Top World News

Health minister says government ‘did not authorize’ Danish-led hepatitis B trial in babies backed by RFK JrGuinea-Bissau has not approved the controversial hepatitis B study in newborns that would be funded by the US government and private partners, the African country’s minister of health said on Tuesday.The study, which would not investigate the safety or effectiveness of vaccines but would instead track “nonspecific” health outcomes like overall mortality or neurodevelopmental conditions, has been championed by Robert F Kennedy Jr, secretary of the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and a longtime anti-vaccine activist. Continue reading...

Outrage poured in Wednesday after Elon Musk’s SpaceX abruptly limited Starlink services in Ukraine, jeopardizing Ukrainian combat drone missions without warning, while critics suspected President Donald Trump may have been behind the mysterious move.Serhiy Beskrestnov, an adviser to Ukraine’s defense minister, said Ukrainian defense forces “did not receive a warning” about the abrupt limitation to Starlink services, which have helped guide their longer-range drone strikes, Reuters reported. Furthermore, he suspected the disruption was connected to Trump’s ongoing spat with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, which has flared up in recent days.Trump has increasingly pressed Zelenskyy to give up territory to Russia as part of an agreement to end the Russo-Ukraine war. Zelenskyy has responded with defiance, drawing a threat from Trump to cut Ukraine off from U.S. intelligence. Trump has also demanded that both Ukraine and Russia halt attacks on energy infrastructure, a demand that has repeatedly gone ignored by both parties.“It’s clear that this action cannot be a coincidence and is connected to the current political situation,” Beskrestnov said Wednesday, The Guardian reported.Beskrestnov wasn’t the only notable figure connecting the Starlink disruption to Trump. Serhii Sternenko, a prominent Ukrainian military adviser and activist, said SpaceX “likely took these measures at the request of the Trump administration,” according to Ukrainian news outlet Ukrainska Pravda.“It is clear that Trump is furious that Zelenskyy has refused to surrender and give away eastern Ukraine, and now Trump is trying to break Ukraine’s resolve by actively supporting Russia,” alleged the progressive media organization MeidasTouch in a statement published Wednesday on social media.“He seems to take that refusal as a personal insult, an attack on his image as the dealmaker who can end the war. Once again, Trump is blaming his own failures on others. This time, the consequences are deadly.”???? BREAKING: Ukrainian military sources are reporting that Elon Musk’s SpaceX abruptly restricted Starlink satellite communications during Ukrainian military operations overnight, disrupting critical missions as Russia unleashed a massive missile and drone barrage against Kyiv.Ukrainian activist Serhii Sternenko reports that Starlink connections began dropping when terminals were moving faster than 100 mph (160 km/h), causing multiple missions to fail.Ukrainian military communications expert Serhii “Flash” Beskrestnov says the restrictions were imposed WITHOUT WARNING.Sternenko suspects SpaceX acted at the request of the Trump administration, though that allegation has not been independently confirmed.It is clear that Trump is furious that Zelenskyy has refused to surrender and give away eastern Ukraine, and now Trump is trying to break Ukraine's resolve by actively supporting Russia.He seems to take that refusal as a personal insult, an attack on his image as the dealmaker who can end the war. Once again, Trump is blaming his own failures on others. This time, the consequences are deadly.— MeidasTouch (@MeidasTouch) October 14, 2026

With the midterms 20 days away, the Trump administration was confronted Wednesday with a “big escalation” in its war against Iran, geopolitical expert Brett Erickson warned, one that could soon send oil prices skyrocketing.Early Wednesday, Tehran claimed that it had sunk a cargo ship in the Strait of Hormuz after it had struck a naval mine, the Associated Press reported, the first such instance of a sinking by sea mine. Erickson called the development a “big escalation,” while also flagging new data that suggested an oil price surge may be imminent.“Data from Kpler published today shows an ENORMOUS drop off in the amount of oil transiting Hormuz per day, with the last three days only moving 10M barrels of oil COMBINED,” Erickson wrote Wednesday in a statement published on social media.“While these numbers will likely be revised upwards over the coming days… There’s certainly been a sharp decline in volume as a result of Iran’s strikes on TWENTY SEVEN vessels in the months of October alone. This includes the container vessel struck earlier today.”The significant reduction in oil flow through the strait was corroborated by Al Jazeera, which in a Wednesday report noted that “only 2.9 million barrels of oil were carried through the waterway on Oct. 11, the lowest level this month.” The shift marked a dramatic reversal of recent trends, with Middle East crude exports nearly rebounding to pre-Iran war levels in early October.The 2.9 million barrels transiting the Strait of Hormuz Sunday stood in stark contrast to the pre-war daily average of 17.1 million barrels, with oil prices already climbing Wednesday morning by 89 cents over Tuesday, according to Al Jazeera.“While the Iranian claims that this vessel struck a mine are unconfirmed, it DOES appear that the vessel is in fact sinking,” Erickson said, citing unverified photos of a cargo ship taking on water. “This marks a notable escalation.”Iran’s October escalation was predicted as far back as August by foreign policy expert Trita Parsi, who warned at the time that Trump’s strategy to “push the [Iran] conflict out of the minds of voters” would likely backfire, and that Iran would strategically escalate just ahead of the U.S. midterms.NEW: Data from Kpler published today shows an ENORMOUS drop off in the amount of oil transiting Hormuz per day, with the last three days only moving 10M barrels of oil COMBINED.While these numbers will likely be revised upwards over the coming days…There’s certainly been a sharp decline in volume as a result of Iran’s strikes on TWENTY SEVEN vessels in the months of October alone. This includes the container vessel struck earlier today.— Brett Erickson (@BrettErickson28) October 14, 2026

President Donald Trump once again claimed ownership of Greenland in a late-night Truth Social boast.The post, at about 12:17 a.m. EDT Wednesday, described “Massive Oil, Gas, and Mineral Exploration” getting ready to begin in “our new and beautiful Greenland.” Greenland is a self-governing territory of Denmark, not a U.S. territory.Trump’s message read in full:“Massive Oil, Gas, and Mineral Exploration is getting ready to begin in our new and beautiful Greenland! There are Experts that are saying that the amount of easily available Oil is far greater than that of almost any land, anywhere in the World and, even more importantly, from a Security Purpose in the Defense and Offense of both the United States of America, and Europe, is second to none. Any future attack on the United States will have to come across Greenland, where our Defense will routinely knock down drones, missiles, or any other form of weapon not yet even conceived. It gives us time, location, and sightline, like nowhere else in the World! Thank you for your attention to this matter.”Trump did not name the experts or say which exploration projects he meant.Last month, Trump announced a security agreement with Denmark and Greenland, signed Sept. 22 at the United Nations, that expands the U.S. military presence on the island. Trump said it gives the United States “permanent control” over Greenland’s security. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said the deal recognizes Danish sovereignty and Greenlanders’ right to self-determination. Danish and Greenlandic lawmakers must still ratify it, according to ABC News.

President Donald Trump's deal to buy Russian diesel fuel ahead of the midterms is more bluster than it is substantive, according to one expert. Last week, Trump announced that the U.S. would buy more than 300,000 tons of diesel this month as an attempt to lower gas prices ahead of the midterm elections. The move was announced at a time when the national average price for a gallon of diesel fuel was above $6.20, according to figures from AAA. The deal has also sparked significant pushback from Republican lawmakers in Congress. Patrick De Haan, head of petroleum analysis at GasBuddy, said on CNN that the deal, while lucrative for Russia, likely won't have the significant and sustained impact on U.S. fuel prices that Trump hopes. "I'm very skeptical that Russia simply has this amount of diesel sitting by," De Haan said, noting that Ukraine has been attacking Russia's oil infrastructure since the beginning of the war in 2022. "We've seen long, long lines for diesel in Russia. So I think that's problematic, whether the supply exists." Gas prices have become a focal point of the second Trump administration. During the 2024 campaign, Trump promised to lower gas prices as part of his efforts to reduce the overall cost of living. However, stubborn inflation combined with Trump's decision to attack Iran has caused fuel prices to spike. De Haan noted that the amount of oil Trump is buying, while nominally large, is a drop in the bucket compared to the needed intervention to stem the rising tide of gas prices. "The amount of diesel that we are said to be importing from Russia over time is less than a week's supply," he said. "This initial 300,000 tons is only about a day and a half of what we are producing as a nation on a daily basis. So there's just a lot of concern. Ultimately, this is not going to move the needle much. Again, only a day and a half of supply. This is not something that's going to have a material impact. It may have a psychological impact until the market unpacks whether or not this diesel is actually coming from Russia."

Middle East crude exports have nearly rebounded to where they stood before the U.S. war against Iran, thanks largely to what Reuters called a “vital lifeline” — but on Sunday, Tehran named that lifeline its new “explicit target” as a senior official appeared to “taunt” President Donald Trump, Al Jazeera reported.That lifeline has been ship-to-ship transfers using corridors along the coast of Oman in an effort to bypass Iranian interference in the Strait of Hormuz, with coordination and protection of the U.S. military. On Sunday night, however, Mohsen Rezaei, the secretary of the Supreme National Security Council of Iran, vowed that shipping through the alternate route would soon come to an end.“You are smuggling, but the strait is under Iran’s control, and we manage it,” Rezaei said.Al Jazeera’s Maziar Motamedi went on to report that Rezaei named the ship-to-ship transfer system as “an explicit target for Tehran,” and characterized Rezaei’s comments as a “taunt aimed at Trump, who hailed energy exports at times reaching pre-war levels over recent weeks.”“Rezaei appeared to give the impression that Iran wants to have lasting authority over Hormuz, and promised a harsh response if Iran’s energy and civilian infrastructure were attacked again,” Motamedi wrote.The average cost for a barrel of crude oil reached its peak in early April at nearly $113. It plummeted to its lowest point since the war began at just under $69 in early July — shortly after the United States agreed to its short-lived peace agreement with Iran on June 14 — before ramping back up to nearly $106 last month. As of Monday, the average cost for a barrel of crude stood at just under $94, though it risks climbing again should Iran prove successful in disrupting the alternative route along the coast of Oman.“Tehran says shipping will be disrupted so long as the US continues its choking naval blockade against Iran, which has also stepped up its efforts to counter efforts by Arab states to export oil,” Motamedi continued. “At least 15 ships are believed to have been targeted in October so far, according to [Windward].”

The chances that President Donald Trump authorizes a significant military escalation in the Middle East — and soon — are “relatively high,” Fox News’ Trey Yingst said Monday as the White House weighs its response to a recent strike on a major U.S. ally.On Saturday, Yemen’s Houthi militants carried out a deadly attack on Saudi Arabia, striking the King Khalid International Airport in Riyadh and killing at least 12 people and injuring more than 300. Trump told reporters he was considering joining Saudi Arabia in retaliating against the Houthis, and despite skepticism from one expert, Yingst said he expected Trump to follow through.“The question now is how Saudi Arabia will respond and if the United States could be involved,” Yingst said, reporting from Tel Aviv, Israel. “The chances [that the United States gets involved militarily] are relatively high just given recent history. The Saudis are asking for support, and that support is going to come in a variety of different ways: one has to do with intelligence, and the other, military action.”Yingst went on to list the variety of ways the U.S. military could directly strike Houthi militants, who have made significant territorial gains in recent weeks and have strengthened their hold on the Bab al-Mandeb Strait, a critical global shipping chokepoint in the Red Sea, much like the Strait of Hormuz.Fox News’ Rachel Campos-Duffy questioned whether the deep unpopularity of Trump’s war against Iran would factor into the White House’s response.“We're in a political season, and the war is not very popular among a lot of people,” Campos-Duffy said. “Do you think that will impact how — and to what scale — the American military gets involved?”Yingst suggested that, despite Trump’s claims that the midterms had no bearing on his decisions regarding his war in the Middle East, it was impossible to know for sure.“It certainly would be a question for the president as he will be the person who decides, ultimately, if U.S. strikes move forward,” Yingst said.

In a bid to navigate the “biggest single mistake” of President Donald Trump’s two terms in office, the president has sparked a new “complete catastrophe,” a panel of journalists argued Monday on MS NOW.“This war with Iran is going to prove to be the biggest single mistake of Donald Trump's two terms in office,” said David Rohde, MS NOW senior national security reporter. “The Saudi Arabian government could fall there — it's a disaster for this country and it's extraordinary what's happening, just the stakes here every day.”A cascade of attacks has erupted across the Middle East in recent days amid Trump’s deeply unpopular war against Iran, a conflict that has kept U.S. fuel prices elevated. However, Trump has increasingly blamed the Russo-Ukrainian war for elevated fuel prices.On Sunday, reports emerged that the Trump administration was threatening to cut Ukraine off from U.S. intelligence to compel the country to stop attacking Russian energy infrastructure. That threat, argued The Insider’s Michael Weiss, would only make the Trump administration’s problems worse.“Ukraine has been striking Russian oil refineries with U.S. intelligence. We have been encouraging them to do it as one of the cards that they can play,” Weiss said. “All of a sudden, a grinding halt to this policy, and now we threaten to take the one thing away that we continue to give them, so it's a complete catastrophe.”Weiss also argued that the move to cut Ukraine off from U.S. intelligence flew in the face of recent Trump administration claims.“And by the way, it was only about a week or two ago I was hearing a lot of triumphalism: 'We have opened the Strait of Hormuz, everything has stabilized!'” Weiss said. “Yeah, the Strait of Hormuz is open as long as our naval blockade is in place.”