measures

Russian President Vladimir Putin has told top Kremlin officials to draft proposals for the possible resumption of nuclear weapons testing, as Moscow responds to President Donald Trump’s order that the United States “immediately” resume its own testing after a decades-long hiatus.

The Russian leader told his Security Council on Wednesday that should the US or any signatory to the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) conduct nuclear weapons tests, “Russia would be under obligation to take reciprocal measures”, according to a transcript of the meeting published by the Kremlin.

“In this regard, I instruct the Foreign Ministry, the Defence Ministry, the special services, and the corresponding civilian agencies to do everything possible to gather additional information on this matter, have it analysed by the Security Council, and submit coordinated proposals on the possible first steps focusing on preparations for nuclear weapons tests,” Putin said.

Moscow has not carried out nuclear weapons tests since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. But tensions between the two countries with the world’s largest nuclear arsenals have spiked in recent weeks as Trump’s frustration with Putin grows over Russia’s failure to end its war in Ukraine.

The US leader cancelled a planned summit with Putin in Hungary in October, before imposing sanctions on two major Russian oil firms a day later – the first such measures since Trump returned to the White House in January.

Trump then said on October 30 that he had ordered the Department of Defense to “immediately” resume nuclear weapons testing on an “equal basis” with other nuclear-armed powers.

Trump’s decision came days after he criticised Moscow for testing its new Burevestnik missile, which is nuclear-powered and designed to carry a nuclear warhead.

According to the Kremlin transcript, Putin spoke with several senior officials in what appeared to be a semi-choreographed advisory session.

Defence Minister Andrei Belousov told Putin that Washington’s recent actions significantly raise “the level of military threat to Russia”, as he said that it was “imperative to maintain our nuclear forces at a level of readiness sufficient to inflict unacceptable damage”.

Belousov added that Russia’s Arctic testing site at Novaya Zemlya could host nuclear tests at short notice.

Valery Gerasimov, the Chief of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces, also cautioned that if Russia does not “take appropriate measures now, time and opportunities for a timely response to the actions of the United States will be lost”.

Following the meeting, state news agency TASS quoted Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov as saying that Putin had set no specific deadline for officials to draft the requested proposals.

“In order to come to a conclusion about the advisability of beginning preparations for such tests, it will take exactly as much time as it takes for us to fully understand the intentions of the United States of America,” Peskov said.

Russia and the US are by far the biggest nuclear powers globally in terms of the number of warheads they possess.

The Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation (CACNP) estimates that Moscow currently has 5,459 nuclear warheads, of which 1,600 are actively deployed.

The US has about 5,550 nuclear warheads, according to the CACNP, with about 3,800 of those active. At its peak in the mid-1960s during the Cold War, the US stockpile consisted of more than 31,000 active and inactive nuclear warheads.

China currently lags far behind, but has rapidly expanded its nuclear warhead stockpile to about 600 in recent years, adding about 100 per year since 2023, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.

France, Britain, India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea comprise the remaining nuclear-armed countries.

The US last exploded a nuclear device in 1992, after former Republican President George HW Bush issued a moratorium on nuclear weapons testing following the collapse of the Soviet Union a year earlier.

Since 1996, the year the CTBT was opened for signatures, only three countries have detonated nuclear devices.

India and Pakistan conducted tests in 1998. North Korea has carried out five explosive tests since 2006 – most recently in 2017 – making it the only country to do so in the 21st century.

Such blasts, regularly staged by nuclear powers during the Cold War, have devastating environmental consequences.

Trump has yet to clarify whether the resumption he ordered last week refers to nuclear-explosive testing or to flight testing of nuclear-capable missiles, which would see the National Nuclear Safety Administration test delivery systems without requiring explosions.

Security analysts say a resumption of nuclear-explosive testing by any of the world’s nuclear powers would be destabilising, as it would likely trigger a similar response by the others.

Andrey Baklitskiy, senior researcher at the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research, said that the Kremlin’s response was a prime example of the “action-reaction cycle”, in which a new nuclear arms race could be triggered.

“No one needs this, but we might get there regardless,” he posted on X.

Russian MOD Belousov suggests Russia should start to prepare for a full-scale nuclear test in response to the US statements. Action-reaction cycle at its best. No one needs this, but we might get there regardless

— Andrey Baklitskiy (@baklitskiy) November 5, 2025

China has accused the United States of “double standards” after US President Donald Trump threatened to impose an additional 100 percent tariff on Chinese goods in response to Beijing’s curbs on exports of rare earth minerals.

China says its export control measures announced last week were in response to the US restrictions on its entities and targeting of Beijing’s maritime, logistics and shipbuilding industries.

Trump’s tariff threats, which come weeks ahead of the likely meeting between the US president and his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping, have the potential to reignite a trade war months after Washington lowered the China tariffs from 125 to 30 percent.

The actions by the world’s two largest economies threaten to ignite a new trade war, adding further uncertainty to global trade. So what’s the recent history of US trade measures against China, and will the two countries be able to resolve their differences?

Why did China tighten export controls on rare earths?

On October 9, China expanded export controls to cover 12 out of 17 rare-earth metals and certain refining equipment, effective December 1, after accusing Washington of harming China’s interests and undermining “the atmosphere of bilateral economic and trade talks”.

China also placed restrictions on the export of specialist technological equipment used to refine rare-earth metals on Thursday.

Beijing justified its measures, accusing Washington of imposing a series of trade curbs on Chinese entities despite the two sides being engaged in trade talks, with the last one taking place in Madrid, Spain last month.

Foreign companies now need Beijing’s approval to export products containing Chinese rare earths, and must disclose their intended use. China said the heightened restrictions come as a result of national security interests.

China has a near monopoly over rare earths, critical for the manufacture of technology such as electric cars, smartphones, semiconductors and weapons.

The US is a major consumer of Chinese rare earths, which are crucial for the US defence industry.

At the end of this month, Trump and Xi are expected to meet in South Korea, and experts speculate that Beijing’s move was to gain bargaining advantage in trade negotiations with Washington.

China’s tightening of restrictions on rare earths is “pre-meeting choreography” before Trump’s meeting with Xi, Kristin Vekasi, the Mansfield chair of Japan and Indo-Pacific Affairs at the University of Montana, told Al Jazeera.

How did Trump respond?

On October 10, Trump announced the imposition of a 100 percent tariff on China, effective from November 1.

“Based on the fact that China has taken this unprecedented position … the United States of America will impose a Tariff of 100 percent on China, over and above any Tariff that they are currently paying,” Trump wrote in a post on his Truth Social platform.

He added that this would come into effect on November 1 or before that. Trump added that the US would also impose export controls on “any and all critical software”.

Earlier on October 10, Trump accused China of “trade hostility” and even said he might scrap his meeting with Xi. It is unclear at this point whether the meeting will take place.

“What the United States has is we have a lot of leverage, and my hope, and I know the president’s hope, is that we don’t have to use that leverage,” US Vice President JD Vance told Fox News on Sunday.

How did China respond to that?

China deemed the US retaliation a “double standard”, according to remarks by the Chinese Ministry of Commerce spokesperson on Sunday.

China said that Washington had “overstretched the concept of national security, abused export control measures” and “adopted discriminatory practices against China”.

“We are living in an era of deeper intertwining of security and economic policies. Both the US and China have expanded their conceptions of national security, encompassing a range of economic activities,” Manoj Kewalramani, chairperson of the Indo-Pacific Studies Programme at the Takshashila Institution in Bangalore, India, told Al Jazeera.

“Both have also weaponised economic interdependence with each other and third parties. There are, in other words, no saints in this game.”

Kewalramani said that China started expanding the idea of “national security” much earlier than others, especially with its “comprehensive national security concept” introduced in 2014.

Through this, China began to include many different areas, such as economics, technology, and society, under the term “national security”. This shows that China was ahead of other countries in broadening what counts as a national security issue.

China threatened additional measures if Trump went ahead with his pledge.

“Willful threats of high tariffs are not the right way to get along with China. China’s position on the trade war is consistent: we do not want it, but we are not afraid of it,” the Chinese Commerce Ministry spokesperson said in a statement.

“Should the US persist in its course, China will resolutely take corresponding measures to safeguard its legitimate rights and interests,” the statement said.

What trade measures has the US taken against China in recent history?

2025: Trump unleashes tariff war

A month after taking office for his second term, Trump signed an executive order imposing a 10 percent tariff on all imports from China, citing a trade deficit in favour of China. In this order, he also imposed tariffs on Mexico and Canada. China levied countermeasures, imposing duties on US products in retaliation.

In March, the US president doubled the tariff on all Chinese products to 20 percent as of March 4. China imposed a 15 percent tariff on a range of US farm exports in retaliation; these took effect on March 10.

Trump announced his “reciprocal tariffs,” imposing a 34 percent tariff on Chinese products. China retaliated, also announcing a 34 percent tariff on US products. This was the first time China announced export controls on rare earths.

Hours after the reciprocal tariffs went into effect, Trump paused them for all his tariff targets except China. The US and China continued to hike tit-for-tat levies on each other.

Trump slapped 145 percent tariffs on Chinese imports, prompting China to hit back with 125 percent tariffs. Washington and Beijing later cut tariffs to 30 percent and 10 percent, respectively, in May, then agreed to a 90-day truce in August for trade talks. The truce has been extended twice.

December 2024: The microchip controls are tightened

In December 2024, Trump’s predecessor, former US President Joe Biden, tightened controls on the sale of microchips first introduced on October 2022.

Under the new controls, 140 companies from China, Japan, South Korea and Singapore were added to a list of restricted entities. The US also banned more advanced chip-making equipment to certain countries. Even products manufactured abroad with US technology were restricted.

April 2024: Biden signs the TikTok ban

Biden signed a bill into law that would ban TikTok unless it was sold to a non-Chinese buyer within a year. The US government alleged that TikTok’s Chinese parent company ByteDance was linked to the Chinese government, making the app a threat to national security.

ByteDance sued the US federal government over this bill in May 2024.

In September this year, Trump announced that a deal was finalised to find a new owner of TikTok.

October 2023: Biden introduces more restrictions on chips

In October 2023, Biden restricted US exports of advanced computer chips, especially those made by Nvidia, to China and other countries.

The goal of this measure was to limit China’s access to “advanced semiconductors that could fuel breakthroughs in artificial intelligence and sophisticated computers that are critical to [Chinese] military applications,” Gina Raimondo, who was secretary of the US Department of Commerce during the Biden administration, told reporters.

Prior to this, Biden signed an executive order in August 2023, creating a programme that limits US investments in certain high-tech areas, including semiconductors, quantum computing, and artificial intelligence, in countries deemed to be a security risk, like China.

October 2022: Biden restricts Chinese access to semiconductors

Biden restricted China’s access to US semiconductors in October 2022. The rules further expanded restrictions on chipmaking tools to include industries that support the semiconductor supply chain, blocking both access to American expertise and the essential components used in manufacturing the tools that produce microchips.

Semiconductors are used in the manufacturing of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies. The US government placed these restrictions back then to limit China’s ability to acquire the ability to produce semiconductors and advance in the technological race.

The restrictions made it compulsory for entities within China to apply for licences to acquire American semiconductors. Analysis by the US-based Carnegie Endowment for International Peace described these licences as “hard to get” back then.

Recently, some US lawmakers are calling for even more restrictions, warning that China could quickly reverse-engineer advanced semiconductor technologies on its own, outpace the US in the sector, and gain a military edge.

May 2020: Trump cracks down on Huawei

In May 2020, the US Bureau of Industry and Security intensified rules to stop Huawei, the Chinese tech giant, from using American technology and software to design and make semiconductors in other countries.

The new rules said that semiconductors are designed for Huawei using US technology or equipment, anywhere in the world, would need US government approval before being sent to Huawei.

May 2019: Trump bans Huawei

Trump signed an executive order blocking Chinese telecommunications companies like Huawei from selling equipment in the US. The Shenzhen-based Huawei is the world’s largest provider of 5G networks, according to analysis by the New York City-based think tank the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).

Under this order, Huawei and 114 related entities were added to a list that requires US companies to get special permission (a licence) before selling certain technologies to them.

The rationale behind this order was the allegation that Huawei threatened US national security, had stolen intellectual property and could commit cyber espionage. Some US lawmakers alleged that the Chinese government was using Huawei to spy on Americans. The US did not publicise any evidence to back these allegations.

Other Western countries had also cooperated with the US.

March 2018: Trump imposes tariffs on China

During his first administration, Trump imposed sweeping 25 percent tariffs on Chinese goods worth as much as $60bn. In June of 2018, Trump announced more tariffs.

China retaliated by imposing tariffs on US products. Beijing deemed Trump’s trade policies “trade bullyism practices”, according to an official white paper, as reported by Xinhua news agency.

In September 2018, Trump issued another round of 10 percent tariffs on Chinese products, which were hiked to 25 percent in May 2019.

During the Obama administration (2009-2017)

In 2011, during US President Barack Obama’s tenure, the US-China trade deficit reached an all-time high of $295.5bn, up from $273.1bn in the previous year.

In March 2012, the US, European Union, and Japan formally complained to China at the World Trade Organization (WTO) about China’s limits on selling rare earth metals to other countries. This move was deemed “rash and unfair” by China.

In its ruling, the world trade body said China’s export restraints were breaching the WTO rules.

In 2014, the US indicted five Chinese nationals with alleged ties to China’s People’s Liberation Army. They were charged with stealing trade technology from American companies.

What’s next for the US-China trade war?

Trump and Xi are expected to meet in South Korea on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), which is set to begin on October 31.

But the latest trade dispute has clouded the Xi-Trump meeting.

On Sunday, Trump posted on his Truth Social platform, downplaying the threat: “Don’t worry about China, it will all be fine! Highly respected President Xi just had a bad moment. He doesn’t want Depression for his country, and neither do I. The U.S.A. wants to help China, not hurt it!!!”

In an interview with Fox Business Network on Monday, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said, “President Trump said that the tariffs would not go into effect until November 1. He will be meeting with [Communist] Party Chair Xi in [South] Korea. I believe that meeting will still be on.”

When it comes to which of the two players is more affected by the trade war, Kewalramani said that he thinks “what matters is who is willing to bear greater pain, endure greater cost”.

“This is the crucial question. I would wager that Beijing is probably better placed because Washington has alienated allies and partners with its policies since January. But then, China’s growing export controls are not simply aimed at the US. They impact every country. So Beijing has not also endeared itself to anyone,” Kewalramani said, pointing out how Trump’s tariffs and China’s rare earth restrictions target multiple countries.

“The ones affected the most are countries caught in the midst of great power competition.”

On Sunday, US VP Vance told Fox News about China: “If they respond in a highly aggressive manner, I guarantee you, the president of the United States has far more cards than the People’s Republic of China.”

Kewalramani said that so far, Beijing has been more organised, prepared and strategic than the US in its policies.

“That said, it has overreached with the latest round of export controls. US policy, meanwhile, has lacked strategic coherence. The US still is the dominant global power and has several cards to play. What matters, however, is whether it can get its house in order.”

Kim Jong Un says Pyongyang will counter the buildup of US forces in the Korean Peninsula.

North Korean leader Kim Jong Un has pledged to develop additional military measures and allocate more strategic assets to respond to the buildup of US forces in the south, as the country prepares for a major anniversary parade.

“In direct proportion to the buildup of US forces in [South] Korea, our strategic interest in the region has also increased, and we have accordingly allocated special assets to key targets of interest,” Kim was quoted in a report published by the state media KCNA on Sunday.

Kim’s latest statement comes just days after South Korea reported that Pyongyang has accumulated large quantities of highly-enriched and weapons-grade uranium, signalling a sharp increase in the country’s stockpile of nuclear material.

“I believe our enemies should be concerned about the direction their security environment is evolving,” Kim said at a military exhibition event ahead of the parade.

North Korea “will undoubtedly develop additional military measures” to prepare to respond to the buildup of US forces, he added without elaborating further.

In recent weeks, Kim had directed top officials to strengthen the nation’s “nuclear shield and sword”, saying only a “nuclear counteraction” could safeguard his country’s security.

On Friday, October 10, Kim is set to lead a large-scale military parade to celebrate the 80th anniversary of the ruling Workers’ Party of Korea. At this event, the country is also expected to display its latest weaponry and other military hardware.

South Korea’s Yonhap news agency quoted analysts as saying that Pyongyang may showcase the next-generation Hwasong-20 intercontinental ballistic missile during the parade.

It added that North Korea could also test-launch the same weaponry around the date leading to the anniversary.

Yonhap quoted South Korea’s military as saying “there are signs” that Pyongyang is preparing to welcome tens of thousands of people at the parade, which will be held on the night of October 10.

South Korea stated that it has also detected movements of vehicles and some military equipment, but did not provide further details.

Kim has maintained a hardline rhetoric towards South Korea and its close ally, the United States, despite signs of diplomatic outreach from US President Donald Trump and Seoul.

South Korea’s President Lee Jae-myung, who took office in June, has also promised a more dovish approach towards Pyongyang compared with his hawkish predecessor, Yoon Suk-yeol.

North Korea has also been tightening military ties with Russia and has been supporting Russian President Vladimir Putin’s war in Ukraine by sending troops and artillery.

Kim has also been deepening alignment with China and recently travelled to Beijing to attend a military parade marking the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II, alongside Chinese leader Xi Jinping and Putin.

ADVERTISEMENT

The steel sector raised the alarm on Wednesday over the fate of Europe’s steel jobs due to the dual impact of Chinese surplus entering the EU market and punitive US tariffs targeting European steel production.

“Europeans have to do something. They have to find strong answers against these overcapacities because if they don’t we will lose all our jobs and all our confidence,” Manuel Bloemers, from the powerful German union IG Metall, told Euronews.

“In Germany, the steel industry is heavily impacted from these imports. Thyssenkrupp has a lot of layoffs planned,” he added.

European Commission Vice-President Stéphane Séjourné convened an emergency summit in Brussels with both steel industry leaders and unions to explore urgent solutions.

The European steel industry currently supports around 2.5 million direct and indirect jobs across the EU, with Germany, Italy and France being the main producers in 2024, according to data by EUROFER, a lobby that represents Europe’s leading steel producers.

Thyssenkrupp Steel alone has announced plans to cut up to 11,000 jobs — around 40% of its German workforce — by 2030. Across Europe, thousands of jobs are also under threat at ArcelorMittal, the world’s second-largest steel producer.

The past year was a challenging one for the sector, which saw a loss of 18,000 jobs in the EU, according to IndustriAll, the European steel union.

The situation may worsen with the new trade policy implemented by US President Donald Trump, industry representatives believe.

Since June, the US has imposed 50% tariffs on steel imports and an influx of heavily subsidised Chinese steel is diverted from the US to the EU market, lowering prices and revenues of the EU industry.

EUROFER has called for measures to slash foreign steel imports by half.

“The big risks we have as Europeans is that not only our exports into the US are being limited, but also the imports which are directed to the US usually are landing in an unprotected Europe,” Henrik Adam, president of EUROFER said.

After weeks of transatlantic trade tensions, the EU and the US reached a trade deal in July, which includes a 15% US tariff on all EU imports, while maintaining 50% tariffs on steel and aluminium — a bitter setback for the sector.

The Commission has told Euronews it will unveil new measures of protection for the market at next week’s European Parliament plenary session in Strasbourg.

‘Time is running out’

“Time is running out,” warned German MEP Jens Geier (S&D), describing the outlook as “anxious” for workers across the continent.

“This is a worthwhile timely initiative by the commission to propose this defence instruments since we all are eager to see action from the Commission,” the MEP said.

To respond to the crisis, the steel industry is proposing a tariff rate quota system: imports above a certain threshold would be subject to a 50% tariff. The threshold remains to be determined.

The quota aligns with a proposal launched in July by France, backed by 10 other EU member states, which notes that the new system “must apply to all third countries without exception.”

Since 2019, the European Commission has implemented safeguard measures to limit imports of foreign steel. However, those are set to expire in 2026, and EUROFER argues the current rules have already proven insufficient, with foreign steel imports doubling over that period.

The OECD published data in April showing that global steel overcapacities stood at 600 million tonnes in 2023 and are expected to rise to 720 million tonnes next year.

To stand its ground, the EU hopes the US will agree to lower its tariffs.

Negotiations between Brussels and Washington are expected to resume once the Commission has finalised its approach to protecting the sector.

The White House will then assess what it is willing to grant the Europeans. But talks are expected to be difficult, as Trump is pushing to bring production capacity back to US soil.

“Our steel and aluminum industries are coming back like never before. This will be yet another big jolt of great news for our wonderful steel and aluminum workers. Make America great again,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform in May.

The US on Wednesday announced new sanctions on dozens of individuals and entities tied to Iran’s nuclear and weapons programs, in support of the recent “snapback” sanctions by the UN on Tehran, Anadolu reports.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a statement that 44 individuals and entities have been designated, including five people and one entity allegedly linked to Iran’s Organization of Defensive Innovation and Research (SPND), which he described as the successor to Iran’s pre-2004 nuclear weapons program.

The US also imposed additional export restrictions on 26 entities and three procurement-linked addresses.

“These actions highlight the importance of the September 27 re-imposition of sanctions and other restrictions on Iran pursuant to multiple UN Security Council resolutions,” Rubio said. “We will not hesitate to hold accountable anyone who supports Tehran’s proliferation activities.”

The measures come after France, Germany and the UK invoked a “snapback” mechanism under UN Security Council Resolution 2231, restoring sanctions that had been suspended since the 2015 nuclear deal.

READ: Iran slams reimposition of UN sanctions, accuses Europeans of abusing nuclear deal

Iran’s president has urged Muslim nations to sever ties with Israel – although it remains unclear whether the summit’s measures will go that far.

Doha, Qatar – Foreign dignitaries from across the Arab and Muslim world have gathered in Doha, and observers are expecting them to deliver a decisive response to Israel after its attack on Qatar.

The emergency summit of the Arab League and Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) opens on Monday, a day after foreign ministers from the participating states met behind closed doors in Doha to hammer out a draft resolution proposing concrete measures against Israel.

Fury has swept across the region since Israel’s strikes on Tuesday, which killed five Hamas members and a Qatari security officer, missing a Hamas negotiation team that was meeting in Doha to weigh a United States proposal to end Israel’s genocidal two-year war on Gaza.

At the session on Sunday, Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al Thani slammed Israel’s attack, noting that he had regional support for taking measures to protect Qatar’s sovereignty.

“We appreciate the solidarity of brotherly Arab and Islamic countries and friendly countries from the international community that condemned this barbaric Israeli attack,” Mohammed said, adding that Qatar intended to take “legitimate legal measures … to preserve the sovereignty of our country”.

Possible avenues of action

Pakistani Foreign Minister Mohammad Ishaq Dar underlined the importance of the summit reaching a “clear roadmap … to deal with this situation”, telling Al Jazeera’s Osama Bin Javaid that the world’s Muslims “would be all eyeing this summit, waiting to see what comes out of it”.

Two days after the Israeli attack on Doha, Pakistani Defence Minister Muhammad Asif warned that firm action was required in response to Israel and no country should think it would remain untouched by the Gaza war.

Speaking to Bin Javaid, Ishaq Dar echoed the sentiment, criticising the lack of results from United Nations Security Council discussions.

Asked what practical measures could be pursued, he said: “I think they’ve [Arab countries] already talked on these lines. It’s a sort of combined security force type,” adding, “A nuclear-powered Pakistan obviously would stand as a member of the Ummah [community of Muslim believers]. It will discharge its duty.”

For his part, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian called on Muslim nations to sever ties with Israel.

“Islamic countries can sever ties with this fake regime and maintain unity and cohesion,” Pezeshkian said before departing for Doha, adding that he hoped for a decision on measures against Israel.

Some analysts said the summit, which ends on Monday evening, could yield concrete measures against Israel for the first time.

SACRAMENTO — In a bid to stabilize struggling crude-oil refineries, state lawmakers on Saturday passed a last-minute bill that would allow the construction of 2,000 new oil wells annually in the San Joaquin Valley while further restricting drilling along California’s iconic coastline.

The measure, Senate Bill 237, was part of a deal on climate and environmental issues brokered behind closed doors by Gov. Gavin Newsom, state Senate President Pro Tem Mike McGuire (D-Healdsburg) and Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas (D-Hollister). The agreement aims to address growing concerns about affordability, primarily the price of gas, and the planned closure of two of the state’s 13 refineries.

California has enough refining capacity to meet demand right now, industry experts say, but the closures could reduce the state’s refining capacity by about 20% and lead to more volatile gas prices.

Democrats on Saturday framed the vote as a bitter but necessary pill to stabilize the energy market in the short term, even as the state pushes forward with the transition from fossil fuels to clean energy.

McGuire called the bills the “most impactful affordability, climate and energy packages in our state’s history.”

“We continue to chart the future, and these bills will put more money in the pockets of hard-working Californians and keep our air clean, all while powering our transition to a more sustainable economy,” McGuire said.

The planned April 2026 closure of Valero’s refinery in Benicia will lead to a loss of $1.6 billion in wages and drag down local government budgets, said Assemblymember Lori D. Wilson (D-Suisun City), who represents the area and co-authored SB 237.

Wilson acknowledged that the bill won’t help the Benicia refinery, but said that “directly increasing domestic production of crude oil and lowering our reliance on imports will help stabilize the market — it will help create and save jobs.”

Crude oil production in California is declining at an annualized rate of about 15%, about 50% faster than the state’s most aggressive forecast for a decline in demand for gasoline, analysts said this week.

The bill that lawmakers approved Saturday would grant statutory approval for up to 2,000 new wells per year in Kern County, the heart of California oil country.

That legislative fix, effective through 2036, would in effect circumvent a decade of legal challenges by environmental groups seeking to stymie drilling in the county that produces about three-fourths of the state’s crude oil.

“Kern County knows how to produce energy,” said state Sen. Shannon Grove (R-Bakersfield). “We produce 80% of California’s oil, if allowed, 70% of the state’s wind and solar, and over 80% of the in-state battery storage capacity. We are the experts. We are not the enemy. We can help secure energy affordability for all Californians while enjoying the benefits of increased jobs and economic prosperity.”

Environmentalists have fumed over that trade-off and over a provision that would allow the governor to suspend the state’s summer-blend gasoline fuel standards, which reduce auto emissions but drive up costs at the pump, if prices spike for more than 30 days or if it seems likely that they will.

Some progressive Democrats voted against the bill, including Assemblymember Alex Lee (D-San José), the chair of the Legislative Progressive Caucus. The bill, Lee said, was a “regulatory giveaway to Big Oil” that would do little to stabilize gas prices or refineries, which are struggling because demand for oil is falling.

“We need to continue to focus on the future, not the past,” Lee said.

The bill also would make offshore drilling more difficult by tightening the safety and regulatory requirements for pipelines.

Lawmakers also voted to extend cap-and-trade, an ambitious climate program that sets limits on greenhouse gas emissions and allows large polluters to buy and sell unused emission allowances at quarterly auctions. Lawmakers signed off on a 15-year extension of the program, which has been renamed “cap and invest,” through 2045.

The program is seen as crucial for California to comply with its climate goals — including reaching carbon neutrality by 2045 — and also brings in billions in revenue that helps fund climate efforts, including high-speed rail and safe drinking water programs.

Also included in the package was AB 825, which creates a pathway for California to participate in a regional electricity market. If passed, the bill would expand the state’s ability to buy and sell clean power with other Western states in a move that supporters say will improve grid reliability and save money for ratepayers.

Opponents fear that California could yield control of its power grid to out-of-state authorities, including the federal government.

Holidaymakers have been warned against a new ‘hacking’ crime which is particularly rife during the summer months – and can lead to theft ‘within minutes’

The festive season may be in full swing, but it’s also a prime time for scammers to strike, particularly targeting travellers and commuters when they’re distracted.

Con artists are using a particularly sneaky tactic: swiping mobile phones and then convincing network providers to switch the number to a new SIM card they control, allowing them to intercept vital calls and texts, including one-time passcodes used for two-factor authentication. This gives them unparalleled access to everything from bank accounts to cryptocurrency wallets.

Ryan Sweetnam, Director of Crypto Fraud and Financial Litigation at CEL Solicitors, raised the alarm, saying: “SIM swap fraud is one of the fastest-growing cyber threats we’re seeing, particularly affecting people when they’re more relaxed.

“This can be whilst you’re walking around town, to the tube, bus or just along the street, or even when you’re on holiday, be it in the UK or abroad.”

READ MORE: Man, 23, took own life after £10k scam left him ‘stressed and embarrassed’READ MORE: Drug gangs ‘grooming’ young Brits with proven tactic as they flock to ‘booming’ Golden Triangle

He added: “Once a scammer has your phone they can potentially access your banking and crypto accounts within minutes.

“Holidaymakers are often easy targets, with many admitting they don’t regularly monitor their financial accounts while overseas. That, coupled with the use of unsecured public Wi-Fi and international roaming, creates the ideal conditions for these high-tech thieves,” he said.

Mr Sweetnam issued a stark warning about the silent nature of financial crime, cautioning: “The real danger is that people don’t always notice what’s happened until it’s too late.

“You might not see missing funds for hours or even days, giving criminals a huge head start.”, reports the Express.

He further highlighted the risks associated with modern technology, stating: “Even those who have their phones stolen out of their hands will quickly report the theft to law enforcement or their banks, but with the growing number of people with access to stocks, shares and cryptocurrencies on their phones, this is often forgotten until it’s too late.”

In response to these dangers, specialists at CEL Solicitors are calling on Britons to adopt a set of five vital safety measures to safeguard against such crimes:

• Beware of unsolicited requests for information: Never share personal data such as your date of birth, address or account details in response to texts, emails or phone calls—even if they appear to be from your bank or mobile provider.
• Ditch SMS authentication: Opt for app-based two-factor authentication instead. Unlike SMS, these apps don’t rely on your phone number, making them far more secure.
• Keep tabs on your accounts while abroad: Regularly check your banking and crypto platforms for any suspicious activity.
• Strengthen your digital defences: Use robust, unique passwords and consider a password manager. Also, update your security questions to make them harder to guess.
• Act fast if your phone loses signal unexpectedly: This could be an early sign your number has been transferred without your knowledge. Contact your mobile provider and bank immediately.

With cybercriminals becoming increasingly cunning, Mr Sweetnam says vigilance is vital—especially during the holiday season:

“Staying informed, especially when you’re out of your usual routine, is essential. Fraud can happen to anyone but preparation can make all the difference.”

Four months after the San Bernardino mass shooting, state lawmakers on Tuesday gave initial approval to five gun control bills, including measures that would outlaw assault rifles with detachable magazines, ban possession of clips holding more than 10 rounds and require homemade guns to be registered with the state.

The bills approved by the state Senate Public Safety Committee were introduced in response to the December shooting in San Bernardino that left 14 people dead and 22 others wounded at the hands of two terrorists.

One of the measures the panel sent toward the Senate floor would outlaw assault rifles with easily detachable bullet magazines like one of the weapons used in the mass shooting in San Bernardino.

The bill prohibits the sale of semiautomatic, centerfire rifles with a “bullet button,” a recessed button that, when pressed, allows removal of the magazine. Those who already own them must register them with the state as assault rifles.

Democratic state Sens. Isadore Hall of Compton and Steve Glazer of Orinda introduced the measure, SB 880, in response to the discovery of a gun with a bullet button that was in the possession of the San Bernardino terrorists.

“These weapons of war don’t belong in our communities,” Glazer told the Senate panel before it approved the measure he coauthored with Hall.

Hall said there is an urgent need to close a loophole in the law that bans assault weapons.

“For years, gun owners have been able to circumvent California’s assault weapons law by using a small tool to quickly eject and reload an ammunition magazine,” Hall said.

The measure is opposed by gun owner rights groups including the National Rifle Assn., according to its lobbyist, Ed Worley.

“We continue to oppose banning guns for citizens who have no criminal background,” Worley told the panel. “People should be able to own any kind of gun they want to own in the United States of America.”

The Senate panel also approved a bill by Sen. Loni Hancock (D-Berkeley) that would ban the possession of ammunition magazines holding more than 10 rounds, closing a loophole in a law that already prohibits their manufacture and sale in California.

Hancock noted that four large-capacity magazines were found among the weapons of the two shooters in San Bernardino. Since 1980, 435 people have been killed in 50 mass shootings involving large-capacity magazines, some of which can hold 100 rounds of ammunition, she said.

The magazines have already been banned in Los Angeles and San Francisco.

“By banning these weapons statewide we would be taking a step to preventing future mass shootings and creating safer communities in California,” Hancock told the Senate panel.

Republican Sen. Jeff Stone voted against the bill.

“Today we want to make criminals out of law-abiding citizens who have been collecting guns,” Stone said.

————

FOR THE RECORD

April 20, 11:35 a.m.: An earlier version of this story mistakenly attributed a quote to Sen. John Moorlach. The statement was from Sen. Jeff Stone.

————

The measure was also opposed by others including Worley and Sam Paredes, the executive director of Gun Owners of California, who said millions of large-capacity clips are already in the hands of Californians.

“Here we are trying to confiscate people’s property,” Worley told the panel.

Paredes said many law enforcement officers are given large-capacity magazines.

“That is what they may need to protect themselves,” Paredes said. “Why should it be any different for a law-abiding citizen?”

The Senate committee also approved a bill that would allow the state to collect information on those who buy ammunition for firearms. An earlier law that would have required bullet purchasers to provide identification and a thumbprint was struck down by a court in 2010 on the grounds that its definition of handgun ammunition was vague.

That case is on appeal to the state Supreme Court.

The new bill by Senate President Pro Tem Kevin De León (D-Los Angeles), SB 1235, would clarify that the previous law applies to all ammunition, including bullets for long guns and handguns as well as shotgun shells, which he hopes will address the lower court’s concerns.

The panel also approved a bill requiring those who build guns at home to register them with the state, get a serial number and undergo a criminal background check.

“These firearms are called ‘ghost guns’ because they are built at home … with no serial numbers or background checks involved,” De León told the panel before it approved the bill on a 5-3 party-line vote. “These are weapons that have the ability to kill or maim a human being.”

Hundreds of ghost guns have been seized in California, and they have been used in major crimes, including a mass shooting in 2013. The measure is backed by the California Police Chiefs Assn.

See more of our top stories on Facebook >>

“Gun-smithing has become easier than putting together Ikea furniture because of the 3-D printer,” said Chief Jennifer G. Tejada of the Emeryville Police Department. “This bill will decrease the number of untraceable firearms in California.”

The measure is opposed by groups including the NRA and Gun Owners of California.

“We’re going to take hobbyists who enjoy making guns and we’re going to make them criminals,” Worley said.

The panel also approved measures that would require firearms owners to report lost or stolen guns to authorities within five days and another to create a gun violence prevention research center at a University of California system campus.

Meanwhile, a bill that would have required all gun sales to be videotaped failed to pass an Assembly committee on Tuesday.

[email protected]

Follow @mcgreevy99 on Twitter

ALSO

Are you an independent voter? You aren’t if you checked this box

Los Angeles Times wins Pulitzer for San Bernardino terrorist attack coverage

Updates from Sacramento