The United States government has ordered artificial intelligence company Anthropic to suspend access to some of its most advanced AI models for foreign nationals, a move the company says it will comply with while strongly disagreeing with the reasoning behind the directive.

In a statement published on its blog late Friday, Anthropic said it received an official letter from the US government at 5:21 p.m. ET instructing it to halt access to its Fable 5 and Mythos 5 models. The decision was based on national security concerns, according to the company.

The restriction applies broadly to foreign nationals, including those located inside the United States as well as overseas, and even extends to foreign employees working at Anthropic. The company confirmed that access to other AI systems it operates will remain unaffected.

“The net effect of this order is that we must abruptly disable Fable 5 and Mythos 5 for all our customers to ensure compliance,” Anthropic said, adding that it has apologized to users and is working to restore access as quickly as possible.

The company said US authorities had raised concerns after identifying a potential “jailbreak” vulnerability in Fable 5. In AI systems, jailbreaks refer to attempts to bypass built-in safeguards and ethical restrictions, allowing users to manipulate models into performing prohibited tasks.

Anthropic described the issue as relatively limited in scope, noting that publicly available models were already able to detect similar weaknesses. The company argued that while it was complying with the directive, it did not agree that a “narrow potential jailbreak” justified withdrawing a commercial product used by hundreds of millions of users.

It also stressed that Fable 5 had been designed with enhanced safeguards intended to reduce misuse, particularly in areas linked to cybersecurity threats.

The decision has sparked wider debate over the geopolitical implications of artificial intelligence. Jordan Bardella, a Member of the European Parliament and leader of France’s National Rally party, said the move underscores how AI has become central to questions of national sovereignty, warning that countries without domestic AI capabilities risk increasing dependence on foreign powers.

British MP and former security minister Tom Tugendhat echoed similar concerns, saying the case highlights how technological systems are now deeply tied to national security and strategic independence.

The dispute follows earlier tensions between the US government and Anthropic. In February, President Donald Trump ordered federal agencies to stop using certain Anthropic technologies after disagreements over defense applications. At the time, Trump wrote on social media that the US would “not do business with them again,” initiating a phased withdrawal period.

Anthropic has also previously announced legal action after being labeled a “supply chain risk” by US authorities, further escalating its dispute with regulators over national security policy and AI governance.

The latest directive adds to growing global friction over how advanced AI systems should be regulated, controlled, and shared across borders.

The United States has imposed new sanctions on Cuba’s state-owned oil and gas company Cupet, a move that is expected to further strain already fragile relations between Washington and Havana and deepen the island’s ongoing energy crisis.

The announcement was made on Thursday by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who said the measures target key assets of Cupet that he claimed were “unlawfully expropriated from American owners years ago.” The decision comes as Cuba continues to grapple with severe fuel shortages, rolling blackouts, and a strained national grid that has struggled for years under limited investment and reduced oil imports.

Rubio accused Cuban authorities of “weaponising energy” and using fuel distribution as a tool of political control. He alleged, without providing evidence, that government officials divert scarce energy supplies for military and security use while rationing fuel for the general population. He also said Cuban officials were reselling fuel on secondary markets, further worsening shortages on the island.

The Cuban government has not issued an immediate response to the latest sanctions. In previous statements, it has consistently argued that US restrictions are designed to cripple the economy and place pressure on ordinary citizens rather than the political leadership.

Cupet, which oversees Cuba’s fuel imports, refining, and distribution, operates in a heavily restricted environment. Fuel sales to the public have been severely limited in recent months, with rationing becoming widespread as the country faces one of its worst energy shortages in years.

The sanctions follow earlier US measures targeting Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel and other senior officials, further expanding Washington’s pressure campaign on the island’s leadership. US officials have framed the actions as part of a broader effort to push for political and economic change in Cuba.

Energy shortages in Cuba have worsened over the past five years, driven by aging infrastructure, reduced foreign oil supplies, and tighter international financial constraints. The situation has resulted in frequent power outages, disruptions to public transport, and shortages of essential goods.

Some analysts say the new sanctions could intensify humanitarian challenges on the island. Critics also argue that restricting access to energy infrastructure may complicate efforts by private operators and humanitarian suppliers who rely on state-controlled systems to distribute fuel.

US officials, however, maintain that the measures are aimed at limiting what they describe as the Cuban government’s misuse of resources and its control over strategic sectors of the economy.

With tensions rising and diplomatic engagement limited, the latest sanctions mark another escalation in a long-running standoff between the two countries, with no immediate sign of de-escalation.

US President Donald Trump has reacted unexpectedly to new economic data showing that inflation in the United States rose to an annual rate of 4.2% in May, saying during a White House briefing that he “loved the inflation” and describing the figures as “great.”

The latest rise in consumer prices comes as the ongoing conflict with Iran continues to disrupt global energy markets. Inflation has accelerated steadily since the beginning of the year, climbing from 2.4% in February, before the outbreak of hostilities, to 3.3% in March and 3.8% in April. The sharpest pressures have come from energy costs following turmoil in the Strait of Hormuz, a vital route for global oil and gas shipments.

Speaking to reporters, Trump dismissed concerns over rising prices and suggested that the United States was managing energy flows through covert operations in the region. He claimed Washington had been “taking out millions of barrels of oil” and referred to undisclosed naval activity in the Gulf. He also said oil prices, currently around $85 per barrel, reflected the impact of recent military actions.

The president, who campaigned on bringing down inflation, acknowledged that the conflict had affected financial markets but maintained that the consequences were justified. He reiterated his position that military action was necessary, arguing that Iran was close to acquiring nuclear weapons. “We have to go and attack,” he said, defending the decision to escalate involvement in the region.

According to official data from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, energy prices have risen 23.5% over the past year, while gasoline costs have surged by 40.5%, placing additional pressure on households and businesses.

The economic impact is expected to remain a key issue ahead of November’s midterm elections, where voters will decide control of Congress. Rising living costs are already shaping political debate, with critics warning that higher prices could erode household purchasing power.

Among those responding to Trump’s remarks was Senator Bernie Sanders, who criticised the administration’s handling of inflation. In a social media post, he argued that working families were bearing the brunt of rising costs, particularly for fuel, groceries and essential goods, and blamed government policy for worsening economic pressures.

As inflation continues to climb, attention is expected to remain focused on how the administration balances military strategy abroad with economic stability at home.