A parliamentary election that President Vladimir Putin has cast as a ‌test of support for Russia’s war in Ukraine entered its third and final day ​on Sunday (September 20, 2026), with the ruling United Russia party expected to retain its dominance in ⁠a political system critics say does not tolerate dissent.

The State Duma vote, the first since Russia launched its full-scale war in Ukraine in February 2022, is likely to be presented by the Kremlin as evidence of public ‌backing for Mr. Putin’s policies and for the war, Europe’s deadliest conflict since World War Two, now in its fifth year with no sign of ending soon.

Most anti-war candidates ‌were barred from the ballot. Those who did run from the liberal Yabloko party, which ‌has ⁠polled in the single digits in recent years but hoped to tap into ⁠war fatigue, said they feared for their freedom after courts handed long jail terms to two senior party figures before the vote for comments about the conflict deemed illegal by authorities.

Discrediting the army or spreading what authorities regard as fake news ​are punishable by lengthy prison sentences.

The Kremlin ‌says national unity and some censorship are necessary during what it calls its special military operation in Ukraine. It casts the conflict as part of an existential struggle with a hostile West and says Ukrainian intelligence services and other enemies are stepping up efforts to stir unrest inside ‌Russia.

Permitted opposition parties could benifit

Mr. Putin on Friday (September 18, 2026) accused Ukraine of trying to interfere ​in the election, citing what he said was a Ukrainian strike on the home of an election official in the Russian-controlled part of Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia region that ⁠killed Elena Astanina, the official. Reuters could not independently verify details of the attack and there was no immediate comment from Kyiv.

Russian electoral officials also said on Saturday (September 19, 2026) that an online voting system in ‌Moscow had come under cyberattack. Kyiv, which has suspended elections under martial law, has dismissed the Russian vote as a “pseudo election”.

Despite what most experts see as the election’s predictable outcome, the NEST think-tank in Berlin, co-founded by Kremlin critic Mikhail Khodorkovsky, whom Russian authorities have designated “a foreign agent”, said the vote could still produce awkward moments for the Kremlin at a time of economic strain.

“The consequences of the war are increasingly being felt within the country, and accumulated anxiety and frustration may translate into votes ‌for the systemic opposition parties that the Kremlin has allowed to remain on the ballot,” it said in a note.

It ​said the Communist party and the New People party could attract votes the authorities would prefer to go to United Russia. Both parties have consistently voted in ⁠line with United Russia on major issues.

Mr. Putin told the nation in a televised address before the election that ⁠the vote would underline support for Russian troops fighting in Ukraine.

“Your choice, and your will, will once again demonstrate that millions of people stand behind our soldiers, that ‌we are a united people bound together by shared values, historical memory, and love for our homeland, and that no one will succeed in dividing or intimidating us,” said Mr. Putin.

Initial results are ​expected to start emerging at around 1800 GMT on Sunday (September 20, 2026), with more complete results available on Monday (September 21, 2026).

Hundreds of drones targeting Moscow and its surrounding region killed at least two people and damaged a major refinery on the final day of the country’s parliamentary elections, the authorities said on Sunday (September 20, 2026).

The capital’s Mayor Sergei Sobyanin said that more than 1,600 drones had been intercepted and shot down, 450 of which were aimed at Moscow.

He accused Ukraine of attempting to interfere with a tightly controlled three-day election that is set to tighten President Vladimir Putin’s 26-year grip on power.

“The unprecedented attack was clearly planned with the aim of disrupting the elections. The enemy did not succeed,” he said on Telegram.

Moscow regional Governor Andrey Vorobyov said on the social media platform that at least two people were killed — a 44-year-old woman and an elderly man — in two separate locations.

A fire triggered by a drone crashing into a 21-storey building also led to 400 people being evacuated, Mr. Vorobyov said. He did not specify the drones’ origin.

The attacks come at a time when Kyiv stepped up its long-range drone strike campaign against Russia in recent months, particularly against energy infrastructure to target a vital source of the Kremlin’s revenue to fund its war effort, now in its fifth year.

A facility on the territory of the Moscow Oil Refinery has been damaged, Mr. Sobyanin added, noting that no casualties had been reported so far and that emergency services were on the scene.

This major refinery has already been hit by Ukrainian strikes in recent months.

The latest strike comes after U.S. President Donald Trump said on Monday (September 14) that Ukraine and Russia had agreed not to target each other’s energy facilities.

It also comes after Russians began voting on Friday (September 18) in the country’s first parliamentary election since Moscow sent troops to Ukraine in February 2022, setting off a conflict that has killed hundreds of thousands.

Only parties that support Mr. Putin and the Kremlin’s military campaign have been registered to run. Moscow has also organised voting in occupied Ukraine.

While few Russians doubt Mr. Putin’s United Russia party will cruise to victory again, the vote offers a gauge of public support for the war.

U.S. ​President Donald Trump is seeking to bring ‌a major part of national funding ​for health research under the control ⁠of his political appointees, Politico reported on Saturday (September 20, 2026).

Mr. Trump has directed his budget director, Russ Vought, ‌to draft an executive order to create a board that would ‌decide which grants would be funded ‌by ⁠the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the ⁠news outlet said, citing two administration officials familiar with the meeting.

The board would include NIH Director ​Jay Bhattacharya and Mr. Vought, ‌the director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, and would be required to reach unanimous decisions ‌on grant awards, the report said.

The ​proposed arrangement would give Mr. Vought a direct role in determining how ⁠the health research agency distributes its congressionally-appropriated money, the report added.

The Office of Management ‌and Budget, the White House and the Health and Human Services Department that oversees the NIH did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment outside regular business hours.

The reported move ‌comes amid mounting criticism of the U.S. government’s ​research funding cuts, undertaken last year to target federal spending at major ⁠universities, resulting in the freezing or cancellation ofgrants ⁠at numerous institutions.

The Trump administration says these cuts are necessary ‌to ensure the government funds only solid science and to reverse years of ​misguided priorities.

The U.S. military attacked a boat suspected of being used to smuggle drugs in the Caribbean Sea, killing four people, as the Trump administration continues its months-long campaign against alleged traffickers in Latin America.

The attack on Saturday (September 19, 2026) brings the number of people who have been killed in boat strikes by the U.S. military to at least 231 in 69 strikes since the Trump administration began targeting those it calls “narcoterrorists” almost a year ago.

As with most of the military’s statements on strikes in the eastern Pacific Ocean and Caribbean Sea, U.S. Southern Command said it targeted the alleged drug traffickers along known smuggling routes.

The military did not provide evidence that the vessel was ferrying drugs. A video posted on X showed an image of what appeared to be a moving boat followed by a flash.

Also Read | U.S. military launches new airstrikes to ‘swiftly punish’ Iran for deaths of U.S. troops

The Trump administration is pursuing deals with allied nations to extend its offensive to land across multiple Latin American countries.

Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth said during a visit to Panama last month that Colombia, Guatemala and Honduras had agreed to allow the U.S. to carry out joint military operations against criminal groups on their soil.

Guatemala denied reaching such a deal. Ecuador launched similar missions with the US in March.

President Donald Trump has said the U.S. is in “armed conflict” with cartels in Latin America and has justified the attacks as a necessary escalation to stem the flow of drugs into the United States and fatal overdoses claiming American lives.

But his administration has offered little evidence to support its claims of killing smugglers. (AP)

Chanting protesters greeted concertgoers Saturday (September 19, 2026) in Philadelphia ahead of pop superstar Ed Sheeran’s first show since his tour plunged into turmoil ignited by his opening act’s pro-Palestinian comments.

Rapper Macklemore was booted from Sheeran’s U.S. Loop Tour on Monday (September 21) after the owners of stadiums hosting upcoming shows objected to his shouting “Free Palestine” onstage in New Jersey earlier this month.

Sheeran, 35, has denied being behind the decision to remove Macklemore, instead blaming the tour promoter.

Four supporting acts subsequently walked out on the “Shape of You” singer, issuing public statements citing their support for Palestinians.

Sheeran has been accused by critics of failing to stand up to the stadium owners — led by billionaire businessman Robert Kraft — and was targeted by boycott calls.

A few dozen pro-Palestinian protesters rallied outside Lincoln Financial Field, where Sheeran was set to perform Saturday night (September 19) waving Palestinian flags and chanting “Free, free Palestine.”

Officers in a dozen police cars kept watch over the peaceful gathering from a distance.

Some of the fans streaming into the stadium said they had hesitated about coming due to the controversy, but ultimately decided to attend and enjoy the music.

But others like Brandon Ateke changed their plans.

The 18-year-old Brown University student accused Sheeran of “complicity” with Kraft and others in silencing Macklemore.

“I decided to not attend the concert and instead attend the protest to bring light to the genocide going on in Gaza today,” he told AFP.

At a time when a growing number of artists are speaking out against the conflict in Gaza and West Bank settler violence, Sheeran has maintained his apolitical stance.

“I have my personal views on this devastating conflict. Just because I choose not to speak publicly, it doesn’t mean I don’t have them,” the British performer said Tuesday (September 15, 2026) on Instagram.

However, he said, “those who come to my shows do not expect a political forum.”

On Saturday (September 19), a pro-Palestinian group urged artists, fans and crew members to stay away from Sheeran’s concerts.

“We now extend our call for boycotting Ed Sheeran’s entire world tour, including the upcoming Latin American dates and the as-yet-unannounced European leg,” the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI) said.

Solo show?

No new opening acts or backing bands have been announced, and it was not known how Sheeran planned to carry out his show on Saturday.

The supporting acts that quit the tour included Sheeran’s backing band as well as performer Finneas, who rose to fame collaborating with his pop superstar sister Billie Eilish.

Since Israel invaded Gaza in October 2023, the toll on Palestinians and the wider issue of Palestinian rights have emerged as a rallying cry in the entertainment industry.

From the Oscars to the Emmys, top music awards ceremonies and European film festivals, the Gaza war has frequently pushed its way onto the agenda.

The massive Israeli offensive in Gaza has killed more than 73,800 people, according to the Gaza health ministry, which is under Hamas authority and whose figures are considered reliable by the United Nations.

On Saturday (September 19, 2026), Gaza authorities said the latest Israeli fire had killed at least four people, including a 10-year-old girl.

Saudi Arabia on Saturday (September 19, 2026) confirmed that Yemen’s Houthi rebels tried to attack its capital with a ballistic missile, the first targeting of Riyadh since the escalation in fighting with the Tehran-backed rebels that has opened a new front in the Iran war.

The statement by the Saudi-led coalition fighting the Houthis came long after the dawn attempt, which the coalition said was intercepted. Some residents in Riyadh heard an explosion.

Later, some saw a plume of smoke near the airport. There were no reports of casualties or damage.

The statement also said the Houthis tried to attack civilian infrastructure in the Red Sea port city of Yanbu — where a key Saudi pipeline ends — and in Taif, Baysh and Farasan, but they were thwarted, giving no further details.

The Houthis earlier claimed, without providing evidence, that they had targeted “sensitive sites” in Riyadh and facilities of Saudi oil giant Aramco in Yanbu, causing “massive fires”.

Aramco, the world’s largest oil company, did not respond to a request for comment.

The growing conflict near another important global shipping corridor has brought new pressures for markets.

Houthi military spokesperson Brig. Gen. Yahya Saree claimed they attacked with cruise and ballistic missiles as well as drones.

He said Saudi Arabia had attempted to target the rebel-held city of Sanaa in neighbouring Yemen, without giving details. The Associated Press couldn’t independently verify the claims.

Recent days have seen one escalation after another. On Thursday (September 17), the first civilian casualty was reported, as the Saudi civil defence said debris from an intercepted Houthi drone killed a Yemeni resident of Saudi Arabia.

And on Wednesday (September 16), Saudi Arabia said the Houthis had tried to attack Mecca, Islam’s holiest city, with a drone that it said was intercepted, calling the security of the birthplace of the Prophet Muhammad a “red line”. The Houthis fiercely denied the accusation.

The United States, a close Saudi ally, has signalled that it has no current fight with the Houthis. Regional officials have told The Associated Press that Saudi Arabia is running low on missile interceptors and has instead asked France, Britain, Pakistan and Egypt for air defence support.

Meanwhile, fighting has surged inside Yemen between the Houthis and the Saudi-backed, internationally recognised government.

The rebels raced down the country’s Red Sea coast over a week ago, seizing the key port city of Mokha and islands on the Bab el-Mandeb Strait at the southern end of the Red Sea.

That has improved their surveillance of passing ships, though the Houthis have said they are only targeting Saudi ones.

The fighting in Yemen also marks a return to a devastating civil war after four years of relative calm.

The story so far:

On September 14, 2026, U.S. Air Force secretary Troy Meink said the country has “space control” weapons deployed in Earth’s orbit to defend U.S. forces against “hostile adversary action”. The disclosure drew backlash from Russia and China, among other quarters.

What is a ‘space control’ weapon?

As per the U.S. Space Force, ‘space control’ refers to military activities required to control the space domain. In 2025, the then-Space Force chief, Gen. Chance Saltzman, said such a device could possess both “kinetic and non-kinetic” capabilities and could disrupt or degrade an adversary’s capabilities.

‘Kinetic’ generally refers to physically damaging an object through impact, such as by smashing into it. Non-kinetic methods include electromagnetic interference that can jam or spoof a satellite’s communications, and directed energy systems that interfere with its sensors.

In fact, the current Space Force war-fighting framework recognises three kinds of counter-space operations: orbital, electromagnetic, and cyberspace.

What has the U.S. deployed?

We do not know. We also do not know how many units/instances of the system exist, what they are capable of, which orbits they are in, and whether they are kinetic or non-kinetic. Mr. Meink had said that while disclosing the weapon’s (or weapons’) existence would contribute to deterrence, revealing their operational details would subtract from the deterrence. There is also no indication whether these weapons are the same as the space-based interceptors the U.S. government has planned for the ‘Golden Dome’ missile defence programme. These interceptors are still undergoing tests.

What will the weapons defend against?

Mr. Meink has referred to “hostile adversary action”. Incumbent Space Force chief Gen. Douglas Schiess has also referred to “space-enabled attacks”.

In other instances over the years, U.S. officials have repeatedly singled out Russian and Chinese counter-space capabilities as reasons for their government to develop similar capabilities of its own, to protect its own satellites. Russia and China have also demonstrated sophisticated satellite manoeuvres in orbit.

For example, in 2020, two Russian satellites manoeuvred close to a U.S. government satellite, prompting the Space Command to call the behaviour potentially threatening. In 2022, the Chinese Shijian-21 satellite used a robotic arm to tow a defunct Chinese geostationary satellite into a graveyard orbit.

However, we do not know the circumstances in which the U.S. will use its weapons as the government has not published the rules of engagement for orbital weapons.

Is it legal to have weapons in orbit?

The relevant instrument is the Outer Space Treaty, which entered into force in 1967, during the Cold War and the nuclear arms race between the U.S. and the Soviet Union. It prohibits its party states, which include the U.S., Russia, and China today, from placing nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction in orbit or stationing them elsewhere in outer space. It also obviates states from setting up military bases and conducting weapons tests on the moon and other celestial bodies.

However, the treaty does not prohibit states from placing conventional weapons in orbit. The treaty also says all activities in outer space must comply with international law, which means other bodies of international law governing the use of force and armed conflicts can be applied to military operations in orbit. As the U.S. government has not disclosed what its orbital weapons are capable of, it is not possible to say whether it violates specific treaty conditions.

Can other countries prevent unilateral action?

There is no international body to order the U.S. to remove its weapons from orbit. However, there are various diplomatic and legal avenues through which other countries can seek more information and negotiate restraints. For example, Article IX of the treaty requires states to have “due regard” for the interests of other parties, which a (party) state can invoke if it believes U.S. activities in orbit could harm its own peaceful use of space. States can also endeavour to draft new orbital governance rules through the United Nations process on the Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space, whose third substantive session is scheduled for November. Countries can also raise the issue before the UN Security Council or the General Assembly as a threat to international peace and security, under Article 35 of the UN Charter.

The U.S. military came close to boarding a Chinese vessel in West Asia earlier this year based on a flawed intelligence report prepared with the help of artificial intelligence, CNN said Friday (September 19, 2026).

U.S. intelligence indicated the ship was carrying nuclear weapons-related components, leading American forces to prepare to intercept it, the broadcaster reported, citing four anonymous sources familiar with the incident.

But the operation was called off after officials determined that an AI chatbot used by an analyst had misidentified the material the ship was carrying.

CNN quoted one source as saying the intelligence report was “entirely false” but “almost started a war.” It did not specify what the vessel was actually carrying or where it was bound.

U.S. Central Command — which is responsible for American forces in West Asia — did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the reported incident.

The CNN report comes after a furore erupted earlier this month when a researcher publicly resigned from leading AI firm Anthropic over fears that the technology could escape human control.

Another Anthropic employee, who did not resign, said publicly that “we really do earnestly believe AI could kill all humans,” and that he thought the chances were greater than “10 percent within the next decade.”

Despite the warnings, U.S. President Donald Trump and some of his key allies have voiced opposition to drastically curbing the development of artificial intelligence.

In a separate incident involving the US military and China, Politico reported Friday that F-35 jet parts — including a sensitive stealth canopy for a cockpit — were diverted to Hong Kong and are now missing, raising fears that Beijing had obtained sensitive American military technology.

The parts were headed from Australia to the United States for repairs when the diversion occurred, the U.S. outlet reported, adding that it was unclear why the parts were rerouted or where they are now.

A spokesperson for Lockheed Martin, which manages the F-35 supply chain, said the company could not discuss specific shipments because of “security reasons.”

“Lockheed Martin follows all U.S. regulations established by the Department of War and regulated by the Defence Logistics Agency (DLA) regarding the shipment of aircraft components,” the spokesperson said.

“Our teams handle every shipment with the utmost diligence and safeguards to ensure the integrity of the F-35 program and the security of our allied partners.”

Denmark and Greenland on Saturday ‌(September 19, 2026) said any agreement with the United States would not compromise Greenland’s sovereignty, after President ​Donald Trump said the deal would give Washington “permanent control” over the Arctic island’s security, leaving ⁠its precise scope unclear.

The United States, Denmark and Greenland said late on Friday (September 18, 2026) they had reached an agreement for the U.S. to develop a significant military presence on Greenland, while prohibiting U.S. adversaries from building their own bases on the ‌island.

Key details of the agreement have not been made public, including the scale of U.S. military presence in the self-governing Danish territory and whether any formal power over foreign policy and resources ‌would be ceded to Washington.

Denmark and Greenland expressed hope that a deal, which is expected to ‌be ⁠signed during the UN General Assembly next week, would end months of uncertainty triggered ⁠by Mr. Trump’s threats to seize control of Greenland.

“Next week could be a good week – for Greenland, Denmark, and the United States,” Denmark’s Foreign Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen said in a statement posted on Facebook on Saturday (September 19, 2026).

“A time of uncertainty will hopefully give way to ​a binding agreement that strengthens security in the ‌Arctic and the North Atlantic, and thereby our shared security within NATO and Europe – while respecting the (Danish) Kingdom’s red lines,” he said.

But some residents in Greenland’s capital Nuuk, expressed scepticism about closer ties with Washington. “The U.S. should not control Greenland. I think it’s better if we have cooperation with NATO,” ‌said Jakob Ludvigsen, 65. “Trump should stay far, far, far away from Greenland,” Marianne Hansen, a ​71-year-old retired chef, told Reuters in Nuuk. “He should not expect our children and grandchildren to become Americans in the future.”

Denmark and Greenland have repeatedly insisted that Washington respect the sovereignty ⁠of the Danish kingdom and accept that Greenland is not for sale.

Trump’s vision for Greenland deal

Mr. Trump said on Truth Social on Friday (September 19, 2026) that under a deal, “the United States will FOREVER have the complete ability to do ‌what is necessary in Greenland to secure and defend the security of Greenland, and the United States of America.” The deal “gives the United States permanent control over security, and all other needs, in Greenland,” Mr. Trump said, adding that no adversary would ever be permitted to have a base or military presence in Greenland, or make sensitive investments there, without Washington’s express written approval.

Mr. Trump announced after Reuters exclusively reported that the U.S. and Denmark were closing in on a deal. “This is probably not the end of President Trump’s ‌ambitions for Greenland and certainly not the end of U.S. strategic interest in the territory and its resources,” said Mikkel Vedby Rasmussen, ​a political science professor at the University of Copenhagen.

If Copenhagen cedes any formal authority to Washington, it raises the question in Greenland of whether “this is the beginning of replacing the colonial ⁠relationship with Denmark with a colonial relationship to the United States,” he said. Greenland’s Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen said ⁠in a Facebook post on Saturday (September 19, 2026) that the proposed deal “recognises the sovereignty and territorial integrity of our Kingdom and the right of the Greenlandic people to self-determination.”

Mr. Trump’s threats, which peaked in January, ‌triggered a diplomatic crisis that strained relations within NATO and pushed Denmark and Greenland into negotiations aimed at defusing the pressure.

A NATO spokesperson on Saturday (September 19, 2026) said the alliance welcomed the agreement, which would “help advance security, ​stability and cooperation in this vital region.”