Shattered glass and a broken door covered with police tape mark the entrance to the apartment where the reported suspect in Sweden’s worst mass shooting is believed to have lived as a recluse.

Rickard Andersson, 35, has been named by the Swedish national broadcaster and multiple media outlets, including Reuters, citing police sources, as the man who opened fire, killing 10 people and himself, at an adult education center in Örebro, Sweden.

Police said that the attacker was not known to them, that he was not connected to any gangs and that he was not believed to be acting based on ideological motives.

PJ Samuelsson has lived next door to Andersson since May last year but says he has never seen or even heard his neighbor.

He says he was in a state of shock after returning home on Tuesday and finding his quiet apartment block surrounded by heavily armed police.

He said he knows “nothing at all” about his neighbor Andersson. “I’ve only seen his name on the door, that’s the only thing,” describing it as “very unusual” because he says hello daily to his other neighbors in the small block.

He said he doesn’t know why his neighbor acted like a recluse but knowing he is the suspect is “terrible.” He said it’s a “disgusting” thought that he had weapons next door.

Andersson’s name and social security number matched the same address that was held on record by the Swedish tax agency.

Bergqvist told a news conference Thursday: “We have a perpetrator who was found inside the school and he was not known to us from before.

“He has a gun license for four guns and all these four guns have been confiscated. Three of those weapons were next to him when police secured him inside the building.”

Bergqvist added that “there is information that he is somehow connected to the school, that he may have attended this school before. But that is also something that we need to look deeper into to be able to fully confirm.”

She said the 10 victims of the killing have “different nationalities, different ages and different sex” and that no motive has been confirmed yet.

On Wednesday night, grief and shock were heavy in the air as a steady stream of mourners came to pay their respects at a candlelight vigil Wednesday night by the side of a busy road, next to a small housing estate and opposite the school where Tuesday’s events unfolded.

A dozen firefighters were among the crowd, standing in silence, their heads bowed.

“They came here to learn, not to die,” said Jenny Samuelsson, whose sister-in-law died in the shooting. She said she only learned the news of her family’s loss this afternoon, 24 hours after her sister-in-law, Camille, was killed.

Camille had been studying to become a nurse, according to Jenny. “They were here to help others, to learn. I have no words,” she said, choking on her emotion. “I can’t explain the hole I have in my heart. And why? There is no answer, so what question can I even ask?”

Hundreds of candles flickered in the cold night air. The young and the old arrived clutching white candles, ready to light them, along with flowers, and handwritten notes paying tribute to those killed in Tuesday’s massacre.

“You are in our hearts, rest in peace,” said one, written in Swedish. On another note, in English, read John Donne’s poem ‘No Man Is An Island.’

Two 17-year-old boys, who had been friends from primary school, stood arm in arm after bumping into each other at the vigil. They spoke of their shock over what happened, how they were forced to lock down in their high schools as the events played out. They came to show their support, they said.

The emotion was palpable. School shootings are rare in Sweden and there is real shock that the peace of this small Swedish city has been so violently shattered.

The gift was an allusion to a deadly September operation carried out by Israel in Lebanon, which targeted pagers used by members of the Iran-backed militant group Hezbollah.

On September 17, thousands of explosions struck Hezbollah members, targeting their pagers and then walkie-talkies a day later.

The blasts killed at least 37 people, including some children, and injured nearly 3,000, many of them civilian bystanders, according to Lebanese health authorities.

In return, on Tuesday, Trump gave Netanyahu a signed photograph of the two of them. He signed the photograph, “To Bibi, A great leader!,” according to a photo on Instagram posted by his son, Yair Netanyahu.

Nuclear engineer and former Miss America Grace Stanke has entered the fierce debate in Australia over its future energy policy with a 10-day national tour extolling the benefits of nuclear power in a country where it’s been banned for almost 30 years.

The speaking tour is familiar territory for the 22-year-old former beauty queen, who said she studied nuclear engineering as a “flex,” but now works for US energy giant Constellation as a spokesperson and as an engineer on its nuclear team.

Her recent arrival comes at a delicate time in Australia, months before a national election that could put the opposition Liberal Party in power, along with its promises to build seven nuclear power stations – upending the current Labor government’s plan to rely on renewable energy and gas.

For several days, Stanke has been speaking to hundreds of Australians, in events organized by Nuclear for Australia (NFA), a charity founded by 18-year-old Will Shackel, who has received backing from a wealthy Australian pro-nuclear entrepreneur.

Most talks were well-attended by attentive crowds, but not all audience members were impressed by Stanke’s message.

As she started to speak in Brisbane last Friday, a woman in the audience began shouting, becoming the first of several people to be ejected from the room as other attendees booed and jeered. One woman who was physically pushed from the premises by a security guard has since filed a formal complaint.

Stanke reflected on the rowdy Brisbane crowd with the poise of a seasoned pageant entrant. “You know what? I respect people because they’re using their voices,” she said, describing the heckling as “probably the most vocal experience I’ve had.”

Those against nuclear power say it’s too expensive, too unsafe and too slow to replace Australia’s coal-fired power stations that would need to keep burning for several more years until nuclear plants came online.

The fact that people are even talking about the proposal shows how much public discourse has changed in the three years since voters last went to the polls, then electing climate friendly candidates and Labor’s pro-renewables policy.

Now, for the first time in decades, nuclear power is back on the election agenda, at the same time a backlash is building in rural areas against renewable energy projects that some say are erasing farmland, razing forests, and dividing communities.

A numbers game

Australia banned nuclear energy in 1998 as part of a political deal to win approval for the country’s first and only nuclear research facility that’s still operating in southern Sydney.

A change in government in an election, to be held before mid-May, would see seven nuclear reactors built in five states to provide power alongside renewable energy – a bold shift in direction that would not only require changes to federal law, but amendments to laws in states where premiers oppose nuclear power.

According to the plan proposed by Liberal Party leader Peter Dutton, the nuclear reactors would be funded by 331 billion Australian dollars ($206 billion) in public money and the first could be working by 2035.

Both forecasts are disputed as underestimates by the government acting on the advice of the country’s independent science agency – the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) – which says renewables are still the cheapest and the most efficient way for Australia to reach net zero by 2050.

Shackel, NFA’s founder, wants the nuclear ban lifted, pointing to a petition he started two years ago that has quietly accrued more than 80,000 signatures.

“I think we need to move away from fossil fuels. Gas is a fossil fuel. So, I think that if we want to be able to move away from those sources, nuclear energy is something that’s going to be increasingly important,” he said.

Shackel met Stanke at the COP 28 climate talks in the United Arab Emirates in 2023, an event she attended as Miss America while finishing her degree in nuclear engineering at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. She says Australia is “already kind of late” to nuclear energy, “so, you might as well start now.”

“I do believe that a strong grid requires both renewables and nuclear energy combined,” she said, referring to the argument for a “baseload” energy source that doesn’t rely on unpredictable weather.

That argument is challenged by experts worldwide, who say the need for “baseload” energy is an outdated concept, and that stability can be achieved by other means, including batteries.

Rural opposition to renewables

While nuclear has dominated recent discussion about Australia’s future energy mix, a steady rumble of discontent is growing louder from rural areas over the rapid rollout of renewable energy projects.

According to the Clean Energy Council, 85 renewable power generation projects are underway in Australia, along with 44 storage projects.

In the past two years, the number of petitions on Change.org opposing renewable energy projects has almost tripled, from 14 in 2023 to 37 in 2024 – alongside Facebook groups where communities are gathering to share stories and updates on protests.

Advance, a conservative campaign group that says it works to counter “woke politicians and elitist activist groups” is promoting a 48-minute documentary it claims tells the “untold stories” of farmers whose “lives have been upended by the rapid rollout of wind and solar projects.”

Murrough Benson lives near the proposed site of a massive battery storage plant in Hazeldean, rural Queensland, that’s currently moving through the council approvals process. He’s in favor of renewables. They “have their place,” he said, but “you could argue that some of them are misplaced.”

He and his wife Joy moved from Sydney to the area five years ago and hoped to enjoy a peaceful retirement. But now they’re considering selling their house, fearing the constant hum and potential contamination of the air, land, and water from the battery system, in the event of fire or flood. “We don’t want to live with something like that across the road,” said Benson.

Michelle Hunt has more immediate issues with the construction of a solar farm next to the “piece of paradise” she bought almost 20 years ago in the town of Gin Gin, also in rural Queensland.

She says a renewable energy company destroyed her fence without permission and replaced it with a wire “prison fence,” contravening a previous agreement to hide panels at the neighboring solar farm behind trees. Now they’re in full view of the house she planned to build. “Let’s face it, we are living beside an industrial electrical installation,” she said.

Rural areas where opposition is building to renewable projects are fertile ground for Shackel and his nuclear campaign. He’s already visited some areas earmarked for power stations under the Liberal proposal. And while he says NFA isn’t politically aligned with either of the major parties, he accepts he’s doing some of the groundwork to bring the community on side.

“I think nuclear energy positions itself as a solution to some of those communities because of its low land use,” he said. “And for those communities who are desperate for jobs but don’t see renewables providing that completely for them, having a nuclear plant there could be a good solution.”

Nuclear ‘foolishness’

Bringing a former Miss America to Australia was part of a plan to raise support for nuclear power among Australian women, who according to one survey are far less enthusiastic than men about the proposal.

According to several people who attended sessions in various states, the audience was dominated by older men, many of whom didn’t seem to need convincing.

“It’s just a way of spinning the fossil fuel industry out for a bit longer, and we cannot afford to do that,” she said. “You can see how the climate is collapsing around us. Look at Los Angeles. Those poor people over there lost everything.”

Others said the panel – which included local nuclear experts – made generalizations and didn’t get to the nub of issues specific to their area, like the potential strain they say a nuclear power station could have on resources in Victoria’s Latrobe Valley.

“There is literally no water for a nuclear power station. The existing allocation is already committed to mine repair,” said Adrian Cosgriff, a member of community advocacy group Voices of the Valley, who attended the Melbourne talk.

“Australians know nuclear power exists. That’s fine. It’s just not suitable for here. That’s kind of the argument,” he said.

David Hood, a civil and environmental engineer who attended the Brisbane talk, said: “Renewables are working right now. We can’t wait 10 to 20 years for higher cost and risky nuclear energy.”

Stanke and Shackel delivered a parliamentary briefing in Parliament House, Canberra on Wednesday, to politicians and aides across the political spectrum.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese was unsurprisingly not in attendance, having already labelled his political rival’s nuclear proposal as “madness” and a “fantasy, dreamed-up to delay real action on climate change.”

Stanke says success at the end of the tour this week will be “knowing that I’ve made an impact in not just one person’s lives, but many.”

Albanese will be hoping that not too many Australians are convinced by her argument, which could lead to a change of leadership at a fork in the road that some say could lead to an even warmer planet.

King Charles and Queen Camilla will travel to Italy and the Vatican in April to meet with Pope Francis, as the Catholic Church celebrates a special Jubilee year, which takes place every quarter of a century.

The British monarch will join the expected 32 million people set to make the pilgrimage to the “Eternal City” this year. The Catholic Jubilee Year – or Holy Year – was established in the 14th century by Pope Boniface VIII and is 12 months focused on forgiveness and reconciliation.

Pilgrims are encouraged to pass through one of the “Holy Doors” located in Rome’s four major basilicas, while Francis has called for this jubilee to be centered on “hope,” which he underlined by opening the first “Holy Door” in a prison.

“Their Majesties The King and Queen will undertake State Visits to the Holy See and the Republic of Italy in early April 2025,” Buckingham Palace said on Thursday. “During Their Majesties’ State visit to the Holy See, The King and Queen will join His Holiness Pope Francis in celebrating the 2025 Jubilee Year.”

While in the country, Charles and Camilla are also set to shore up the bonds between Italy and the United Kingdom, carrying out engagements in Rome and Ravenna in the northern Emilia-Romagna region.

King Charles – who as the supreme governor of the Church of England is known to be deeply faithful and regularly attends services – has met Francis on several occasions. In fact, the upcoming trip will be their third encounter – though their first since Charles acceded the throne.

It will also be the second time that Francis has met a British monarch, with the pontiff having hosted Queen Elizabeth II and the Duke of Edinburgh in the Vatican in 2014.

Despite the turbulent past of the Reformation and King Henry VIII’s break with Rome almost 500 years ago, relations between the Vatican and the British monarchy are today marked by warmth and mutual respect. The UK and the Holy See have had full diplomatic relations since 1982.

King Charles and Francis are both passionate defenders of the environment and champion the importance of interfaith dialogue – topics that are likely to come up during their meeting. The King has also expressed support for persecuted Christians in the Middle East through his collaboration with a Catholic charity.

Relations have also been boosted by the King’s interest in religious faith and respect for the Catholic Church, while the Pope gifted relics of the True Cross, two wooden splinters from what is believed to be the cross on which Christ was crucified, for Charles’ coronation. The fragments were incorporated into a new processional cross that was specially made for the lavish religious ceremony in 2023 and was then gifted to the Church in Wales. Charles’ coronation was attended by two cardinals, one of whom was a personal representative of the Pope. It marked the first time in almost half a century that Catholic prelates were involved in a British coronation.

As Prince of Wales, Charles visited Vatican City on five occasions. He was present in St. Peter’s Square for the 2019 canonization ceremony of Saint John Henry Newman, an influential theologian who converted to Catholicism after years as an Anglican priest. At that time, the King wrote an article praising Newman and thanked the Pope for his environmental efforts.

Francis, who regularly meets world leaders when they visit Italy, will see the meeting as a chance to deepen relations with the King. In 2017, the Pope encouraged Charles to be a “man of peace,” to which the future King replied: “I’ll do my best.”

But it hasn’t always been plain sailing for the King when it comes to the Vatican.

In 2005, the then-Prince of Wales had to postpone his wedding to Camilla Parker-Bowles as it clashed with the funeral of Pope John Paul II. The prince himself attended the papal funeral but, awkwardly, during the service he shook hands with Zimbabwe’s brutal then-president Robert Mugabe while performing the sign of peace.

While the exact dates of the King and Queen’s forthcoming Italy trip have not yet been revealed, speculation is mounting that the visit could coincide with their 20th wedding anniversary on April 9.

Charles’ other two visits were in 2009 and 1985.

At the end of their meeting, Francis and Charles are expected to exchange gifts. When the Pope met Queen Elizabeth II, Francis gave her a gift for Prince George (then 8 months old). It was a Lapis Lazuli orb, decorated with a silver cross of the 11th century monarch Edward the Confessor, and on the base was engraved: “Pope Francis, to His Royal Highness Prince George of Cambridge.” The Queen in return gifted the Pope a hamper of produce from the royal estates.

And in 2017, the Pope gave Charles a copy of his encyclical on climate change, other papal writings, and a bronze olive branch signifying peace. Charles, who was accompanied on that trip by Camilla then as well, hadn’t come empty handed. He gave the Pope a hamper of produce from Highgrove, telling Francis: “It may come in handy.”

Donald Trump has begun his second term as president by ramping up pressure on Panama – threatening to “take back” the Panama Canal and accusing the country of ceding control of the critical waterway to a US rival: China.

“Above all, China is operating the Panama Canal. And we didn’t give it to China. We gave it to Panama, and we’re taking it back,” Trump claimed in his inaugural speech last month.

There’s no evidence that China controls the canal, which is run by an independent authority appointed by Panama’s government. Beijing has repeatedly denied that it has interfered in canal operations.

But the US concern comes as the Trump White House seeks to shore up national security, especially in its own neighborhood, and win an economic competition with China.

At the heart of Trump’s contentions are a Hong Kong-based company that operates two key ports at either end of the 50-mile long waterway – and broader concerns about Beijing’s expanding influence in a region of the world where the US has long been the dominant power.

Panama’s President José Raúl Mulino has said Panama’s sovereignty over the canal was not up for debate, but the country has made other concessions to US pressure.

Following a meeting with top US diplomat Marco Rubio last Sunday, Mulino said Panama would exit China’s Belt and Road infrastructure drive – a blow for Beijing, which had celebrated Panama as the first country in Latin America to join the program.

Panamanian officials last month also launched an audit of the Hong Kong-owned firm that operates two ports at either end the canal.

Chinese companies have become increasingly caught in the crosshairs of Washington’s national security concerns. Chinese-owned app TikTok and telecoms giant Huawei have been among private firms facing intense scrutiny in Washington over concerns that they are ultimately beholden to Beijing, despite their denials.

Here’s what to know about China’s involvement in the strategic channel.

Does China have a presence in the Panama Canal?

The Trump administration’s key concern is found at either end of the waterway, where two of the five ports that service the canal are operated by Panama Ports Company (PPC), part of a port operator owned by Hong Kong-based conglomerate CK Hutchison Holdings.

Based in a gleaming skyscraper in downtown Hong Kong, CK Hutchison is a publicly listed company and one of the world’s largest port operators, overseeing 53 ports in 24 countries, according to the company. It was first granted the concession over the two Panama Canal ports in 1997 when Panama and the US jointly administered the canal. That concession was renewed in 2021 for another 25 years.

Rubio ahead of his visit to Panama said Hong Kong-based companies “having control over the entry and exit points” of the canal is “completely unacceptable.”

Hong Kong, which came under Chinese control in 1997, is meant to have a high level of autonomy from mainland China, but Beijing has dramatically tightened its grip on the city in recent years following widespread pro-democracy protests.

“If there’s a conflict and China tells them, do everything you can to obstruct the canal so that the US can’t engage in trade and commerce, so that the US military and naval fleet cannot get to the Indo-Pacific fast enough, they would have to do it,” Rubio said in an interview with journalist Megyn Kelly, without directly naming the company.

The Hong Kong-owned operator PPC, however, does not control access to the Panama Canal.

The Hutchison ports are not the only China-linked firms involved in canal infrastructure.

A consortium comprised of state-backed China Harbour Engineering Company and China Communications Construction Company was awarded the contract to build a $1.4 billion highway bridge over the canal to ease traffic in Panama City.

Meanwhile, state-owned COSCO Shipping is a major canal client, with nearly 300 of its cargo ships navigating the waterway each year, including container ships, dry bulk carriers, and oil tankers, according to company data from 2018.

Does that give China ‘control’ over the canal?

There’s no evidence that the Chinese government controls the canal or of Chinese military activity in Panama, experts say.

But US officials’ concerns come amid a global scrutiny of Beijing’s efforts to build or secure access to commercial ports around the world – which could also benefit China’s expanding navy.

When it comes to the Panama Canal, some observers say that Chinese firms’ involvement in the canal and its infrastructure could give Beijing leverage – both in terms of commercial advantage and in the event of a potential future conflict with the US.

Rubio referenced this concern during a confirmation hearing for his post in January, saying that a “foreign power” possesses the ability, through their companies, “to turn the canal into a choke point in a moment of conflict.”

The strategic risk from a military perspective is that the more commercial assets that are linked to China around the canal, the more options Beijing has to block the US from moving military equipment through the waterway in the event of a conflict between them, according to R. Evan Ellis, a research professor of Latin American Studies at the U.S. Army War College Strategic Studies Institute.

“All of these operations, and the relationships with Panama Canal Authority … plus the technical knowledge that you get as a regular operator of the canal basically multiplies the possibilities that if you are (China) and you want to shut down the canal at a time of conflict, there are a thousand ways to do it,” he said, pointing to actions like attacking lock control systems or physically blocking the waterway. “Their physical presence, influence and technical knowledge … would make it harder for us to defend against.”

Federal Maritime Commission Chairman Louis Sola last week told Congress the US must also guard against “any effort by other interests in Panama to diminish the independence or professionalism of the (Panama Canal) Authority.”

A 1977 treaty laying out the return of the canal from the US to Panama requires the canal to remain neutral and allows for the US to intervene militarily if the waterway’s operations are disrupted by internal conflict or a foreign power.

However, some observers see little or limited sway from China at present.

The US is so firmly established as a the “pre-eminent” partner for Panama that any leverage over goods passing through the canal that China could hope for by enhancing its ties in the country is “capped and limited at best,” according to Brian Wong, a fellow at the University of Hong Kong’s Centre on Contemporary China and the World.

What kind of relationship does China have with Panama?

A 2018 state visit from Chinese leader Xi Jinping to the country of roughly 5 million underscored just how much emphasis Beijing – a major global exporter – has placed on building its ties with the strategically vital country.

Then, the countries inked some 19 agreements to collaborate on trade, infrastructure, banking, and tourism, while Xi declared their relations had “turned over a new chapter.”

That certainly was the case then. China and Panama only established diplomatic ties a year prior, after Panama stopped recognizing Taiwan as the government of China. That same year Panama became the first country in Latin America to join Xi’s flagship Belt and Road global infrastructure development initiative.

Those changes were accompanied by a flurry of bids from Chinese companies to build and invest – projects ranging from a $1 billion container terminal to a high-speed rail. Both those projects ultimately fizzled, as a change in Panama’s leadership brought greater scrutiny over such plans and US concerns drove more caution.

But Chinese firms have also had successes.

A China-built cruise ship terminal was inaugurated last year, while Chinese companies also have a significant presence in special trade zones near Colon and Panama Pacifico, experts say. Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei in 2015 opened a large distribution facility for its electronic systems from one of those zones.

Mulino’s decision not to stay involved in the Belt and Road initiative may signal a new stage of scrutiny on China’s presence in the country. But some observers say Beijing may not be phased.

“China will continue to make investment in Panama if the Central American nation needs the money, and China will continue to trade with Panama,” said Jiang Shixue, director of the Center for Latin American Studies at Shanghai University. Panama’s decision will merely signal to Beijing that “American pressure is so huge,” he added.

Meanwhile, there are signs that while China has an interest in expanding its footprint in the country, it may have other goals, in places with less potential resistance.

“Control of strategic chokepoints like the Panama Canal is probably among China’s goals,” said Will Freeman, Fellow for Latin America studies at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York.

“But it’s dwarfed in importance by a project like Chancay, the new Peruvian mega-port which will accelerate South America-China trade.”

US officials kept around 100 deported Indian migrants in shackles for their 40-hour flight home, including during bathroom breaks, in the latest incident to spark anger overseas at President Donald Trump’s migration crackdown.

Indian lawmakers demonstrated outside parliament on Thursday, some wearing shackles and others mocking the much-touted friendship between Trump and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

Elsewhere in New Delhi, members of the youth wing of India’s main opposition party burned an effigy of Trump.

Last month, the spectacle of Colombian deportees being shackled as they boarded a US deportation flight sparked a bitter dispute between the two countries, with Colombian president Gustavo Petro initially refusing the military plane permission to land.

The anger in India comes days ahead of an expected visit by Modi to meet Trump – whom he has called a “true friend” – at the White House.

S. Kuldeep Singh Dhaliwal, a government minister in the western state of Punjab, where the deportation flight landed, urged Modi to “now use his friendship to resolve the issue.”

Dhaliwal also questioned “the usefulness of this friendship if it cannot help Indian citizens in need,” his office said in a statement.

The flight to India was the longest in distance since the Trump administration began deploying military aircraft for migrant deportations, according to a US official.

“Our hands were cuffed and ankles tied with chains before we took the flight,” said 23-year-old Akashdeep Singh, who arrived in Punjab on Wednesday with 103 other deportees.

“We requested the military officials to take it off to eat or go to the bathroom but they treated us horribly and without any regard whatsoever,” Singh added.

“The way they looked at us, I’ll never forget it… We went to the bathroom with the shackles on. Right before landing, they removed (the shackles) for the women. We saw it. For us, they were removed after we landed by the local police officials.”

US Border Patrol Chief Michael W. Banks posted a video of the Indian deportees being put onto a plane on X. In the video, shackles are seen on the wrists and ankles of several men who shuffle slowly up the ramp.

‘Better life, better future’

Deportee Sukhpal Singh, 35, also said the shackles were kept on throughout the flight, including during a refueling stopover on the Pacific island of Guam.

“They treated us like criminals,” he said. “If we would try to stand because our legs were swelling due to the handcuffs they would yell at us to sit down.”

Young Indians looking for work opportunities have made up a sizeable portion of undocumented migrants in the US, many after making the dangerous trek through Latin America to reach the US southern border.

Many say they see no future at home where a jobs crisis is stifling young hopes in the world’s most populous country.

In just four years, the number of Indian citizens entering the US illegally has surged dramatically — from 8,027 in the 2018-19 fiscal year to 96,917 during 2022-23, government data showed.

“I had gone for work, for better life, for a better future,” said Sukhpal Singh, who has a son and daughter and hoped to better provide for them by getting a job in the US.

“You see it in movies and you hear from people around you that there’s work there and people are successful there so that’s why I also wanted to go.”