But there is some way to go. A Congressional Research Service report in July 2026 noted that Chinese goods exported to the US still face tariffs of 36.5 percent, while US goods entering China are taxed at 31 percent.

Any higher, and they will raise import and manufacturing costs in the US, squeeze margins and increase pressure on consumer prices, said Sun. They would also hurt US farmers and industrial exporters, he added, just as the US faces pressure from the rising costs of its war on Iran, which have pushed it into a record national debt of $40 trillion two years earlier than expected.

“Washington is playing a high-stakes game of economic chicken with a $40 trillion debt load, an inflationary sword of Damocles, zero fiscal cushion to absorb a truce collapse and a dependence [on] Chinese industrial and manufacturing inputs,” Tangen said.

US consumers and the economy in general will find it tough to survive yet another inflationary shock from renewed tariffs “at a time when the federal budget already operates like a high-wire Ponzi scheme”.

Then there is the AI race, which no one can afford to lose. According to Jon Bateman, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a partial “decoupling” of US and Chinese technology ecosystems is under way. US policymakers have pushed to become less dependent on Chinese tech and “to secure America’s technological future in the context of a rising China”, Bateman writes.

But that will not help if there is a collapse in valuations of companies in the AI sector, which currently drive global stock markets. An AI valuation collapse, Tangen warned, “could trigger a financial tsunami that makes 2008 look tame – making technological decoupling meaningless as the world is plunged into a depression”.

Despite the trade war and Trump’s tariffs, China’s trade with other countries has risen sharply, with the country registering a $1.2 trillion global trade surplus last year. But an escalation of the trade war with the US would nevertheless spell increased pressure on export orders, employment in exposed industries and business confidence, said Sun.

Beijing does hold one crucial ace card – it is sitting on 60 percent of the world’s known deposits of rare-earth minerals, said Le Corre. It processes 90 percent of them, too. These are the metals that all countries need supplies of for semiconductors, technological components and the manufacture of weapons, to name but a few. Last year, China began to make use of that leverage by restricting exports of five of the 12 rare-earth metals it mines in April. Then, in October, it prepared to restrict seven more – until the trade truce happened. Plans for the export restrictions are not shelved, however, merely on hold.

“[China] understood this over the past year and they are certainly not going to give up on this,” said Le Corre.

“Washington is hostile, but it is hooked,” Tangen said. “You cannot threaten China with secondary sanctions on energy while desperately needing its rare-earths to fuel your military-industrial base.”

A drawn-out path to durability

The path to a lasting US-China trade deal will be long and rocky. First, any new tariff reductions will need more coverage and duration, said Sun.

For a deal to last, it would also require “more predictable licensing and actual deliveries of rare earths and critical minerals; restraint in expanding technology restrictions; and market access reflected in regulatory approvals and completed transactions”, he said.

A durable agreement also needs regular consultations and a process for resolving complaints. If all this can be hammered out then, just maybe, there might be a chance, Sun said.

Tangen and Le Corre were less optimistic, however. “The US view of China as an existential threat has to change before there can be solutions,” said Tangen.

Le Corre, meanwhile, said that while China is a long-term planner, “durable is a word that can hardly be associated with Trump.”

The existing trade truce also risks breaking down if there are new unilateral tariffs, broader technology or mineral restrictions, or disputes over whether commitments have been fulfilled, said Sun.

Tensions over Taiwan, which China claims as its own territory, but for which the US approved an $11.1bn arms sale in December last year, could also trigger a breakdown in trade relations, the analysts said.

“Taiwan remains the ultimate low-probability, catastrophic-impact tail risk – where a single round of arms sales can snap a multibillion-dollar trade truce in an instant,” Tangen noted.

The heads of several major AI firms told the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) their industry urgently needed global oversight to avoid dangers that could threaten the whole world.

“If managed poorly, I even believe AI could be a risk to humanity as a whole,” Dario Amodei, the chief executive officer of Anthropic, told members of the body on Wednesday.

Sam Altman, the head of rival company OpenAI, echoed his concerns, telling the 15-member council tasked with tackling major crises globally that humanity could “lose control of the future of AI”.

The meeting, which coincides with the UN General Assembly (UNGA) gathering in New York City, was convened by France and comes at a time when experts are increasingly warning that the rapid development of AI needs more human oversight to ensure it does not slip out of control and cause a global catastrophe.

Altman and Amodei called on world leaders to take action.

“If AI is to be democratic, the most important decisions cannot be made by labs in San Francisco alone,” Altman told members. “They must be shaped through democratic processes and by governments accountable to the people they serve.”

Their concerns were shared by several representatives on the council, including the foreign ministers of France and the United Kingdom, who said the international community needed to step in and create common frameworks for how the technology should be controlled.

Hugging Face CEO Clement Delangue, whose company has come under attack by out-of-control AI models in recent months – incidents used by the other companies as evidence of the need for more safety measures – told the UNSC his company had relied on the technology to defend itself in those same incidents.

Delangue said Hugging Face had relied on a Chinese AI model to help defend against the attack by OpenAI’s AI agents, because it faced fewer restrictions than comparable US tools.

“We were attacked by AI, but more importantly, we defended ourselves with AI,” he told the council.

US and China reluctant to impose restrictions

In the United States, though, where the largest and most influential companies developing AI are based, the administration of US President Donald Trump has baulked at imposing new guardrails on the industry.

The administration’s representative at the UNSC meeting, Michael Kratsios, told members, “We totally reject all efforts by international bodies to assert centralised control and global governance of AI.”

Chinese President Xi Jinping is expected to discuss whether and how to regulate AI during a visit to Washington, DC, this week. The two countries are locked in a technological race to develop more powerful AI tools, a competition that experts say makes it less likely that either country would want to impose any major new restrictions on their efforts right away.

Yet there is a growing recognition at the UN of the danger AI potentially poses to the world, said Daniel Forti, head of UN Affairs at the International Crisis Group. Member states understand that “there will be much more of a need for international cooperation, setting some rules of AI, even if the biggest players are more focused on growth opportunities than on some sort of collaboration,” Forti said.

For several years, the UN has been participating in multilateral meetings to shape everything from protections for workers from AI in emerging economies and ensuring open access to this technology, to following how AI is used in military conflicts. In 2024, the UNGA unanimously passed its first resolution on AI, a nonbinding statement that called on member states to protect personal data, monitor AI for risks and safeguard human rights.

The adoption of AI has taken off dramatically since then, and with it have come dire warnings from environmental groups, human rights advocates, and even the tech moguls whose companies are developing the tech.

The future of AI “cannot be decided by a handful of countries or left to the whims of a few billionaires”, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said at a global summit held earlier this year.

Last year, the UNGA formed two new bodies to deal with AI: the Independent International Scientific Panel on AI that brings together experts to provide governments with independent assessments, and the Global Dialogue on AI Governance, which provides a regular forum for discussing approaches to AI governance.

“The dangers are real and imminent,” Yoshua Bengio, a Canadian expert on AI and co-chair of the Independent International Scientific Panel, told the UNSC on Wednesday. “This council faces an unprecedented threat, one that none of its members would ⁠choose, that none can contain alone, and that does not respect the borders we defend.”