Economy

Both sides signed a digital trade deal, as Trump’s trade threats push Washington’s allies to seek closer ties elsewhere.

The European Union and Canada have launched what they described as an Alliance for the Future, as Ottawa prepares to become the bloc’s first so-called “associate member”.

Prime Minister Mark Carney hosted the Canada-EU summit in Montreal and signed a digital trade deal, alongside other agreements. Also at the Friday summit were European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and European Council President Antonio Costa.

The term “associate member” has no legal basis and is contested by some EU states. However, its use underscores the desire of Canada and the EU to forge closer relations, as United States President Donald Trump continues to threaten Washington’s traditional allies with trade tariffs if they do not play by his rules.

“Canada and the EU are working to establish the closest possible partnership, which will be far from full membership, but which will make Canada the first associate member of the European Union,” Carney posted on X.

“Today in Montreal, we have taken a major step forward by establishing more than twenty measures that will increase affordability, create opportunities and ensure our sovereignty on both sides of the Atlantic.”

In a joint statement following the summit, the two sides announced an agreement under which the European Investment Bank will invest in critical Canadian resources, particularly raw minerals. They also said they would advance cooperation on artificial intelligence security and safety.

“A more dangerous and divided world has fundamentally changed the requirements of sovereignty. It is no longer enough for nations to feed, fuel and defend ourselves,” the statement said.

It added that “true sovereignty” requires secure access to critical minerals, semiconductors, payment systems, energy, vaccines, space-based communications and AI.

Ukraine was also on the meeting agenda, with Carney announcing Canada’s participation in the EU’s 90 billion euro ($103bn) support loan for Kyiv. Carney said Canada would make an initial contribution of 500 million euros ($558m).

Opportunities for students in Canada and the EU were also discussed. Both sides said they would launch negotiations aimed at deepening Ottawa’s participation in Erasmus+, the EU’s flagship student exchange programme.

Carney and Trump are currently engaged in a trade dispute, with talks under way to reach a deal between the two countries.

Oil flows out of the Gulf have increased substantially, easing the huge supply disruption caused by the United States/Israel war on Iran.

Crude exports from the Gulf averaged 24.6 million barrels per day (bpd) in the week to October 18, exceeding the pre-war average, according to market intelligence firm Kpler.

Yet, oil prices continue to rise.

Brent crude, the global benchmark, is trading at its highest prices since April, up more than 60 percent compared with before the war.

On Friday, Brent crude front-month futures – contracts for oil deliveries in December – rose more than 2 percent to briefly top $117 a barrel.

The climbing prices reflect anxiety about the possibility of renewed hostilities in the US war on Iran, dwindling oil stocks, and the increased costs of transporting supplies out of the region, according to market analysts.

“The market is doing exactly what it is supposed to do: It is telling us there is plenty of prompt oil, but there is no end to this war in sight – in fact … escalation is very likely,” Adi Imsirovic, a lecturer in energy systems at the University of Oxford, told Al Jazeera.

“Therefore, futures markets reflect that expectation,” Imsirovic, a veteran oil trader, said.

Oil producers have become increasingly adept at responding to the volatile climate in the Middle East to keep supplies flowing.

Facing the threat of Iranian attacks on shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, shipping lines have established a shuttle system involving ship-to-ship transfers off Oman and the United Arab Emirates to reduce the distance any one vessel must travel in perilous waters.

Shuttle boats carry the oil through the strait and load it onto waiting tankers once they are out of the danger zone.

In August, more than 70 percent of the crude that crossed the strait did so via ship-to-ship transfers, according to Kpler.

Oil producers have also ramped up exports that bypass the strait altogether via Saudi Arabia’s East-West pipeline, which carries oil supplies from its eastern oil fields to its Yanbu port on the Red Sea in the west, and the United Arab Emirates’ Habshan-Fujairah pipeline.

As of September, 40 percent of exports from the Gulf were bypassing the strait, a conduit for one-fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas supplies during peacetime, compared with 17 percent before the war, according to Kpler data.

The soaring cost of delivery

Such workarounds have nonetheless come at a cost.

Freight costs have reached as much as $40 per barrel in recent weeks, about 10 times the usual rate, according to data from the London Stock Exchange Group, the surge driven by elevated insurance premiums in addition to logistical challenges.

October has been the deadliest month for attacks on commercial vessels since the start of the war, with 32 incidents logged by the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) as of Friday.

“So barrels are moving, but neither smoothly nor reliably. That should not be read as a sign of normalisation,” Isabel Figuerola-Ferretti, an expert in oil markets at Comillas Pontifical University in Madrid, Spain, told Al Jazeera.

“Delivering a barrel has become far more expensive,” Figuerola-Ferretti said.

While market intelligence data has shown exports reaching pre-war levels at various points in recent weeks, the longer-term supply trend is less clear.

Pavel Molchanov, an investment strategist at Raymond James & Associates, expressed scepticism that supply has returned to the pre-conflict trend.

“The IEA’s most recent production data – for September – shows OPEC Gulf production at 15.8 million bpd, which equates to 75 percent of the pre-war baseline,” Molchanov told Al Jazeera, referring to the International Energy Agency’s latest energy outlook.

“That slightly surpassed July’s 74 percent to reach the highest level since the start of the war, but it’s still a considerable distance from 100 percent.”

Meanwhile, oil stockpiles, a buffer during supply disruptions, are waning.

Observed inventories fell by 10 million barrels in September, taking the global stockpile to 509 million barrels below its pre-war level, according to the IEA.

“The market has moved to a chronic squeeze, driven by concrete supply risks: Hormuz transit, shipping and depleted inventories,” Figuerola-Ferretti said.

No reprieve anytime soon

With no permanent end to the Iran war in sight, few analysts see prices returning to normal anytime soon.

Brent futures for delivery in October 2027 stood at more than $90 a barrel on Friday, in a sign that markets see normality as a long way off, still.

“When could prices return to $70? Not soon,” Figuerola-Ferretti said.

“It would need durable de-escalation, a return to normal transit and shipping conditions through Hormuz, rebuilt inventories and freight costs back to normal,” she added.

Molchanov, the investment strategist, said he did not believe supply could realistically exceed 85 percent of pre-war levels without a permanent diplomatic solution to the war.

“Once the political groundwork is in place, the next steps will be logistical: Demining Hormuz, bringing shipping crews back to work, and resuming production at currently shut-in oilfields,” he said.

The US tech giant is investing $15bn in a huge new data centre project in northern Finland.

Finnish police have launched a criminal investigation into suspected breaches of environmental law at the construction site of a planned Google data centre in northern Finland.

The project is part of a $15bn deal announced last month by Alphabet’s Google to invest in artificial intelligence (AI) infrastructure in Finland, which the US company described as its largest investment in Europe.

Authorities have said Tuike Finland, a local subsidiary of Google, conducted forest clearing and drainage at a planned site near the town of Muhos, before the environmental impact assessments required under Finnish law had been completed.

“We are investigating whether the company’s operations have breached the Water Act and resulted in environmental damage,” Detective Superintendent Kari Pakanen told the Reuters news agency on Thursday, adding that a guilty finding could lead to a corporate fine.

Pakanen declined to say whether any individuals could become a target of the investigation, and a Google spokesperson said the company would cooperate with the police investigation and continue to focus on maintaining compliance at its sites.

Tree felling prompts local anger

Videos and photographs showing the scale of the forest clearance at the site of the data centre, and Google’s initial reluctance to address the issue in the days after the news broke, have prompted widespread anger in Finland, where there is a high level of respect for the natural environment among the public.

“All the outrage and dismay directed at Google, I can very much share that, especially when we are talking about the parent company valued as the third-largest in the world,” Finnish Green MP Oras Tynkkynen told Al Jazeera. “There is just no excuse. You have to know the legislation of the country you are operating in; you can afford to hire the best legal experts to help you navigate the local legal requirements.”

Finnish authorities ordered Google to stop work at the data centre site at the start of October, and the latest information from the police highlights shortcomings in the drainage and water management at the site.

Tynkkynen called Google’s actions “unforgivable”, but cautioned that while the anger being directed at the US tech giant was justified, it was also diverting scrutiny away from legacy Finnish forestry companies, which he says are “by far the biggest contributors to biodiversity loss in this country”.

What is Finland’s appeal for data centre construction?

Finland’s cool climate, low-carbon electricity and government endorsement of AI projects have contributed to making the country one of Europe’s main destinations for data centre investments in recent years.

Finland, similar in size to Germany – but with one-seventh of the population, less than six million people – has had less vocal opposition to data centre buildouts than other places, including in the United States.

AI data centres are among the main drivers of a projected rise of up to 40 percent in Finland’s electricity consumption in the coming years, if all agreed grid connection projects go ahead, grid operator Fingrid has said.

Google’s planned investments in Finland include data centres, electricity grid improvements and clean energy and battery projects to power services such as Gemini, Search, Maps and YouTube.

Supporting Google’s plan, Finland’s Prime Minister Petteri Orpo said in September that the deal would be a boost for the economy, playing down concerns that it would suck up energy and push up power prices.

Christine Lagarde will leave the post in February, nine months before the end of her eight-year term.

European Central Bank (ECB) President Christine Lagarde will step down months before her term ends, kicking off a race to succeed her against a turbulent backdrop in the eurozone.

Lagarde announced on Thursday that she will leave the post on February 7, about nine months before the scheduled end of her eight-year term. She said in a filmed statement posted on X that she was leaving “with a sense of good work done and an ECB that is fit for the future”.

The move gives European Union leaders time to choose her successor before April’s French presidential election, which polls have suggested far-right candidate Marine Le Pen is favoured to win.

The timing could allow current European Council members, including French President Emmanuel Macron, to take part in appointing Lagarde’s successor before France’s vote.

Macron, who is not allowed to run again, thanked Lagarde in a post on X for “the determined action she led at the head of the European Central Bank” during “a period marked by numerous crises”.

“The transition at the head of the ECB must now be prepared in an orderly and balanced manner with our European partners,” the leader of the eurozone’s second-largest economy added.

However, Markus Ferber, a German member of the European Parliament, warned: “If the impression arises that such a departure is timed around national elections, it damages trust in an institution that must stand above any domestic political calculation.”

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, leader of the eurozone’s largest economy, said Lagarde had led the bank “with great aplomb during challenging times”, and European Union chief Ursula von der Leyen thanked Lagarde “for everything you have done for Europe and the euro”.

French Finance Minister Roland Lescure praised her tenure. “Christine Lagarde has been an exceptional President of the ECB. As Europe navigated through crises and difficult times, she brilliantly modernised and strengthened the institution,” he posted on social media.

Marcel Fratzscher, president of the German Institute for Economic Research, told the Reuters news agency the early exit gives governments “an opportunity to appoint a successor who will safeguard European values and protect the ECB’s independence”.

Markets appeared unfazed. “Our view is that institutional behaviour is likely to outlast Lagarde and be quite similar, whoever takes over,” Simon Dangoor, head of fixed income macro investing at Goldman Sachs told Reuters.

Lagarde, appointed in October 2019, steered the bank through the COVID-19 pandemic, Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine and the United States-Israel war on Iran.

The ECB faced criticism for responding too slowly to the 2022 inflation surge, caused by post-pandemic supply chain bottlenecks and the war on Ukraine. Inflation is currently running at almost double the bank’s 2 percent target amid worries over France’s public finances.

A former French finance minister and head of the International Monetary Fund, Lagarde arrived in Frankfurt in 2019 as the first ECB chief with no formal economics training or central banking experience, prompting some market participants to warn of a “credibility risk”.

In March 2020 as the pandemic shook sovereign debt markets, she said the bank was not there to narrow the gap between Italian and German borrowing costs. She went on to show that political diplomacy could steer a central bank through historic shocks.

Sources told the AFP news agency that leaving early would give Lagarde “greater freedom to express her views”. She has hinted she could campaign in the French presidential race, saying a European voice was needed in the debate.

When Paul McKinney, a farmer in northeast Arkansas, thinks of his son’s childhood, he remembers a small boy playing in vast fields.

To a child, a flooded rice field is “like a giant, 40-acre swimming pool”, he said.

Rice has been a staple on McKinney’s farm for four generations. Next year, however, the family plans to plant much less. Instead, they will focus on soya, a crop that is cheaper to produce.

Like farmers across the United States, McKinney is making tough decisions this year in response to higher fuel and fertiliser costs, which have skyrocketed since the start of the war on Iran.

This week, farmers also face tough choices at the polls. Democrats are expected to make gains in the midterm elections, as voters react to high prices economy-wide by switching parties or staying home.

Observers are watching farm country closely. Texas and Kansas could send Democrats to the Senate for the first time in decades. In the House of Representatives, two majority-rural districts, Wisconsin’s Third and North Carolina First, could become tipping points for Democratic control.

Still, many of the country’s most rural areas, like Arkansas, are also its most safely Republican.

That leaves an uphill battle for Democrat Hallie Shoffner, who quit farming last year to challenge Republican Senator Tom Cotton in a campaign squarely focused on rising costs.

How high costs hurt farmers

Even before the US-Israel war on Iran, high input costs were straining farmers, said Ryan Loy, an extension economist for the University of Arkansas’ Division of Agriculture.

Loy pointed to a trade war with China that began in 2018, the ongoing war in Ukraine and disruptions related to the 2025 tariffs as factors driving up input costs and disrupting markets. A drought across the US heartland, made worse by climate change, has added to the strain.

Farmers across the country are working to adapt. In Arkansas, many farmers skipped rice in favour of soya. Soya is “the least input-intensive crop, and perhaps can break even or have the shallowest loss”, Loy said.

Now Arkansas, usually the country’s top rice producer, has its lowest rice acreage since the 1970s. Many farmers hoped 2026 would bring economic recovery so they could return to rice.

Then, the war on Iran hit. With the Strait of Hormuz blocked, fertiliser costs jumped just as farmers were fertilising during the spring planting season.

Loy tracked the increase in a sample budget that he maintains for Arkansas row crop farmers. “Urea fertiliser specifically peaked about 39 percent over our budgeted amount,” Loy said. Diesel costs came in about 72 percent more than budget averaged across the planting, growing and harvesting seasons, Loy found.

Those changes represent a significant economic hit. “For our state alone, it’s an additional cost of about $343m,” Loy said.

Last week, US President Donald Trump announced an $8bn fuel relief programme for farmers, following $12bn in tariff-related aid in 2025. If the fuel relief payment were divided equally between the 50 states, it would cover less than half of the extra costs that Loy estimates Arkansas’ farmers paid this year.

McKinney, a member of the Arkansas Farm Bureau, said the announcement was welcome. Still, he hoped for longer-term solutions that would prevent “this constant battle for survival”.

For many farms, survival is indeed getting harder. Farm bankruptcies for the first three quarters of 2026 were up 19 percent compared to this time last year, according to a recent analysis by the University of Arkansas’ National Agricultural Law Center. They were up 73 percent compared to 2024.

‘We can’t keep doing this’

McKinney’s son, who grew up playing in muddy rice fields, now helps his dad farm their 24,000 acres. So does McKinney’s nephew, who this year is driving a combine.

“As has been done for us, we would love to be able to hand that down to the next generation,” said McKinney. “But you also have to think about what is going to be best for them.”

McKinney questions how long farming will provide a sustainable living. “It’s some heavy things to think about,” McKinney said.

For Shoffner, a sixth-generation Arkansas farmer, that reckoning came last year.

Higher costs, lower crop prices and the uncertainty of trade wars and tariffs “made the numbers stop working” for their 2,000-acre farm operation, Shoffner told Al Jazeera.

“I know what it feels like to work hard, make every adjustment you can, and still have to sit down with your family and say, ‘We can’t keep doing this,’” Shoffner said.

To protect her parents’ land and retirement, Shoffner closed the family’s farm. That “heartbreaking” decision helped spur her Senate run.

“I decided that if I can’t farm, I will fight,” Shoffner said.

If elected, Shoffner wants to end the war on Iran, build trade policies farmers “can actually plan around”, invest in local processing and distribution, and pass a robust Farm Bill — strategies she hopes will help farmers and rural economies more broadly.

“If we want rural communities to have a future, the people producing our food have to be able to make a living doing it.”

Cotton did not respond to a request for comment.

How will farmers vote?

Economic pain may not change farmers’ votes, however, in Arkansas or nationwide. Michael Shepherd, a political scientist at the University of Michigan, said many farmers, like many rural voters, are committed Republicans.

Committed voters tend to view the economy through a partisan lens, according to Shepherd. “Their political behaviours, their voting choices, things like that, are not particularly responsive to changes in the agricultural economy,” he said.

Some polling this year, however, did suggest the potential for movement. A poll by the Farm Journal in April found that 35 percent of farmers who “usually” vote Republican and 15 percent who “always” vote Republican were still considering how they would vote.

And September polling from Purdue showed that, for the first time this term, a majority of farmers surveyed think the country is “on the wrong track”.

Even if farmers are swayable, of course, Shoffner still may not be the one to sway them: her campaign has been far outspent by Cotton’s, an established lawmaker who has received funding from interest groups like AIPAC and leaders at companies like Anthropic and Palantir.

“If one side has a massive war chest, and the other side has very limited resources, then that game of tug of war can be won much easier than it should be,” Shepherd said.

And even if farmers do change their votes, they may not decide elections.

McKinney, who is now farming one of the Shoffner family’s former fields, said farmers represent a shrinking percentage of rural voters — their strength now is in organising, not numbers.

Still, even where candidates like Shoffner don’t win, their campaigns might signal to funders that similar races may be competitive in the future or help Democrats win down-ballot seats.

In Arkansas’ second congressional district, for example, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is betting on Democrat Chris Jones. It’s a long-shot campaign, but across the country, at least some long-shot candidates are expected to win.

“All indications are that this is gonna be one of the biggest shifts away from the president’s party that we’ve observed,” Shepherd said.

Ethiopia has received 12 Russian Su-35 fighter jets and will acquire four S-400 air defence batteries, in a deal experts say strengthens Moscow’s foothold in the Horn of Africa while bolstering Addis Ababa’s military amid conflict at home and tensions with neighbouring Eritrea.

Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed announced the deal in Moscow during the two-day Russia-Africa Summit.

“I value the friendly relations between Russia and Ethiopia,” Russian President Vladimir Putin said in a statement. “Russia and Ethiopia stand together in international affairs.”

Experts say the agreement builds on decades of military cooperation, offering Moscow arms revenue and diplomatic influence while allowing Ethiopia to strengthen its armed forces amid its ongoing conflict in Tigray.

Here is what we know:

What weapons is Ethiopia acquiring?

Abiy said Ethiopia had taken delivery of its first 12 Su-35s under an earlier agreement with Russia, with four S-400 batteries to follow, but did not say when the air defence systems would arrive.

The aircraft would expand an air force already equipped with Russian fighter jets. The S-400 systems would complement this existing fleet by helping the military defend itself against aerial threats, experts say.

“They would be best used against conventional air threats,” Benedict Manzin, a lead analyst on the Middle East and Africa at risk consultancy Sibylline, told Al Jazeera. “In a war with Eritrea, they could be used against Eritrea’s limited air force and drones.”

However, air defences do not provide protection against every kind of attack.

“As we have seen in Ukraine, conventional air defence systems can be overwhelmed by small, cheap drones,” he said.

Why does Russia want closer ties with Ethiopia?

The relationship predates the current competition for influence in Africa.

“Russia has been engaged in Ethiopia for decades, part of the legacy of the Cold War,” Manzin said.

The Soviet Union backed Ethiopia’s former communist government. Today’s cooperation builds on those foundations, with the two countries having signed military agreements intended to improve the Ethiopian armed forces’ capabilities through technology, knowledge and training, according to the Ethiopian News Agency.

Commercial interests also matter.

“Russia is also in the business of making money through arms sales,” Manzin said. “This is one of Russia’s primary exports to Africa.”

Weapons sales provide revenue while sustaining relationships with governments that require training, maintenance and replacement equipment. But the partnership extends beyond defence.

Abiy said his talks with Putin covered nuclear energy, health and trade, alongside bilateral and multilateral cooperation, while in a statement, Putin said bilateral trade exceeded $1.3bn in January-September, more than twice the figure for all of 2025.

He identified energy, agriculture, industry and education among potential areas for further cooperation.

Ethiopia’s size also makes it attractive to competing powers, with experts saying that because it is Africa’s second-most populous country, it offers a substantial market.

“Everyone engages a bit, and Ethiopia tries to maximise its gains,” Manzin said.

Does this mean Ethiopia is turning away from the West?

Manzin suggested Ethiopia is widening its options rather than committing exclusively to Moscow.

“African states are aware that they are a focus of geopolitical competition,” he said.

That competition gives governments room to seek weapons, investment and diplomatic backing from different partners. Ethiopia’s relationship with Russia coexists with a significant Chinese presence and continuing Western investment in the country.

“China has a huge presence in Ethiopia, and Russian arms have always been a huge factor,” Manzin said. Moscow is seeking to turn those established connections into broader influence as Western sanctions over its war in Ukraine constrain its international relationships.

Russia supplied 15 percent of African imports of major weapons in 2021–2025, behind the United States at 19 percent and China at 17 percent, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).

Could the weapons be used in Tigray?

In his statement, Abiy thanked Putin for ensuring the aircraft were delivered a year ahead of schedule and said the equipment would strengthen Ethiopia’s ability to “preemptively deter aggression”.

The delivery comes amid renewed fighting in Tigray, a separate rebellion in Amhara and concerns about a possible conflict with Eritrea.

“Ethiopia is buying a lot of aircraft,” Manzin said. “The timing comes as Ethiopia is going through conflict in Tigray, with speculation about war with Eritrea.”

He cautioned against assuming the latest battlefield developments directly prompted purchases negotiated earlier.

“Aircraft are helpful regardless, as they are using aircraft and the air force heavily during any suppression,” he said.

What’s the conflict about?

Fighting between Ethiopia’s federal army and Tigrayan forces intensified in late September, in effect unravelling the November 2022 Pretoria peace agreement that ended a devastating two-year war.

Each side has blamed the other for renewed violence. Tensions grew following the formation of a seven-group alliance seeking to overthrow Abiy’s government and establish a transitional administration.

Government troops and allied forces entered Mekelle, Tigray’s capital, earlier in October after Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) fighters withdrew.

Addis Ababa subsequently installed a six-month caretaker administration, but rebel commanders have promised to continue fighting.

Student protests that began in September in France have spread to more than 11 European countries as anger rises over high rents and fuel prices and cuts to public services.

Many young protesters said they no longer expect to be better off than their parents, and household wealth data show a wide gap between generations.

Across the eurozone and two other European countries, households headed by someone under 35 have a median net wealth of about 25,000 euros ($27,870) while those headed by 55- to 64-year-olds are worth about 208,000 euros ($231,882), more than eight times as much, according to the European Central Bank’s (ECB’s) 2023 Household Finance and Consumption Survey.

In this visual explainer, Al Jazeera compares wealth by age groups across 22 European countries and looks at how much more expensive life has become since 2000.

Where is the wealth gap widest?

The Household Finance and Consumption Survey, run by the ECB and national central banks since 2010, tracks household wealth and debt in the eurozone, the Czech Republic and Hungary.

It measures net wealth, which includes property, cars, valuables and savings, minus debts. Under-35s hold just 2.8 percent of all household wealth in the 22 countries while 55- to 64-year-olds hold the largest share at 24 percent.

In Finland, under-35s hold 0.8 percent of household wealth, the lowest share of any country surveyed, while over-55s hold more than 71 percent. Young people’s shares are also small in Ireland (1.4 percent), Austria (1.6 percent), Greece (1.8 percent) and Germany (2 percent).

Rising housing costs mean many young people cannot afford what their parents or grandparents could.

Wealth is more evenly spread in Central and Eastern Europe. In Lithuania, under-35s hold 13.2 percent, against 15.9 percent for 55- to 64-year-olds. Their share is 12.3 percent in Croatia, 10.1 percent in Slovakia and 9.8 percent in Estonia. Malta, at 11.1 percent, is the exception outside the two regions.

The graphic below shows how household wealth is split between age groups in each country surveyed.

“What we’ve seen is actually a very strong increase in housing prices both in terms of the rental market as well as the ownership market,” Evelyn Astor of the European Social Observatory told Al Jazeera’s Counting the Cost programme.

“All of this is also reinforcing a sense of inequality because ultimately ordinary families are struggling to pay their rents or be able to purchase their homes whereas wealthy people with capital are able to make rather significant investments in the European housing market,” she said.

How much more expensive is it than 2000?

Prices of everyday goods and services, such as food, energy, transport and household bills, have risen by 67.2 percent in the eurozone, Hungary and the Czech Republic since 2000.

Of the countries in our chart, Hungary has seen the steepest rise with prices more than tripling, according to Eurostat, the European Union’s statistics agency. Its harmonised index of consumer prices is the EU’s official measure of how much everyday goods and services cost.

The chart below shows how consumer prices have changed in each country since 2000 with prices in 2000 set at 100 on the index.

Eastern European countries have seen the sharpest increases – particularly since 2022 when Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine began – because many relied heavily on Russian energy supplies.

Prices rose by about 2 percent a year on average until 2022 when annual inflation in the EU hit 9.2 percent.

The surge was driven mainly by energy costs. Inflation has since eased, but the price rises of the COVID-19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine have not reversed.

Rates will remain 3.75-4 percent even as inflation continues to rise.

The United States Federal Reserve is set to hold interest rates steady in its final monetary policy decision before the US midterm elections.

The central bank will maintain rates at 3.75-4 percent, following a 10-2 vote, in line with expectations.

CME FedWatch, which tracks the likelihood of monetary policy decisions, indicated that there was more than a 90 percent chance rates would remain unchanged.

“Economic activity is expanding at a strong pace,” the Fed said in its press release announcing the decision on Wednesday. “While uncertainty remains elevated owing, in part, to geopolitical developments, domestic spending has been resilient. Productivity growth is strong, and capital investment is robust. Job gains have kept pace with the workforce, and the unemployment rate has changed little.”

The Fed noted how inflation continues to rise.

It also added, “The accumulation of more information will help the Committee determine the policy stance appropriate to ensure a timely return of inflation to the Committee’s 2 percent goal.”

The most recent Consumer Price Index (CPI) report showed the annual inflation rate increasing to 3.7 percent in September, up from 3.4 percent in August, with energy prices largely accounting for the monthly surge.

There were signs earlier this month that the central bank would maintain benchmark interest rates, with the Fed’s chair for supervision, Michelle Bowman, advocating a “wait and see” approach.

“I don’t feel any urgency for taking further action at this point,” she said at this month’s International Monetary Fund-World Bank meetings in Bangkok, Thailand. “We really need to take some time and understand how things will evolve.”

The decision comes before Thursday’s release of the Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) Price Index report, which is used by the central bank to assess inflation and inform its decisions.

Today’s Fed announcement follows an interest-rate hike rise last month, amid surging inflation – the first increase by the central bank since July 2023. The move drew criticism from US President Donald Trump, who has repeatedly pressed the Fed to cut rates since taking office. At the time, he wrote on Truth Social that “interest rates in the United States should be 1% or less.”

The Fed’s next monetary policy meeting is scheduled for December 8-9, when it will give its final rate decision of the year.

Current forecasts point to a quarter-point interest rate increase.

Khartoum, Sudan – Rasha Abdelaziz Musa works every day for seven hours selling tea. But by the time she finishes for the day at 10pm, she’s still unsure if she has enough to feed her four children.

Musa, 39, is doing her best, but her earnings are increasingly no longer enough to cover soaring food prices in the Sudanese capital.

Her husband, a member of the Sudanese military, has spent more than eight months on the front lines of the country’s war, in which the military has been fighting the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces since 2023. Musa has not heard from him for months, and he has sent no money.

In his absence, Musa has been left to provide for their children, who attend kindergarten, primary and secondary school.

Musa told Al Jazeera that feeding her family costs about 40,000 Sudanese pounds per day ($4 at the parallel-market exchange rate) before accounting for rent, household essentials and other expenses.

Some of the family staples are ful medames, a dish of stewed fava beans, or lentils. When lentils are too expensive, Musa serves taamiya, or falafel, sandwiches.

Prices regularly change, and Musa often ends the day in debt to the traders she gets her food from.

Large families struggle

Musa is not alone in struggling to cover her family’s daily expenses.

Ahmed Youssef, 61, supports a family of 12 through his work in a butcher’s shop and as an occasional intermediary in livestock sales. He can earn 90,000 to 140,000 pounds ($9 to $14) when a deal succeeds, but that income is irregular.

He told Al Jazeera that his household spends more than 100,000 Sudanese pounds ($10) daily and his income is no longer enough to support the family.

“One income is no longer enough to cover the family’s needs, and sometimes my older children have to work to help meet expenses,” Youssef told Al Jazeera.

Ali Fadil supports a family of 10. Without a permanent job, he goes to the market each morning to look for work. Some days, the 57-year-old earns enough to buy food, but on other days, he finds no work at all. And yet his daily expenses still reach about 70,000 pounds ($7), with rising prices adding to the financial pressure he faces.

“Sometimes I skip meals so I can pay for school fees or medical costs,” he said. “I also borrow money to meet other obligations.”

Food prices rise as Sudanese pound weakens

A survey of four local markets in the Khartoum State area by Al Jazeera last week found that prices for several essential foods had risen sharply within days, making it increasingly difficult for families to plan their spending.

A kilogramme (2.2.lb) of sugar cost about 10,000 pounds ($1), up from 9,000 pounds ($0.90) two days earlier. A litre (1 quart) of cooking oil rose to 25,000 pounds ($2.50) from 20,000 pounds ($2) while a loaf of bread costs 500 pounds ($0.05), compared with 300 pounds ($0.03) a week earlier.

Lentils cost about 10,000 pounds ($1) per kilogramme, up from 8,000 pounds ($0.80), and rice was priced at 13,000 pounds ($1.30) per kilogramme, up from 10,000 pounds ($1). Powdered milk reached 70,000 pounds ($7) per kilogramme, up from 60,000 ($6) two days earlier.

The Sudanese pound has also continued to weaken. According to exchange rates monitored by Al Jazeera, $1 was trading at 10,050 Sudanese pounds on the parallel market on Friday, compared with 9,500 the previous day.

Food inflation adds to pressure on households

Official figures offer further evidence of the rising cost of living, particularly in Khartoum and other urban areas.

According to Sudan’s Central Bureau of Statistics, prices across the country were 28 percent higher in September than a year earlier, up from 26 percent in August. Prices rose by 7.5 percent in September alone, more than double the increase recorded the previous month.

Food prices have risen even faster. Across Sudan, food and beverages cost nearly 37 percent more in September than a year earlier, up from an annual increase of about 21 percent in August. In September alone, food prices jumped by more than 17 percent.

The situation was particularly severe in Khartoum State, where prices were nearly 60 percent higher than a year earlier. Prices rose by more than 15 percent in September alone, following an increase of nearly 9 percent in August.

That sharp increase comes as the capital region struggles to recover from widespread destruction caused by the war. Although displaced residents have begun returning and businesses are gradually reopening since the military recaptured the state from the RSF last year, damaged infrastructure and rising transport costs continue to constrain the availability of goods.

The return of residents has also increased demand for essential supplies, further driving up prices. In September, fuel shortages hit the capital as consumption rose faster than supplies could be replenished.

Urban areas have generally been hit harder than rural communities. Food prices in towns and cities were 55 percent higher than a year earlier, up from about 40 percent in August. Overall, prices in urban areas rose by 40 percent over the past year, compared with about 21 percent in rural areas.

The war is the main driver of these increases, disrupting livelihoods and supply chains. According to the World Bank, Sudan’s economy shrank by an estimated 29 percent in 2023 and a further 14 percent in 2024 as the war devastated businesses, disrupted agricultural production and eliminated jobs.

The conflict has also forced millions of people from their homes with nearly 8.9 million people still internally displaced as of April, according to the International Organization for Migration.

War destroys livelihoods

Journalist and economic affairs specialist Khalid Teks said Sudan’s economic deterioration began long before the war. Falling oil production after South Sudan’s secession in 2011 worsened conditions as did the depreciation of the pound, cash shortages, international isolation, political conflict and corruption in the years preceding the removal of President Omar al-Bashir in 2019.

Teks said political instability during the power transition undermined Sudan’s economic performance, and deep reforms were not implemented before war broke out in 2023. The conflict devastated infrastructure and productive sectors, depleted savings and disrupted economic activity. The climate has also been a factor. Strong agricultural production in 2024 was followed by concern over limited rainfall this year and possible food shortages after the harvest begins in November.

Teks told Al Jazeera that families increasingly deplete their savings and sell their possessions to cover everyday expenses.

He also pointed to disruptions to remittance channels, which many Sudanese households rely on for financial support.

Teks called for easier humanitarian access, an end to the war, direct support for vulnerable households and low-interest loans for small businesses and craft enterprises.

“The government needs to provide direct support through dedicated funds and the Zakat Chamber, facilitate humanitarian organisations and offer affordable loans for small businesses and vocational activities,” Teks said. “This could help reopen markets and workshops and expand microfinance.

Trade and security are expected to be on the agenda as delegations and leaders from dozens of African countries gather in Moscow for a two-day summit with Russia.

The third instalment of the Russia-Africa Summit will run through October 28–29 and will be chaired by Russian President Vladimir Putin and the current African Union chair, Burundian President Evariste Ndayishimiye.

Russia has boosted security and trade cooperation with African nations as it grapples with Western sanctions imposed in response to its war against Ukraine.

So who will be attending and what is at stake?

Here’s what we know.

What is the Russia-Africa Summit?

The Russia-Africa Summit is a two-day diplomatic and economic meeting being held in Moscow on Wednesday and Thursday.

Leaders and delegations from 48 African countries are meeting to discuss bilateral cooperation spanning politics, defence and technology.

This high-profile forum is the third of its kind. The first summit took place in October 2019 in Sochi, marking an unprecedented turn in Russian-African relations.

What’s on the agenda for the summit?

The event’s official theme is Developing Mutually Beneficial Cooperation and “unlocking the potential of every African country”.

More than 40 sessions and about 100 speakers will cover trade, investment, technology transfer, food and energy security, healthcare, education and youth exchange.

There will also be a business programme, culminating in a plenary session.

Who is attending?

Representatives from 48 African countries will participate, as well as 22 heads of state, according to Kremlin presidential aide Yury Ushakov. Heads of state from 17 countries attended the last summit in 2023.

Fewer leaders came to the last two summits, compared with the first gathering in 2019, when 43 took part, a decline which Moscow blamed on Western pressure.

Russian President Putin is scheduled to meet with his Egyptian counterpart Abdel Fattah el-Sisi and Ethiopia’s Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed.

The guest list includes leaders closely tied to Russia’s growing security role in Africa, including Burkina Faso’s Ibrahim Traore and Niger’s Abdourahamane Tchiani.

Kenya’s William Ruto, Uganda’s Yoweri Museveni and Namibia’s Netumbo Nandi-Ndatiwah are also expected, as well as Sudan’s Abdel Fattah al-Burhan and Mohamed al-Menfi, the chairman of the Presidential Council of Libya.

What is the relationship between Russia and Africa like?

Russia has gained far more influence in Africa through security than trade, according to a report by the African Security Analysis group (ASA), a security consultancy.

Russia’s security presence has risen significantly in the region. In 2023, Russian forces, mostly from the Wagner Group, operated in only a few African countries, but the ASA now counts Russian missions or troops in at least nine countries.

Trade between African countries and Russia has exceeded $28bn. It was estimated to be about $16.8bn in 2019, when the first summit was held. But trade is mainly concentrated in a few countries and overshadowed by that of China and the European Union.

Russia’s strongest ties to the continent are in energy, fertilisers, defence and nuclear power, where the state-owned firm Rosatom has signed a string of agreements.

Russia has been an essential supplier of fertilisers and wheat to many countries in the region.

In 2023, Russia exported 200,000 tonnes of grain to Mali, Somalia, the Central African Republic, Burkina Faso, Eritrea and Zimbabwe. 

Why does this summit matter?

This is the first summit since 2023, so it will be an indicator of how far the relationship has developed and where it is heading, analysts say.

A final declaration and a Russia-Africa Partnership Forum plan should be adopted by the end of the Summit to cover 2027-2029.

Analysts have said that meetings on the sidelines could be more important than the main event, as talks between African delegations and Russian defence officials can illustrate where Moscow plans to expand its military ties.

The recruitment of Africans to fight in Ukraine could also be a growing problem for Moscow, as it has already caused diplomatic concern in countries such as Kenya.

Amnesty International has used the run-up to the summit to raise the issue of Africans being recruited to fight with Russia.

In an open letter, the directors of Amnesty’s African section urged leaders attending the summit to demand that Moscow end what the group describes as deceptive and coercive recruitment of Africans to fight in its war in Ukraine.

British Chancellor John Healey will set out the country’s autumn budget, the government’s tax and spending plans, the first under Prime Minister Andy Burnham’s premiership amid high inflation and government spending levels.

While the budget will be announced in parliament on Wednesday at 12.30 GMT, speculation about what it will lay out has ranged from a series of tax announcements to commitments to defence spending.

But the country continues to deal with a rising cost-of-living crisis and energy bills are expected to see their biggest rise in four years in January due to the ongoing conflict in the Middle East.

As total United Kingdom borrowing broke through the 3 trillion pounds ($3.99 trillion) barrier for the first time in September, the country is already spending 100 billion pounds ($133bn) each year just on servicing that debt.

Despite that challenge, the chancellor has said the budget will move “money and power out of Westminster and into every postcode around Britain”.

In a speech last month, Healey said that he and Burnham were in “lockstep” in meeting fiscal rules, “to balancing the books, with a buffer to protect against uncertainty, to control borrowing to bear down on inflation, and reducing long-term pressures on our public finances”.

Following the two budgets from former Chancellor Rachel Reeves, which included big tax and spending increases, Healey’s budget is expected to take a more “steady as she goes” line, which some say is the wrong approach.

Here’s how he will be expected to achieve that.

Defence spending

On Monday, Burnham said Healey would set out a plan to fully fund the government’s defence plans and commitments, telling ITV’s Good Morning Britain that his government’s first challenge was financing the already announced defence investment plan.

Announced in June, the plan is backed by 298 billion pounds ($396bn) of investment and will transform the armed forces as the country moves to “warfighting readiness” and stepping up “European security”, according to a government policy paper.

But Burnham said it was “crucial that we have a funded plan that we can then implement, and we will set out more details on Wednesday as to how we’ve done that”.

He added that NATO commitments of spending 3 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) on defence spending by 2030 and 3.5 percent by 2035 are included in the pathway, explaining that national security issues were “at the top of the priority list”.

As it stands, Britain spends about 2.6 percent of its GDP on defence.

The Guardian reported that on defence spending, Healey aims to close a 4.7-billion-pound ($6.2bn) funding gap in the government’s plan inherited from the previous Labour Party leader, with cuts to other departmental budgets likely to fund it.

Inflation

Government borrowing and inflation continue to rise, which is a potential spanner in the works for proposed spending.

Last week, UK inflation and government borrowing both hit their highest levels in a year.

According to the Office for National Statistics, borrowing was nearly 25 billion pounds ($33bn) last month alone, “a little higher than a year earlier, as spending, including higher debt interest costs, increased more than government income, partly reflecting the impacts of inflation”.

ONS added that in the financial year to September 2026, borrowing remained below the same period last year, but it was higher than the Office for Budget Responsibility’s forecast.

However, debt at the end of last month exceeded 3 trillion pounds ($3.99 trillion), much of it due to the Iran war and the fallout from the closure of the Strait of Hormuz as the government borrowed more than expected.

According to Jasper Kanter, a professorial research fellow in ecological economics at Aberystwyth Business School, for the government to grow the economy without raising inflation levels, there needs to be an understanding of what kind of economy is created.

“The strongest policies improve prosperity, resilience and sustainability at the same time,” Kanter said.

“Growth is less likely to be inflationary when it comes from increasing the economy’s productive capacity rather than simply boosting spending. Measures that improve skills, reduce energy dependence, strengthen local economies and regenerate ecosystems are likely to deliver more lasting benefits than short-term stimulus,” he added.

Moreover, Helen Miller, director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, said in a media release ahead of the budget that Healey “faces a forecast in which borrowing is still expected to fall in coming years, and the fiscal rules are still being met”.

“Despite that, a ‘steady-as-she-goes’ budget is not an option available to the chancellor. Choosing to stay the course with the inherited tax and spending plans would mean allowing inflation to blow departments’ spending plans off course,” Miller said.

Tax on banks, online sellers

The budget is also expected to reveal new taxes on banks and online marketplaces such as Amazon, Temu and eBay, as well as a funding boost for mayoralties and local authorities.

The biggest four banks collectively made about profits of 15 billion pounds ($19.9bn) in the first six months of this year. Trade unions are calling for higher taxes on those earnings, the BBC has reported.

According to the BBC, the Treasury is leaning towards changing a 2023 surcharge rate on banks, which would raise about 2 billion pounds ($2.6bn).

On marketplaces such as Amazon, Healey is reportedly looking to crack down on foreign sellers who avoid paying VAT – a UK sales tax – which is expected to raise as much as 1 billion pounds ($1.3bn) and help fund business rate cuts for high street shops, The Times reported.

Paying for social care and benefits

According to The Guardian newspaper, Healey is expected to allocate about 1.42 trillion pounds ($1.8 trillion) this year for day-to-day spending and public investment, with about 100 billion pounds ($132.8bn) going on debt interest.

Kanter, of Aberystwyth Business School, told Al Jazeera that he expects “targeted support rather than large-scale tax cuts or rises” in the budget announcement.

“The government appears keen to signal empathy with the pressures many people are facing. Addressing the harsh cliff edge in carer’s allowance and expanding parental pay are good examples of this,” he said.

Some of the budget’s contents have already been announced, including ending the carers’ allowance limit and removing tariffs on a range of food items, including chocolate and beans, to make them cheaper for shoppers.

Pensioners are also expected to be shielded from income tax through the introduction of a new personal allowance, while Healey is expected to add another 1 billion pounds ($1.3bn) to the 39 billion pounds ($51.8bn) planned for social and affordable housing in England over the next decade.

“Pensioners will benefit from another substantial increase in the state pension, while low-paid workers will benefit from increases in the minimum wage. For most households, the bigger determinants of living standards will remain wages, inflation and energy costs rather than any new tax measures announced in the budget,” Kanter explained.

Last month, Burnham announced a new national care service to provide free personal care for elderly people. As costs of care for the elderly have soared in the UK, this was a major issue from the outset of Burnham’s premiership.

He said the plan would be introduced in phases and would be fully funded from public spending and savings from scrapping the state pension triple lock – an annual increase in state pension that goes up with inflation, wages or a fixed rate of 2.5 percent, whichever is highest.

A report on how this will be implemented is due in summer 2027.

Energy bills

Amid high gas and oil prices as a result of the US-Israeli war with Iran and the subsequent closure of the Strait of Hormuz, energy prices worldwide have increased, with Brent crude futures at $115.90 a barrel on Wednesday.

In the UK, energy prices are predicted to reach nearly 2,000 pounds ($2,655) a year for households in January after energy consultancy Cornwall Insight projected in its latest forecast last month that the government’s cap on energy prices is expected to increase by 16 percent.

On energy bills, reports suggest the chancellor is expected to announce help for households in the budget by scrapping standing charges for energy supply, among other things.

Global stock markets have climbed as investors continue to bet on bright prospects for the tech giants driving the AI boom.

In the United States, all three major stock indexes rose on Tuesday, led by the tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite, which gained 1.18 percent.

The benchmark S&P 500 rose 0.6 percent, while the narrower Dow Jones Industrial Average edged up 0.03 percent.

Five of the “Magnificent Seven” tech stocks rose, led by Tesla, up 4.04 percent.

Amazon gained 1.61 percent, while Apple and Alphabet gained 0.93 percent and 0.9 percent, respectively.

Nvidia, the world’s most valuable public company, rose almost 1 percent after announcing a $3bn investment in Meta’s equity offering.

Meta fell 1.64 percent, while Microsoft fell 0.24 percent.

Other big movers in tech included Advanced Micro Devices, Broadcom and Intel, which gained 5.45 percent, 4 percent and 3.61 percent, respectively.

Asia Pacific markets rally

Gains continued in the Asia Pacific on Wednesday, with stock markets in Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and Australia climbing.

The KOSPI in Seoul led the gains, with the benchmark index up 5.84 percent as of 03:00 GMT.

The surge came as South Korea’s SK Hynix, one of the world’s top three memory chip makers, announced blockbuster third-quarter results on Wednesday, with operating profit soaring about 630 percent year-on-year to 83.33 trillion won ($62.8bn).

SK Hynix shares listed in South Korea surged more than 8 percent following the results.

In Tokyo, the benchmark Nikkei 225 was up 1.26 percent, while the TAIEX in Taipei was up 1.32 percent.

The S&P/ASX 200 in Sydney was up 0.11 percent.

Investors are keenly anticipating upcoming earnings reports from major tech players as they try to gauge whether their massive investments in AI will pay dividends.

Microsoft and Alphabet report their latest results on Wednesday, followed by Amazon on Thursday and Apple on Monday.

On Monday, AI giant Anthropic filed paperwork for its hotly anticipated IPO, reporting a net loss of $80.7bn in the first half of 2026 on $16.3bn in revenue.

Tech firms have poured hundreds of billions of dollars each into AI infrastructure, fuelling debate over whether a speculative market bubble could be forming similar to the one that preceded the 2000 dot-com crash.

Global AI investment is forecast to hit $2.7 trillion in 2026 and $3.6 trillion in 2027, according to Gartner, a technology insights company.

Oil prices, which have been elevated since the start of the US-Israel war on Iran, rose about 1 percent as Asian markets opened on Wednesday amid the ongoing conflict in the Middle East, including hostilities between Saudi Arabia and Yemen’s Iran-aligned Houthis.

Futures for Brent crude, the global benchmark, stood at about $115 a barrel, up 59 percent from before the war began.

When Brazil’s President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva scored his surprise election victory on Sunday, winning an unprecedented fourth term in office, his supporters were euphoric.

The joy they felt over Lula’s victory has echoed across large parts of the Global South – and could restore some hope to the grouping that has sought to give emerging countries a greater stake on the world stage, the BRICS alliance.

At a time when United States President Donald Trump is seeking to reassert US power and has cast BRICS as a threat to US interests, Lula’s victory in Brazil offers the alliance a measure of political reassurance, experts say.

A win by his rival, Flavio Bolsonaro, could have threatened Brazil’s commitment to the bloc, given his links to Trump and calls to reconsider the country’s role in BRICS.

Instead, Lula’s return gives the grouping one fewer reason to fear a retreat from within – as it continues to help forge a more multipolar future for a world dominated by the US.

As Esmat Zaidan, professor of public policy at Qatar’s Hamad Bin Khalifa University, told Al Jazeera, “The victory of Lula is important to BRICS’ political continuation in the current climate as it seeks to increase the bloc’s role and make it stronger in global governance.”

A spared fracture

It was clear to analysts that Lula’s win would safeguard the continuation of the BRICS alliance, while under Bolsonaro, its future may have floundered.

Lula himself was one of the architects of the bloc when it was founded nearly two decades ago, and has sought to advance its role on the global stage.

According to Zaidan, Bolsonaro’s desire to reconsider Brazil’s participation in BRICS and instead pursue closer alignment with Washington would have weakened the bloc’s political cohesion and potentially slowed cooperation on trade and financial reform.

Bolsonaro had reportedly also promised the US Trade Representative that Brazil’s Pix instant payment system would stay out of non-Western payment schemes, as the US seeks to safeguard global dominance of the dollar, said Imran Khalid, a geostrategic analyst and senior fellow at Foreign Policy in Focus.

“BRICS makes decisions by consensus, so one unwilling founding member can slow everything down from the inside. That was the real risk, more than Brazil walking out,” Khalid told Al Jazeera.

Still, Zaidan cautioned that continuity of the alliance does not amount to total unity within.

“The member countries of BRICS have distinctly different economic interests and geopolitical goals,” he said. “Therefore, while Lula’s victory makes it easier for the BRICS bloc to continue working towards a common agenda, his election did not eliminate these distinct differences.”

Guy Burton, a geopolitical and policy analyst, agreed that the bloc’s differences will remain unchanged with Brazil’s election result.

“BRICS matters because it represents a large share of the world’s population, economy and trade. But it has never really acted as a political unit. Its members are too different,” he said.

“The bloc now includes Iran and the UAE, which sit on opposite sides of the current war. That tells you how limited its cohesion is,” Burton added.

More multipolarity, but not a counterweight to Washington

The apparent relief in the Global South to Lula’s win reflects a broader concern among many emerging economies about their exposure to decisions made in Washington, “particularly regarding trade, tariffs and international economic relations,” said Zaidan.

“For these countries, the issue is not necessarily opposition to the US. It is about having greater room to make independent decisions and avoiding excessive dependence on any single global power,” he said.

Khalid pointed to China and Russia’s support for Lula, with Xi Jinping backing him against outside interference, and the Kremlin praising his work for the BRICS alliance.

“Most of these countries do not want a fight with the United States; they want the freedom to say no to Washington without being punished for it,” he explained.

“A strong Brazil inside BRICS helps protect that freedom.”

Lula has long advocated for a more multipolar international system, in which emerging economies have a stronger voice when it comes to shaping international rules and institutions, added Zaidan.

Burton said even countries and regions beyond the Global South are looking to lessen their reliance on  Washington, including Europe, which is building its own security against Russia and in support of Ukraine.

“So states, whether in the Western camp or not, have accepted that they must pursue their own interests. That means working with whoever they can. We are moving into a genuinely multipolar world,” he said.

Still, BRICS’ diversity and its member states’ varied interests have meant it has never been a coherent counterweight to the West, experts said.

Many in the alliance maintain strong economic and security relationships with the US, said Zaidan.

“I would see Lula’s victory as strengthening the case for strategic autonomy rather than confrontation with Washington,” said the professor.

“BRICS is potentially more effective when it expands the choices available to its members, rather than defining itself simply through opposition to the United States.”

Burton agreed, pointing to Brazil’s changing ties with Trump over the years.

“Russia and China are the obvious US rivals. But India under Modi long had a close relationship with Washington, and with Trump in particular, even if that has weakened recently,” he said.

“Brazil, too, was close to Trump under Jair Bolsonaro, Flavio Bolsonaro’s father, when he was in office.”

Challenging dollar dependence

Among the BRICS’ many ambitions is to promote trade in local currencies rather than the US dollar – and Lula’s victory could provide the political foundation to build on these efforts, said Zaidan, given that Brazil is one of the largest trading economies in the bloc.

Khalid said that after the alliance scrapped the idea of a common BRICS currency at its most recent summit in New Delhi in September, its ambition for trade in local currencies has become far more viable.

“If the [BRICS’ New Development Bank] moves towards its goal of 30 percent of lending in member currencies, and Brazil and China settle more trade in reais and yuan as they agreed in 2023, reliance on the dollar falls step by step, without an open confrontation,” he explained.

But Zaidan said that political will alone is not enough.

“Countries also need reliable payment infrastructure, sufficient currency liquidity, appropriate financial regulations, and businesses willing to use these arrangements,” he said.

For now the dollar reigns supreme in foreign exchange transactions, and there may be no tipping point for another decade or so, Burton said.

Ultimately, though, Lula’s victory could help BRICS move from political discussions towards more practical financial cooperation, while reducing dollar dependence will be “gradual, uneven and driven as much by economic feasibility as by geopolitical ambition”, said Zaidan.

How Washington reacts to this is another variable; Trump’s government sits at the contradiction of wanting to remain the world’s superpower, while also retreating to a more protectionist America-first role, said Burton.

“Developments such as Lula’s re-election will only sharpen the pressures already building in the Global North,” said the expert.

London, United Kingdom – “It’s magical,” says biology teacher Muneera Alfadhel from under her umbrella.

In fact, it is a characteristically rainy, grey day in London, but the weather is doing nothing to dampen her mood. She is among the first to walk down the middle of the iconic Oxford Street following its pedestrianisation.

For generations, shoppers have bustled along Oxford Street next to bikes, cars, black cabs and red double-decker buses. But on Monday, from Great Portland Street to Orchard Street, the road is now a pedestrian-only zone.

On Monday morning, by force of habit, most pedestrians are still sticking to the pavement. Mark Arbouine, a forensic scientist out for a stroll, is one of the few breaking ranks: “I saw there was no traffic today, so I thought, why not walk in the middle of the street and take advantage of it? I just think it’s great for the environment, great for shopping. It’s just so much easier to move around the street.”

This tiny strip of real estate is big business: about 1 percent of the UK’s annual gross domestic product (GDP) is generated along this 1km (0.6 miles) stretch of street. But despite its outsized importance, Oxford Street has in recent decades been hit by lower consumer spending, as well as falling rents and footfall, which is now just 57 percent of what it was in 2006, according to New West End Company, a retail trade body.

The Greater London Authority, also known as City Hall, believes pedestrianisation could, therefore, offer a lifeline.

City Hall analysis suggests the partial pedestrianisation of Oxford Street could generate more than $109m per year and support an additional 700 jobs. Following a weekend trial in October 2025, two-thirds of businesses in the area said they had higher or similar sales figures during the pedestrianisation.

This is the first step in a multi-phase regeneration project to add two public squares, 50 trees and hundreds of public seating.

Barbara Stoll, a leading campaigner on the benefits of greener, more walkable cities, was smiling as she observed the street. The air already feels cleaner, she noted.

“It’s amazing coming here this morning. Walking down the street, it was already so uplifting that the noise is considerably lower,” she said. “People are excited. I saw people coming up from the tube and looking around. Seeing that, it’s almost like children when it’s Christmas Day.

“So I think it’s absolutely wonderful, and so needed for London.”

Residents ‘haven’t really been listened to’

On Saturday, ahead of the change, not all shoppers were convinced. A French tourist said he would avoid Oxford Street altogether if buses and cabs were no longer allowed through.

“People with disabilities who cannot walk a lot – that would be really helpful if the buses move on and they don’t discontinue [them],” a shopper told Al Jazeera.

“It would be good. Sometimes you’re tired; sometimes it’s raining.”

The pedestrianisation of Oxford Street has been years in the making, and not without controversy.

London Mayor Sadiq Khan first tried it in 2017, following a manifesto pledge. But the plan fell apart in 2018, when Westminster Council – the local government authority responsible for Oxford Street at the time – withdrew its backing, saying residents did not support it.

Following a public consultation, Khan created the Oxford Street Development Corporation, taking responsibility for the street away from local officials and transferring it to the Greater London Authority and Transport for London.

With this second, successful attempt at pedestrianisation, doubts from local authorities have not gone away.

Residents are not being listened to, said Councillor Tim Barnes, the deputy leader and cabinet member for growth and planning for the City of Westminster.

“There has been a communication process with residents, but it’s been pretty much one way. Mostly, they are being told what’s going to happen to them and how it’s going to happen; what the format of the process is going to be in future. But realistically, those who know the street best haven’t really been listened to.”

He believes the economic benefits are overstated and do not consider the impact of displacing bus routes from a major road to the surrounding, smaller streets. That fear is shared by resident Nerma Cridge, who said London’s West End will become “completely unliveable, too crowded and too noisy at night”.

“We think all of this should be done in a much more productive relationship with communities,” she told Al Jazeera over the phone.

‘People just take back the space’

Concerns over the change will fade once residents see the real-world results in the coming months, Stoll believes.

“Examples from across Europe and the world, where such projects have already happened, prove that this only makes life better overall for local residents,” she said.

“Retail gets a boost. More people linger, more people come to the street, more people spend money in the shops, and even local shop vacancies reduce. The local air pollution significantly reduces, and as activity increases, people just take back the space.”

The Oxford Street Development Corporation will be testing and reviewing the results of the pedestrianisation in the coming months, and reviewing its findings early next year. Transitioning the rest of Oxford Street into a permanent, traffic-free public space is expected to go ahead by the end of next year.

Ahead of mayoral elections in 2028, the pedestrianisation could be one of the last major initiatives that Sadiq Khan signs off. A landmark project that will also become his legacy.

OpenAI’s announcement is the latest in a series of claimed scientific breakthroughs credited to AI.

OpenAI has announced that its AI models have made several scientific discoveries in mathematics, computer science and physics.

The AI giant said on Monday that the three new discoveries concerned the fields of harmonic analysis, complexity theory and quantum field theory.

Among the discoveries, AI models proved the local smoothing conjecture, one of the central propositions of harmonic analysis, in every spatial dimension for the first time, according to OpenAI.

Researchers in harmonic analysis, a branch of mathematics that studies how complex signals and functions can be broken down into elementary waves, had previously only proved the theory in three dimensions.

‘Historic development’

Alex Iosevich, a professor of mathematics at the University of Rochester who specialises in harmonic analysis, said OpenAI appeared to have “cracked” the conjecture in a “historic development”.

“The conjecture was formulated by my PhD adviser, Chris Sogge, so it is near and dear to my heart, and the news was a shock at first,” Iosevich told Al Jazeera.

“Now I am filled with joy and optimism, because the scientific enterprise as a whole is going to make giant leaps as a result of the AI revolution, and we have the chance to be a part of this historic development.”

Iosevich said he expected the field of theoretical mathematics to “change drastically” due to AI.

“I feel a twinge of sadness as a result,” Iosevich said.

“Many theoretical mathematicians I know feel the same way, but I firmly believe that these feelings will soon give way to the realisation that there is so much we can now accomplish.”

“Problems in pure mathematics did not arise in a vacuum,” he added. “Many of them came out of concrete physical considerations, and these connections can now be explored rapidly and decisively.”

According to OpenAI’s announcement, its models also disproved the Exponential Time Hypothesis, which relates to the time it takes to solve complex computational problems, and provided “mathematically rigorous [proof of the] existence” of quantum chromodynamics, which studies the interaction of quarks and gluons.

The ChatGPT creator said it had reached out to scientists outside the company to turn its “raw research data into scientific understanding”.

The San Francisco-based company said it decided on several different methods for releasing the findings based on consultations with three expert groups chosen to act as “shepherds”.

While the groups collaborating on the mathematics and computer science problems opted to make the AI-produced data public immediately, the physics group decided to defer the release in order to write up their own interpretation of the findings, OpenAI said.

“All of these approaches involve tradeoffs,” OpenAI said.

“On the one hand, the collaborations empower experts to foster unpacking the results and contextualizing them in the broader academic community,” the $852bn start-up said.

“On the other hand, choosing initial shepherds necessarily shapes who gets involved first and creates asymmetry of information. We welcome feedback on how to broaden participation and make this process more useful.”

OpenAI’s announcement is the latest in a series of claimed scientific breakthroughs credited to AI.

Last month, Claude creator Anthropic announced the discovery of a new enzyme said to resemble CRISPR, the groundbreaking gene editing mechanism used in treating conditions such as cancer and sickle cell disease.

Anthropic’s announcement drew mixed reactions among scientists.

While some researchers hailed the finding as an exciting development, others suggested that the AI company had exaggerated its significance.

Investors react to Lula’s election victory with a sharp decline in the Brazilian real and concerns over increased spending and fiscal challenges.

Brazil’s real dropped against the United States dollar on the heels of Brazil’s President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva’s unexpected re-election after right-wing Flavio Bolsonaro, the son of former President Jair Bolsonaro, led in the first round of voting earlier this month.

Brazil’s currency dropped against the dollar by 12 percent in spot trading. Bovespa stock index futures tumbled nearly 15 percent on Monday.

“I’m not surprised the real is sinking sharply; traders are covering their bets that assume a Bolsonaro victory and tighter fiscal policy,” Rachel Ziemba, adjunct senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security, told Al Jazeera.

Brazil’s stock exchange halted trading for 30 minutes. The Bovespa index fell 10 percent from its previous close, triggering a circuit-breaker safety mechanism and reversing a rally earlier this month amid expectations of a shift to the right after Bolsonaro won the first round.

Ziemba says Bolsonaro’s refusal to concede the election has driven some financial uncertainty.

“The market pressure is also amplified by the objections raised by Bolsonaro, but the scale of the victory suggests that the result will stand,” she said.

Interest rate futures had also reflected expectations that tighter fiscal policy under Bolsonaro would allow borrowing costs to decline.

“They [investors] assume more domestic spending and higher rates in Brazil. However, the real is still likely to be supported by strong commodity revenues,” Ziemba noted.

Stocks closed on Friday almost 7 percent above their level before the first round, while the Brazilian real was nearly 5 percent stronger against the US dollar.

Interest rate futures are up 3.1 percent, rising sharply after President Lula’s win. Interest rate futures had previously reflected a tighter fiscal policy amid expectations that Bolsonaro would oust the incumbent and that he would allow borrowing costs to decline.

Lula faces an increase in Brazil’s debt and will be challenged with protecting both social programmes and investment, with investors looking for signs of whether his gradual fiscal approach can bring borrowing costs down.

Lula’s team aims to produce a budget surplus of about 1.3 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) by 2030. That would leave money to cover part of the interest bill, reducing the need for fresh borrowing. But public debt already exceeds 82 percent of GDP, while pensions and other legally required spending limit where savings can come from.

“Lula’s policies have talked about spending cuts, but he has not gone into the details of how that is going to look,” said Divya Singaravelu, head of research at Meridian 1305 Capital.

Attention will now turn to Lula’s choice of finance minister and what it signals about his fiscal approach.

Back in Healey’s time under Gordon Brown, there was no OBR. Back then it was not unknown for late budget maths problems to be settled with an optimistic tweak of a forecast, a date change to the economic cycle, or choosing a stronger rate of long term growth.

The OBR’s verdict is crucial now – to what extent it agrees with projected welfare savings or even the importance it places on stronger GDP figures matters now.

The bigger point here is that the chancellor must be shocked by the contrast between the sheer power of the Brown Treasury to do what it wanted, and the reality of what he currently faces: the constraints of the OBR, manifesto red lines, bond markets, significant debts and an energy shock.

There are reasons to postpone some of the toughest decisions beyond this Budget, such as how to fund desired increases in spending on defence and social care. The economic outlook could improve were the Iran war to settle at some point in the next few months, and after revised statistics the OBR may also have cause to rethink last year’s downgrade to long term economic growth.

There is an imaginable pathway to a forecast next year with higher growth, lower inflation and lower debt interest costs, plausibly improving the public finance projections by tens of billions.

This would be a much more agreeable basis upon which to decide the pace of those big ticket spending rises. It also may be a tempting option for anyone thinking about an election. Former Treasury officials lament: “There is always a reason for procrastination.”

Expect the Chancellor to laud the resilience and strength of the UK economy and seek to sustain it, and spread growth geographically. His key judgement, however, will be a balance between extra financial and economic support and the peril of still elevated borrowing costs.

He will try to offer breathing space. It may be needed not just for households and families, but for the Exchequer itself.

Top image credit: Reuters/Getty Images

In late August, United States President Donald Trump announced a 90-day pause on certain beef tariffs, making beef cheaper to import, particularly from Brazil.

That decision was framed as a way to bring down prices for consumers, but it landed as a betrayal for many US ranchers, who were getting ready to take their cattle to market.

It is too soon to tell how the decision will ultimately affect grocery prices, but the impact on ranchers was immediate: prices at cattle auctions plummeted, temporarily lowering ranchers’ profits. The United States Cattlemen’s Association, the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association and the Farm Bureau, all member organisations that represent ranchers, opposed the decision.

Rural Republican members of Congress also distanced themselves, but it is not yet clear how ranchers will vote in the midterms — or whether those votes will decide races.

Chad Basinger, a rancher in Pretty Prairie, Kansas, is sceptical that the imports will have a significant impact.

“I know there’s people that have said, ‘Well I’m just gonna vote for the other party’ or ‘I’m not gonna vote’ or ‘This administration’s really let me down’. So yes, there will be people that swing the other way in the midterms. But overall I don’t think it’ll be that much,” Basinger said.

Ranchers will also be weighing the administration’s other actions, Basinger said, such as the $8bn in farm relief announced in Kansas on October 19.

Basinger’s House of Representatives district in Kansas is expected to remain safely Republican in the midterms. But Kansas faces an unexpectedly tight Senate race and ranchers in House districts elsewhere may find themselves closer to the political fray: potential swing districts in Montana, Iowa, Texas and Colorado are all in cattle country.

Still, it is unlikely that ranchers alone will decide elections: ranchers — along with farmers more broadly — represent a shrinking percentage of rural voters and a smaller voting bloc in practice than in the public imagination.

America’s cattle herd is near its smallest size since 1951 and the number of ranchers has declined alongside the number of livestock. Observers worry that ongoing uncertainty fuelled by tariffs, fuel prices and drought may cause the ranching population to shrink further.

David Anderson, an agricultural economist at Texas A&M University who advises ranchers, said that high prices this year should have given ranchers the confidence to invest in the future and expand their herds. Making imports cheaper, however, may have helped nudge ranchers in the opposite direction.

“It really works against the market signal to expand and produce more domestically,” Anderson said. “That got a lot of people pretty angry.”

Tariff changes add volatility

This is not the first time that Trump’s tariffs have impacted cattle supplies. Last year, the president added a 50 percent tariff on Brazil, a key trade partner for beef, raising the cost of importing Brazilian lean beef, which is often mixed with fatty US beef to make hamburger patties, a staple in most homes.

In February, Trump allowed more tariff-free beef imports from Argentina. In August, he did the same for Brazil and Paraguay.

Both tariff changes led to swift price swings in cattle futures markets, which are often volatile in response to the news cycle.

Cattle prices also moved this year in response to more fundamental drivers of supply and demand: plant closures by meatpackers, labour shortages late last month related to ICE actions at Kansas packing plants, the second-largest in the country, and the reopening of the southern border after a closure due to New World screwworm disease.

Big picture, the shrinking US cattle herd has less to do with short-term price changes and more to do with drought cycles, which are growing more intense as warming temperatures increase evaporation.

Still, tariff changes add uncertainty. “This has been a hot topic for the last six weeks,” said Anderson. “It just adds a little more uncertainty or volatility — or worries or stress.”

This year, extra price volatility as many ranchers prepared to sell meant ranchers faced lower profits and more risk.

Basinger says that for many established ranchers, the tariff announcement was frustrating, but not existential.

“People are upset. They have a right to be upset. But they’re not going to change their strategy,” he said. For most ranchers, Basinger said, the imports would not be the biggest factor shaping decisions about their herds this year.

Where price volatility may matter more, Basinger said, is for the next generation. Most of today’s ranchers are eyeing retirement. Their heirs must decide whether to make a go of ranching or sell their family’s land. Other aspiring ranchers are also watching the industry.

“If you’re seeing your dad not make money, or somebody else not make money…it’s not easy work!” Basinger said. “It has to be very enticing for somebody to want to jump in and be like, ‘I’m gonna be a rancher and go break ice in the middle of winter when it’s cold and I could be inside’.”

Record revenue and record costs

This year, low US cattle supplies meant that ranchers commanded record-high cattle prices, despite added imports and other market shifts.

But high revenue doesn’t always mean huge profits: Many ranchers operate at a loss for years in a row. Then, they rely on a few good years to pay down debts or expand their herds.

This year, profits were lower than hoped, because ranchers also faced high costs.

Interest rates on loans are high and the war with Iran meant ranchers paid extra for fuel and fertiliser. A drought across much of America’s ranchland meant they paid more for feed.

In states such as Kansas and Nebraska, ranchers also faced destructive wildfires and aid groups like Farm Rescue coordinated hay donations.

Still, Basinger said, ranchers who raise cows and calves generally did well this year. In Kansas, he is seeing ranchers use profits to make repairs and upgrades. He said this year’s high cattle prices have been helping. “But it needs to help for a little longer to give them more of an edge,” he said.

More of an edge might mean, for example, enough money for bigger purchases, like buying land from a neighbouring ranch to make room for a growing herd.

Rangeland, however, is increasingly expensive. When it is up for sale, outside investors can often pay more than ranchers, which can mean less land for cattle. That’s just one more pressure shrinking the US herd decade after decade.

Ranchers had hoped that 2026 would be a turnaround year. So far, however, “we really don’t have much evidence of herd expansion,” Anderson said.

Officers baton-charge demonstrators in overnight operation as activists demand government action on soaring rents and home shortages.

Police in Portugal have cleared a camp in central Lisbon set up to protest against the country’s deepening housing crisis, baton-charging demonstrators and making 25 arrests.

Dozens of officers, some with police dogs, moved in on the camp in Rossio Square shortly after 2am (02:00 GMT) on Sunday.

They had warned protesters that their tents would be dismantled if they were not removed, threatening disobedience charges for those who resisted.

Protesters had pitched more than 100 tents after Saturday’s protest march by thousands along one of Lisbon’s main avenues.

A smaller camp of about 50 tents was also dismantled in Porto’s Praca D Joao I public square, where police made six arrests.

Police said the operation was “proportionate” and that the 25 people arrested in Lisbon were later released and are due in court on Monday.

While police reported seven minor injuries among officers and protesters in the two operations, the activist group Casa para Viver (Homes to Live) said 60 people were hurt and called for a fresh protest outside parliament on Tuesday.

“Choosing the early hours of the morning to unleash dogs and baton-charge peaceful protesters is a political decision. It shows this government would rather repress those denouncing the housing crisis than address it,” the group said.

Home affordability crises

Portugal is grappling with one of Europe’s most acute home affordability crises, as prices have more than doubled since 2017 while rents for new leases have nearly doubled, with young people among the hardest hit.

Protesters say soaring rents and higher living costs are squeezing households and turning housing into a growing source of discontent.

The Bank of Portugal estimates a shortfall of 300,000 homes nationwide, equivalent to Lisbon’s entire housing stock.

The protesters are demanding that the government scrap a bill to make evictions easier and end rent caps on new leases, which passed a first parliamentary reading, although the far-right Chega party abstained.

The protests in Portugal echo recent demonstrations in Spain over home shortages and surging rents.

There have also been protests in cities including Paris, where small student demonstrations over school conditions broadened into wider protests against government economic policies.

WASHINGTON — In September, just weeks before Americans were set to vote in this year’s midterm elections, a sudden panic over the dangers posed by artificial intelligence caught the White House off guard. A whistleblower had gained viral attention warning the technology could soon pose an existential threat.

President Trump was quick to dismiss concerns, evoking urgency in the U.S. race to achieve global dominance in superintelligence. He rejected calls to negotiate guardrails on the most advanced AI models with China’s leader, Xi Jinping, weeks later, during a prime opportunity to do so in Washington.

Privately, the president expressed concern that public hysteria over AI could jolt markets that have become excessively concentrated in AI-related stocks. He had already seen fresh polling that showed widespread bipartisan opposition to the boom in construction of AI data centers, a push by Trump that has cannibalized chips and energy from other sectors of the economy, driving up costs.

Now, on the campaign trail in the final days before the vote, Trump is vowing to expand a “golden age” of prosperity through the end of his presidency. But experts say his policies on AI have set the U.S. economy up for a period of tremendous risk over the next two years.

Some of the world’s leading financiers are sounding increasingly alarmed about an AI bubble. Ray Dalio, founder of Bridgewater Associates, has warned that AI stocks have become detached from financial fundamentals, pushing markets to precarious highs. Ken Griffin, the world’s richest hedge fund owner, said last week that AI is “almost certainly” fueling a market bubble that could be on the verge of a burst.

Economists warn that Trump has overseen fiscal policy that would give the federal government fewer tools than it has had in the past to respond to a crisis.

“Trump could easily run into a financial crisis before his term is up,” said Kenneth Rogoff, an economist at Harvard. “It is entirely plausible to have a 30% — or more — drop in the stock market, and in the context of an economy so dependent on AI, this in turn could easily lead to a recession and widespread financial distress.”

Spending on data center infrastructure last winter and spring accounted for nearly all U.S. economic growth, according to independent analyses. Without it, growth would have slowed to a mere fraction of a percentage point, leaving the economy nearly stagnant and flirting with recession.

The Nasdaq 100 has about 70% of its index weight in companies that depend on AI, from semiconductor manufacturers and Big Tech giants to cloud platforms and software providers. Anthropic, one of the top AI industry leaders, plans an initial public offering next month, while its chief rival, OpenAI, expects to go public next year.

From left, Chris Painter, president of the Model Evaluation and Threat Research, Marius Hobbhahn, CEO of Apollo Research, Paul Ohm, professor of law at the Georgetown University Law Center, Kurt Gaudette, senior vice president of Dragos, and Daniel Kokotajlo, executive director of the AI Futures Project, are sworn in to the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on Disaster Management, District of Columbia, and Census hearing titled “Rogue AI: Securing the Homeland Against AI Agent Attacks,” in Dirksen Senate Office Building on Wednesday, September 30, 2026.

(Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

“Because government finances are already strained, with the national debt on a patently unsustainable trajectory, there is no guarantee of a sharp drop in long-term borrowing rates for the government,” Rogoff continued. “So the options for bailing out the financial sector, or fighting recession, could be much more constrained than during the global financial crisis.”

While doubling down on the promise of an untested, frontier technology, Trump’s other economic policies may be hobbling its growth. Tariffs have raised the costs of imported chips, servers, networking equipment, metals and electrical components, and visa restrictions have tied the hands of industry leaders trying to secure the world’s best talent. Runaway federal deficits have driven long-term bond interest rates, adding pressure on AI firms already strapped with debt.

Servaas Storm, an economist closely following the AI sector at the Delft University of Technology, said the industry is already facing severe financial headwinds that could precipitate a panic.

Prices for energy, chips and minerals are driving up the cost of doing business, while early AI adopters such as Microsoft, Meta and Walmart are scaling back its use as employees spend too much time correcting errors, cleaning up low-quality output and addressing security lapses.

Slower adoption could further complicate the search for revenue, particularly for companies already struggling to monetize the technology. For now, hyperscalers are shouldering the cost of financing frontier AI labs that, as Storm put it, “do not have a credible path to profitability.”

“There is indeed an AI bubble in the stock market and in data center construction, which could pop rather soon, as rising debt loads and elevated interest rates could prove too much to sustain it,” Storm said. “That moment is not imminent, but it is approaching — and it will very likely happen before the end of Trump’s presidency.”

An economy already under duress from Trump’s other economic policies — from tariffs and tax cuts to the Iran war — could precipitate further pain, said Darrell Duffie, a finance professor at the Stanford Graduate School of Business.

Leading AI companies are already running “day-after” drills in anticipation of an AI-related crisis within the next year, according to Axios.

Americans head into election day deeply pessimistic about the economy, with 77% rating it fair or poor, according to a Fox News poll. A separate CNBC survey found that just 34% approve of Trump’s handling of the economy, while 35% of Republicans disapprove — a record high within his own party.

Inflation has fallen sharply from its 9% peak in 2022, during a pandemic-era surge, reaching 2.9% by the end of Biden’s presidency. Under Trump, it has climbed once again to 3.7%, driven by rising energy, transportation and housing costs — among the top concerns for voters entering next month’s vote.

Persistent inflation has forced the Federal Reserve to keep interest rates elevated, squeezing borrowers. And those rates — paired with high government spending and concerns over mounting deficits — have pressured the bond market, pushing 10-year Treasury yields to levels not seen since the early 2000s.

“Financial crises, by their nature, are virtually impossible to predict,” Duffie said, asked whether he shared concerns of a potential AI bubble.

“If we know we are going to be in a crisis soon,” he added, “markets advance the crisis to now.”

Two years after United States voters delivered a stunning rebuke of the country’s Democratic Party by electing Republican President Donald Trump to a second nonconsecutive term, some of the party’s midterm candidates are reassessing stances on a host of hot-button issues.

Whether they have dialled it back on issues like transgender rights or ramped up efforts to oppose Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, Democrats in some of the toughest midterm battleground races are responding to voter concerns – or even breaking outright with party leadership.

Those shifts have resonated with some voters, while others have been alienated as the party tries to find its footing in Trump’s second term and wrestle away control of both houses of Congress from Republicans.

But in the time since Trump defeated former Vice President Kamala Harris in 2024, Democratic divisions have only grown deeper. Establishment and self-described moderates within the party have struggled to hold back a rising tide of progressive populism as voters increasingly demand stronger, bolder policies.

That movement, powered by groups like the Democratic Socialists of America, has forced a reckoning over what it means to be a Democrat in Trump’s second term, leading to significant differences among candidates on policies that often depend on where they are running.

Here’s how – and why – the party has shifted:

Democrats’ shifting views on Israel

The most notable shift among Democrats has, arguably, been on Israel.

Three years after Israel launched its genocidal war in Gaza and killed more than 74,000 Palestinians following Hamas’s October 7, 2023, attacks, polls have suggested that Americans hold increasingly negative views on Israeli military actions.

A Pew Research Center survey conducted earlier this year suggested that 60 percent of US adults had an unfavourable opinion of Israel. That number is significantly higher – 80 percent – among US Democrats.

In response, some longtime Democratic supporters of Israel – including Senator Chris Coons, who is likely to chair the Senate Foreign Relations Committee if Democrats retake control of the Senate next month – have shifted, as voters, especially younger ones, demand greater accountability from the US ally.

The moderate Delaware Democrat told Politico in an interview this month that he wants a “thorough reexamination” of the US-Israeli relationship and is even willing to impose sanctions on Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu.

It is a marked change in tone after Harris rejected calls to feature a Palestinian American speaker at the 2024 Democratic National Convention in Chicago.

Earlier this year, 40 Democratic senators voted in support of a motion that disapproved proposed military sales to Israel. Only seven Democratic senators voted with Republicans to block it.

But as a new Congress may include even more progressive voices demanding the US rethink its relationship with Israel, those calls would likely be met with stiff resistance from some in the Democratic leadership, including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.

The New York Democrat, who would likely become majority leader if Democrats retake the Senate, has said that the US “commitment to Israel’s security and defense must be ironclad”.

Have Democrats changed their positions on transgender rights?

Following years of attacks from Republicans, Democrats in tightly contested US House or Senate races have downplayed – or outright dismissed – support for the transgender community, mostly when it comes to the participation of transgender students in school sports.

In Ohio, Democratic Representative Marcy Kaptur ran an advertisement featuring her saying, “Boys should not play in girls’ sports”. And in North Carolina, Representative Don Davis released a television commercial in which the Democrat says there “should always be a safe and fair space for women and girls in sports”.

Next door in South Carolina, Democratic Senate candidate Annie Andrews, a doctor, said in a newly released advertisement that she opposes “biological men playing in women’s sports”.

Trump’s return to the White House was fuelled, in part, by a now-famous advertisement in the 2024 campaign that highlighted Harris’s support for transgender Americans.

“Kamala is for they/them,” a narrator said in the advertisement, referring to gender neutral pronouns used by some in the transgender and nonbinary community. “President Trump is for you.”

But the reassessment of transgender rights after the commercial’s airing is not taking place in every part of the party.

On Thursday at a “Students vs Billionaires” town hall in Portland, Maine, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez addressed concerns from a transgender college student who told the New York progressive that they felt “abandoned” by Democrats.

“They’re wrong”, Ocasio-Cortez said about some members of her party. “First and foremost, I want to just let you know how shameful and sorry I am that there are people out there that scare so easily after an election”.

The congresswoman added, “The moment you compromise the rights of a trans person in America, you compromise the rights of every citizen.”

What has changed on immigration and border security?

During former US President Joe Biden’s term, Democrats encountered near-daily attacks from Republicans on the country’s immigration system.

US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) recorded more than 8 million encounters at the US-Mexico border between 2021 and 2025, fuelling concerns among some voters that the Biden administration had ignored the issue.

In Texas’s closely watched Senate race, candidate James Talarico has positioned himself as a “border security Democrat”, advocating for stronger border enforcement and comprehensive immigration reform.

Third Way, a US-based organisation that pushes for moderate policies, said stances like Talarico’s resonate better with voters because they have taken a proactive, rather than a reactionary approach.

“I remember very clearly when Harris came out and spoke at the DNC in 2024; she… said we need order at the border and to have a strong immigration system”, Third Way’s senior political adviser, Lucas Holtz, told Al Jazeera.

“The problem is, after that, the Harris campaign really did not stick with that line in the sand… They stopped taking a stand on these issues, and more voters thought that she was too far to the left.”

“[Talarico] is making the case in a lot of his ads that the Biden administration failed on securing the border… It’s putting Republicans on their back foot in some of these races.”

But among progressives, Trump’s response to the nation’s immigration issue has also prompted a strong swing to the left.

After several high-profile incidents earlier this year – including federal immigration agents in Minneapolis, Minnesota, shooting dead US citizens Renee Good and Alex Pretti  – calls to abolish, or drastically overhaul, US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) have gained momentum.

Left-leaning political groups and politicians have united behind a message of “abolish ICE”, which would dismantle the federal agency and end its enforcement authority.

Do Democrats support Medicare for All?

As cost-of-living issues remain paramount for voters, Democrats of all stripes have coalesced behind the need for more government intervention in the country’s healthcare system.

But how exactly the party addresses rising medical costs remains up for debate.

Some progressives, including Michigan Democratic Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed, have championed policies like Medicare for All, which would expand the nation’s federal health insurance programme for seniors so all US citizens would be guaranteed healthcare.

Others running in more conservative states, like Andrews, have called for the return of Affordable Care Act subsidies that lapsed during Trump’s second term, as well as limits on health insurance companies’ profits.

Polling released by the independent health organisation KFF suggested that 66 percent of US adults now support Medicare for All, a 13-point increase from October 2020.

“Everybody’s going to have their own approach to this, but by and large, all Democrats want to move to a universal healthcare system in the best way possible”, Holtz said.

“We’re in agreement that we need to do better than what the Trump administration has done.”