build

This train track claimed the lives of hundreds of people during its 24 years of construction.

Burrowing beneath a towering mountain range in Massachusetts is a railway tunnel with a long and blood soaked history. The Hoosac Tunnel travels between North Adams in the west to the town of Florida, Massachusetts in the east. It was constructed in 1851 and finally finished in 1975.

However, during its 24 years of construction, this railway tunnel claimed the lives of around 200 men, giving it the terrifying nickname of ‘the Bloody Pit’. Men were killed by explosions, falling rocks and accidents with ladders and scaffolding, leading to a strike in 1865 where workers burned buildings in protest of the horrific working conditions.

Over the year following the strike, a further 14 men were killed or injured at work in the tunnel.

On October 17, 1867, the tunnel saw the deadliest accident of its 24 years in construction.

Workers were digging a 1,028 foot long vertical exhaust shaft when a candle ignited the fumes that had leaked from a lamp.

An explosion ripped through the shaft, setting the hoist alight. It collapsed into the shaft, trapping 13 men working at the base of the shaft inside the darkness.

The pumps were destroyed, and the shaft began to fill with water.

In a desperate attempt to save the men trapped below, a worker was lowered into the shaft the following day but was overcome by fumes and reported no survivors once he reached the surface again.

Horrifyingly, when workers reached the bottom of the shaft months later they found that at least some of the men had survived long enough to build a raft to escape the rising flood waters before they suffocated.

The men died due to a lack of oxygen as fires burned through the air.

Despite the tragedies that befall construction, the tunnel was finally completed and used by both passenger and freight trains.

Today, the tunnel still stands but is only used for freight trains.

For years, the day in Kulak ended when the generator powered down. Like thousands of villages across Iraq, this small farming community in the semi-autonomous Kurdistan region lived to the faltering rhythm of an erratic power supply: a few hours of electricity, then the water pumps stopped, refrigerators warmed and children put down their books.

Today, Kulak runs on the sun. Solar panels harness its energy, batteries store the excess and residents have power 24/7. The change is visible beyond the homes: water pumps keep running, and cold storage gives farmers more control over when they sell their harvest.

This is the part of the energy transition the global climate conversation too often overlooks. Solar hardware is cheap; the world has learned how to install it. What matters is what comes after the panels go up: building the local capacity to keep the systems running and using reliable power to support farms, livelihoods and communities.

The energy transition will not be won in conference halls. It will be won, or lost, in places like Kulak.

Iraq’s rural energy crisis

Iraq’s energy story is usually told as a paradox. It is one of the world’s great oil producers, yet rural communities still endure daily power cuts. Summers now regularly push past 50 degrees, and the United Nations ranks Iraq among the nations most vulnerable to climate change. Drought has emptied farmland. Heat has made whole regions harder to live in. Rural families face a quiet, grinding choice between staying on land that can no longer sustain them or joining the drift towards overcrowded cities.

These pressures do not respect provincial boundaries. They are shared across Iraq, from the marshes of the south to the mountains of the north. They demand responses that work for the whole country.

For remote communities, decentralised power should not simply be treated as a stopgap while they wait for the grid. It can be part of the long-term answer.

Beyond electrification

Kulak is one of five villages in the Kurdistan region electrified through a solar initiative that pairs new infrastructure with local training and agricultural development. Residents are trained to operate and maintain their own systems, while research is under way into how reliable power can support local production.

Energy is treated not as a gift to be received but as an asset to be managed. That means looking beyond electricity itself to what it can enable: cold storage that allows farmers to hold their harvest for better prices, irrigation that no longer depends on diesel and processing that adds value before crops ever leave the village.

That distinction matters, because the graveyard of development is full of well-intentioned infrastructure. Anyone who has worked in this field has seen the solar array gathering dust because no one was trained to fix an inverter, or the water project abandoned when the foreign NGO moved on.

Sustainability is not a slogan; it is a design choice. Building local capability into a project from day one is the difference between a photo opportunity and a future.

Building the transition from the ground up

There is a broader argument here for the climate movement.

The energy transition is overwhelmingly narrated from the top down: through COP plenaries, G7 communiques and the financing pledges of wealthy nations, many of them unmet. Yet for hundreds of millions of people in the Global South, the transition will arrive, if it arrives at all, through decentralised solutions built close to the ground.

Rural Iraq will not wait decades for grid expansion to reach every valley. It does not have to. Distributed solar suits these communities better than centralised generation ever did, while local institutions can move at a speed that multilateral programmes rarely match.

There is also a quieter point about who gets to act on climate.

The prevailing image of climate action in the Middle East is the megaproject: vast desert solar farms, futuristic cities and sovereign wealth funds. Those have their place. But electrifying farming villages one by one represents a different kind of ambition, one rooted in the belief that Iraqis themselves, in all their diversity, can build the country’s energy future rather than wait for it to be delivered.

Local involvement matters particularly in places where reliable electricity is tied not only to household comfort but to whether farms can irrigate crops, preserve produce and remain economically viable.

Iraq has thousands of rural communities, and scaling this model will require partners, patient financing and supportive policy at every level of government. The agricultural research is promising but young.

On my last visit to Kulak, I was struck less by the panels than by what surrounded them: the cold store, the working pumps, the sense of a community planning for next season rather than next month.

The lights staying on is the least of it. What has really been switched on is the future tense.

If Iraq’s energy transformation is built like this across the whole country, village by village and from the ground up, it will be more durable than anything imposed from above. That means investing not only in the systems themselves, but in the people who will maintain them and the farms, businesses and livelihoods that reliable power can support.

The world’s climate diplomats could do worse than pay attention.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

On July 23, Volodymyr Zelensky told Ukrainians that Raytheon wanted to help produce Patriot interceptors on Ukrainian-linked lines. Five days later, Lockheed Martin signed a second license, this one for the PAC-3 MSE — the hit-to-kill missile that has spent three years picking Russian ballistic warheads out of the sky over Kyiv. For a moment it looked like a watershed: the United States handing a country still absorbing nightly missile and drone barrages the blueprint to build its own air defense. Then, within days, the story came apart in public. US Ambassador Matthew Whitaker said Washington would not allow Ukraine to build PAC-3s at all. Donald Trump called the technology transfer “a hard thing to give away.” NATO’s own envoy said no agreement would close before winter. Something had clearly been decided. Nobody could agree on what.

The Patriot system is the closest thing the West has to a proven shield against ballistic missiles, and it is scarce almost everywhere it is needed. Roughly twenty countries now compete for a production line that turns out about 650 PAC-3 MSE interceptors a year worldwide — Lockheed Martin’s entire global output, shared among Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan, Gulf states and the US Army’s own depleted stocks. Russia, meanwhile, has been firing 55 to 60 Iskander ballistic missiles a month at Ukraine alone, before counting the nightly Shahed drone waves that push crews to expend scarce interceptors on cheaper threats out of necessity. The Pentagon has spent much of the past two years quietly rationing Patriot allocations across allies, reportedly diverting orders meant for Taiwan and Ukraine to replenish American stockpiles. Against that backdrop, “Ukraine will build its own Patriots” is not primarily a sovereignty story. It is a story about whether the system that makes Patriots for everyone else can keep up at all.

What the deal actually requires

Start with what was actually signed, because the headlines overstate it. Raytheon’s license covers the PAC-2 GEM-T, an older blast-fragmentation interceptor effective against aircraft and cruise missiles. Lockheed Martin’s covers the PAC-3 MSE, the missile that actually stops Iskanders and Kinzhals. Neither license includes the radar, the fire-control system or the launchers; those still come from existing Patriot batteries. And neither company has committed to building these missiles on Ukrainian soil in the near term. Reporting from Reuters and Ukrainian officials both point to Germany, which already runs its own PAC-2 line, as the likely first production site, with capacity shifting to Ukraine only “after the war ends.” What was announced in July, in other words, is not a factory. It is paperwork that keeps a door open.

Even so, the paperwork matters, because of what it concedes. Every PAC-3 MSE round carries a 24-month production lead time for the missile itself and 30 months for its solid rocket motor. Boeing manufactures every active radar seeker that guides it from a single facility in Alabama, capped at 650 to 700 units a year — a bottleneck no amount of Ukrainian factory floor changes. Aerojet Rocketdyne is the sole source for the motor. These are not obstacles a co-production agreement dissolves; they are structural limits on how fast the United States can arm anyone, Ukraine included. A government does not open its most tightly export-controlled missile program to a country still under nightly bombardment unless it has concluded that the existing pipeline, working alone, cannot meet demand. That is the admission buried in the announcement: not that Ukraine’s industrial base is ready, but that Lockheed’s and Raytheon’s are strained, and Washington needs help from a country it would ordinarily be supplying, not licensing.

The contradictions among American officials sharpen the point rather than undermine it. Whitaker’s flat denial that Ukraine would ever build PAC-3s, arriving days after Zelensky announced the license, is not really about Ukraine’s trustworthiness. A Republican congressional official close to the process gave the more candid version: the manufacturers are less worried about Ukraine leaking American technology to Moscow than about Ukraine improving on it and producing it “at scale, faster and for much less money.” That fear has a track record behind it. Fire Point’s Flamingo cruise missile, built in Ukraine during the war, reportedly costs around $600,000 — roughly a sixth of a Tomahawk and a fraction of a $2 million PAC-3 ACE round — while Ukraine’s home-grown Freyja interceptor is priced at roughly a fifth of the Patriot missile it is meant to substitute for. A country that has spent three years learning to manufacture air defense under fire, at a fraction of Western unit costs, is not the industrial partner a legacy prime wants loose inside its own supply chain. The reluctance is commercial before it is strategic.

The strongest objection to this reading is that Kyiv already produces a large share of its own weapons, so extending that into Patriots is a natural next step rather than a crisis signal. Zelensky puts the domestically produced share of Ukraine’s frontline weapons at close to 60 percent, up from roughly 40 percent a year earlier — drones, the Bohdana howitzer, the Neptune and Flamingo missiles. That is true, and it matters. But those are systems Ukraine designed and built from scratch under wartime pressure, with no legacy export-control regime standing in the way. Patriot is different: it is Washington’s most sensitive interceptor program, run by companies that have spent decades keeping production onshore for precisely the security reasons Whitaker cited. Handing over any piece of it, even nominally, to a country under active bombardment breaks with everything the export-control system was built to prevent. That the United States is doing it anyway — however slowly, however contested internally — says less about confidence in Ukraine than about how thin the interceptor pipeline has become.

Three ways this goes

What happens next depends on which of the deal’s obstacles proves harder to move: engineering or politics.

Base case (our estimate: roughly 55 percent probability). The license survives, but production stays offshore. Germany’s existing PAC-2 line absorbs the first Ukrainian-linked output sometime in 2027; Lockheed and Raytheon leave the seeker and motor bottlenecks unresolved; and Zelensky’s own target of “production capability by the end of 2026” slips the way most Patriot-related deadlines have slipped since 2022. The deal functions mainly as a signal — to Moscow, to Congress, to the manufacturers themselves — that the West is willing to widen its supplier base, without actually widening it before the war’s most dangerous phase has passed.

Downside case. Export-control friction, not battlefield risk, kills momentum outright. Boeing declines to license seeker technology, Congress balks at formally notifying an ITAR transfer into an active conflict zone, and the agreement quietly becomes what several earlier Patriot-adjacent announcements already have: a signed memorandum with no factory behind it. Unable to close its ballistic-missile gap through licensed production, Ukraine leans harder into Flamingo and Freyja — cheap and available, but not full substitutes for hit-to-kill interception. Iskander and Kinzhal strikes on Ukrainian cities continue at close to current tempo through 2027.

Upside case. Ukraine’s wartime manufacturing culture forces the restructuring the primes have been resisting. Facing a credible cheaper competitor, Lockheed and Raytheon accelerate second-sourcing of seekers and motors — the actual chokepoints — to defend market share rather than out of goodwill toward Kyiv. Patriot output rises for every operator, not only Ukraine, and Kyiv becomes the proving ground for a lower-cost interceptor variant that outlives the war. This is the scenario in which an admission of scarcity turns into a fix for it — plausible, but it requires the manufacturers to treat competition, not politics, as the threat that finally moves them.

The takeaway

So: is licensing Patriot production to a country under bombardment an admission? Yes — but not the one the announcements were built to convey. It does not say Ukraine’s industrial base has arrived. It says the American one has not kept pace with a war of attrition it did not plan for, and that Washington is now willing to test its most sensitive export controls against the same scarcity that has Israel, Taiwan and its own Army competing for the same missiles.

Watch for: whether groundbreaking on a German or Polish production line actually begins before the end of 2026 — Zelensky’s own deadline for “technical capability.” If it hasn’t started by then, treat every subsequent announcement as the political theatre this one increasingly resembles: a scarcity confession dressed up as an industrial handshake.

Reporting from Sacramento — A Bay Area lawmaker wants to knock down what he believes is a key barrier to California meeting its ambitious climate change goals: one of the state’s most prominent environmental laws.

Assemblyman Tim Grayson (D-Concord) has introduced legislation that aims to make it harder for lawsuits filed under the California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA, to stop construction of roads and public transit.

CEQA requires developers and public agencies to disclose a project’s environmental effects and take steps to reduce or eliminate them. But Grayson says the law can grind to a halt transportation projects that are needed to reduce the amount of cars on the road.

His legislation, Assembly Bill 1905, would make it easier for road or transit projects included in a state-approved regional growth plan to begin construction before any CEQA litigation is resolved.

Since state climate regulators will have already signed off on those road and transit projects when approving a region’s growth plan, the projects shouldn’t face multiple threats of environmental litigation, Grayson argues.

“What I’m looking at is how do we cut down on traffic congestion where we’re just spilling greenhouse gases, creating clouds of greenhouse gases and impacting the environment negatively,” Grayson said.

But Grayson’s approach is already attracting concerns from high-profile environmental organizations. Environmental groups often credit CEQA, which took effect in 1970, with preserving California’s natural beauty, and argue it is complementary — not contrary — to the more recent climate change laws.

A court should rule in a CEQA lawsuit before construction starts, said Kyle Jones, a policy advocate for Sierra Club California.

“It just seems prudent that you’ve gotten all your legal barriers out of the way,” Jones said.

California has many laws that force private developers and public agencies to examine the environmental impacts of their housing, commercial, industrial and transportation plans and projects.

In 2008, the state Legislature began requiring regional governments, including the Southern California Assn. of Governments, to draw up plans to accommodate population growth and reduce greenhouse gases with proposals for new housing and transportation primarily in already developed areas. The goal is to reduce sprawl and emissions from long commutes. Regional governments are now revising their plans to comply with the state’s new aggressive targets to cut carbon emissions by 40% of 1990 levels by 2030.

But actual growth doesn’t have to follow the plans, and individual projects can stall for many reasons, including environmental litigation. Under Grayson’s bill, however, any road, transit or other transportation project included in an approved regional climate plan would receive relief in potential CEQA lawsuits.

Currently, a court can stop construction on a project if the judge finds its required CEQA analysis failed to account for all effects on the environment. Under Grayson’s bill, a court could do so only if the project was found to have serious life or safety risks.

State lawmakers have approved this legal standard before to speed the development of a new Sacramento Kings basketball arena. Those rules weren’t tested in a lawsuit against the arena. But state and local officials have said the legal standard allowed construction to go forward without fear of litigation tying up the project and potentially costing the city the team.

In Los Angeles, Grayson’s bill could affect large road and transit projects including a Metro Gold Line extension into eastern Los Angeles County and tunnels through the Sepulveda Pass.

But Sierra Club California and the Natural Resources Defense Council are among the environmental organizations that believe the bill goes too far. State climate regulators don’t heavily scrutinize individual projects when approving regional growth plans, representatives of both groups said.

For instance, a judge might find that a transportation project’s environmental review didn’t account for all the effects the development could have on air quality, but under AB 1905 that judge couldn’t stop the project because of it, said David Pettit, a senior attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council. Without the threat of halting construction, agencies won’t need to take seriously any subsequent demands to improve the air surrounding the project, he said.

AB 1905 “may look good on its face, but it’s fantastically unrealistic when you look at the effects of when concrete is already in the ground,” Pettit said.

Grayson said the inspiration for his bill came from the California Transportation Commission, a state agency that advises Gov. Jerry Brown and the Legislature on transportation policy and spending. In its most recent annual report, the commission recommended an idea similar to Grayson’s bill as a way to speed up project construction.

The recently passed gas tax and other fee increases are expected to bring in more than $5 billion annually for road repairs and mass transit upgrades. Grayson said it’s important to spend that money quickly, and making it easier to defend against CEQA lawsuits is one way to do it.

“If we’re ever going to make a huge impact it is going to be now with the amount of revenue at our disposal,” he said.

liam.dillon@latimes.com

@dillonliam

ALSO

Which California megaprojects get breaks from complying with environmental law? Sometimes, it depends on the project

Lawmakers have put a lot of energy into getting new stadiums built — without much success

California lawmakers pitch a break from a key environmental law to help L.A. Olympic bid, Clippers arena

Updates on California politics

July 31 (Asia Today) — South Korea’s arms procurement agency signed a contract with Hanwha Ocean on Friday for the detailed design and construction of the first KDDX next-generation destroyer.

The agreement moves the long-delayed naval program into its full design and construction stage after nearly three years of disputes over the selection of a shipbuilder.

The lead ship is scheduled to be delivered to the South Korean Navy by the end of 2032.

The Defense Acquisition Program Administration said KDDX will be South Korea’s first large destroyer built with a domestically developed hull, combat management system, multifunction radar and other core weapons systems.

Although the vessel is sometimes described in South Korea as a Korean-style Aegis destroyer or a mini-Aegis ship, it is not expected to use the U.S.-developed Aegis Combat System.

Instead, the destroyer will combine a South Korean integrated combat system with an indigenous phased-array radar to detect, track and engage aircraft, missiles, ships and other threats.

The contract for the detailed design and lead ship is valued at about 882.1 billion won, or about $617 million.

The entire program, including five additional destroyers, is expected to cost about 7.8 trillion won, or $5.46 billion.

The government has not determined which companies will build the five follow-on ships or how those contracts will be awarded.

Contract ends prolonged shipbuilder dispute

Hanwha Ocean, formerly Daewoo Shipbuilding and Marine Engineering, completed the KDDX conceptual design.

HD Hyundai Heavy Industries later conducted the basic design, leading to expectations that it would receive a negotiated contract for the detailed design and lead ship.

Hanwha Ocean instead called for a competitive bidding process, citing a military-secrets case involving HD Hyundai Heavy Industries employees.

The acquisition agency accepted that request and held a competition.

Hanwha Ocean and HD Hyundai Heavy Industries were reportedly separated by less than 0.6 point in the final evaluation.

A 1.2-point security penalty imposed on HD Hyundai Heavy Industries was considered decisive.

Employees of the company had been convicted of photographing or improperly handling military secrets related to the KDDX program.

Hanwha Ocean was selected as the preferred bidder June 11. The company’s selection had previously been reported as part of a six-ship program valued at approximately 7.8 trillion won or $5.46 billion.

HD Hyundai Heavy Industries challenged the evaluation but its objection was rejected in early July. Negotiations between the acquisition agency and Hanwha Ocean then led to Friday’s final agreement.

The contract was signed before all cost data were finalized. The final value may therefore be adjusted to reflect verified construction expenses.

South Korean systems to replace foreign equipment

The KDDX is expected to displace about 7,000 tons when lightly loaded and will be larger than South Korea’s Chungmugong Yi Sun-sin-class destroyers.

It will be smaller than the Navy’s Sejong the Great and Jeongjo the Great-class destroyers equipped with the American Aegis system.

The ship will feature a low-observable design and an integrated mast intended to reduce its radar signature.

Planned armament includes a 5-inch naval gun and South Korean vertical launch systems capable of carrying surface-to-air, anti-ship, land-attack and anti-submarine weapons.

The exact number of vertical launch cells has not been officially confirmed.

The acquisition agency said major systems, including the combat management system, sonar, multifunction phased-array radar and ship-launched surface-to-air missiles, will be developed domestically.

South Korea plans to apply technologies developed since the basic design was completed, including digital-twin construction, layered counter-drone defenses and a communications environment using 5G and integrated wired and wireless networks.

A digital twin is a computerized replica of the ship that can be used to test design changes, construction procedures and equipment performance before work is carried out on the physical vessel.

The Navy is also considering integrated electric propulsion to reduce noise and improve anti-submarine survivability.

Automation is expected to reduce the number of sailors required to operate the ship compared with older destroyer classes.

Schedule remains a challenge

The KDDX basic design was completed in December 2023 and the detailed design and lead ship construction were originally expected to begin soon afterward.

Disputes between Hanwha Ocean and HD Hyundai Heavy Industries delayed the program by about two years.

The acquisition agency and Hanwha Ocean will now need to shorten portions of the development and construction schedule to meet the 2032 delivery target.

Jung Jae-jun, head of the acquisition agency’s force resources division, described KDDX as a national project bringing together South Korea’s shipbuilding and defense capabilities.

Jung said the government would examine several options for the construction of the follow-on vessels while seeking to deploy the new destroyers on schedule.

He said the program could also strengthen the international competitiveness of South Korean naval vessels.

Hanwha Ocean previously said it felt a significant responsibility after being selected as the preferred bidder and would work with the government to normalize the delayed program.

Competition between Hanwha Ocean and HD Hyundai Heavy Industries is expected to continue as the government determines how to award contracts for the five remaining destroyers.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260731010011621

This beach is a marvel of engineering that is totally free to cross.

The world’s widest bridge is a Guinness World Record holder that cost billions of pounds to build. The Rod El Farag Axis Bridge, also known as the Tahya Misr Bridge is a cable-stayed bridge that spans the Nile River through Cairo, Egypt.

The bridge has a whopping width of 67.3 metres, making it the widest bridge in the world. It has six lanes in each direction and is also a big tourist attraction. Pedestrian visitors to the bridge can cross it using the walkway which offers panoramic views out over the Nile.

This walkway is interspersed with glass panels so that it feels as if you are hovering above the rushing river below.

As it is a public road, you can cross it free of charge and enjoy the spectacular views out over Cairo.

The construction of the bridge was implemented by the Armed Forces Engineering Authority (AFEA) in cooperation with a number of national companies.

It took four years, finishing in 2019.

According to Ihab Alphar, the chairman of the AFEA, the basic cost of the project reached an eye-watering £7.43billion.

The bridge is 540 metres long, with 92 metre high suspension towers and has seven different entry and exit ramps.

In order to build the bridge, 4,000 workers, including engineers, technicians and labourers, worked tirelessly to finish the project.

Chief executive officer and chairman of Arab Contractors Company, Mohsen Salah, said: “The engineering crews responsible for the implementation of the bridge faced many difficulties that were overcome with Egyptian engineering innovations.”

He said one of the major issues faced in building the bridge was moving 226.8 tonnes of metal beams to the assembly area.

During the peak of construction, there were 200 cranes deployed at the site to get the bridge up and running.

Builders also had to construct two custom ferry boats that were strong enough to move 544.3 tonnes of equipment to assembly zones

Before the war, roughly 15 million barrels of Gulf oil passed through the Strait of Hormuz every day, as roughly a fifth of the world’s traded oil moved through the maritime chokepoint in peacetime.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

With the channel still largely closed and prices elevated, at least seven major pipeline projects are now under construction, in planning or under discussion to push supplies out through the Red Sea, the Suez Canal and the Gulf of Oman instead, according to Gulf officials, energy companies and market analysts.

With the Iran war reignited this month, Brent crude is trading again at around $93 a barrel at the time of writing, well above the roughly $72 it fetched after June’s short-lived truce, and the US benchmark WTI has also risen to roughly $90 a barrel.

Depending so heavily on the Strait of Hormuz “is no longer a prudent long-term strategy,” said Victoria Grabenwöger, a senior researcher at the data firm Kpler.

Two escape valves already exist, and both are close to their limits.

Saudi Arabia’s East-West pipeline, built in the 1980s when Tehran threatened shipping during the Iran-Iraq war, carries crude from the Abqaiq complex to Yanbu on the Red Sea, where tankers head south towards the Arabian Sea or north to the Suez Canal.

Meanwhile, the UAE has been channelling more oil to Fujairah, its port on the Gulf of Oman about 145 kilometres south of the Strait of Hormuz.

Together the two links had a spare capacity of some 3.5 to 5.5 million barrels a day before the war, according to the US Energy Information Administration, and both now run close to full representing around 6.5 million barrels a day.

Abu Dhabi’s state oil company is also racing to finish a project it began before the war.

Its $3 billion (€2.6bn), 300-kilometre pipeline to Fujairah, laid alongside an existing line, is designed to lift deliveries by over 1.2 million barrels a day and is roughly half built, according to Kpler, which expects the official early-2027 completion target to slip to mid-2027 because the port itself must be expanded.

Even that timetable, the firm argues, only became conceivable because of the blockade.

Red Sea relief, Red Sea risk

The Red Sea route has vulnerabilities of its own, and this week served as a reminder.

Yemen’s Iran-backed Houthi rebels, who declared a blockade on Saudi-linked shipping in retaliation for the kingdom’s blockade of Yemen and an attack on Sanaa’s airport, said on Thursday they had attacked two Saudi tankers, the Encelia and the Layla, setting both on fire.

Saudi state media reported a blaze at the bow of the Encelia with no casualties, while the UK Maritime Trade Operations centre reported a tanker struck by “an unknown projectile” southwest of Al Shuqaiq.

The Iran-backed group has disrupted the Bab el-Mandeb Strait before, a maritime chokepoint carrying about 12% of world trade, and a Houthi drone strike forced the East-West pipeline itself to shut back in 2019.

Iraq’s $60 billion bet on Washington

Nowhere is the scramble more urgent than in Iraq, which draws about 90% of state revenues from oil exports and has had to cut output because of its dependence on the Strait of Hormuz.

Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi returned from Washington last week with 48 agreements signed with American firms, spanning energy, healthcare and technology and worth more than $60 billion, according to Reuters, including tie-ups involving ExxonMobil, Shell, Halliburton, KBR and GE Vernova.

The centrepiece is a deal with Syria to rebuild the long-dormant pipeline running from the Kirkuk fields to the Mediterranean port of Baniyas, a project Iraqi state media says Chevron will execute and which the US State Department, welcoming the plan, called “a critical energy corridor” with an initial capacity of 2 million barrels a day.

Baghdad is also weighing a line from Basra to Jordan’s Aqaba.

Washington’s ambassador to Turkey, Tom Barrack, predicted the agreements would render the Strait of Hormuz “an afterthought”.

French President Emmanuel Macron says Ukraine is in line to get a license to produce Aster 30 missiles domestically. Aster 30 is the anti-air interceptor used in the SAMP/T surface-to-air missile system, examples of which are already in Ukrainian service. The Franco-Italian SAMP/T is often described as an analog to the U.S.-made Patriot, and both systems offer Ukraine vital anti-ballistic missile capability.

2018 – SAMP/T live firing by FASF in Le Levant

Ukraine is still in desperate need of additional capacity to shoot down incoming Russian ballistic missiles, especially amid shortages of missiles for its Patriots. Just last week, U.S. President Donald Trump also said he would approve a license for Ukraine to domestically produce Patriot interceptors. Significant questions remain about the exact timeline for when Ukraine might begin domestic production of munitions for either system, along with a host of other factors that will need to be addressed, as TWZ just explored in detail after Trump’s announcement regarding Patriot.

The French President spoke alongside Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz at a press conference at the Coalition of the Willing summit today in Paris. A total of 25 world leaders were in attendance. At this event, the governments of Ukraine, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom also announced the creation of an Integrated Anti-Ballistic Missile Coalition. The coalition will pool resources to develop new anti-ballistic missile defense capabilities.

“Earlier this afternoon [Ukrainian] President Zelenskiy and I agreed ​on a roadmap between our two countries, implementing what ​had been agreed in principle last November regarding ⁠our bilateral defense cooperation,” Macron said at a press conference today, per a translation of his remarks from Reuters.

This is set to include the license production of Aster 30, as well as AASM Hammer-series precision-guided bombs and SCALP cruise missiles. France has already supplied tranches of all three of these munitions to Ukraine. It’s also worth noting that Ukrainian forces have also received Storm Shadow cruise missiles from the United Kingdom, which are nearly identical to SCALP.

Macron also highlighted planned deliveries of SAMP/T and SAMP/T NG surface-to-air missile systems to Ukrainian forces, which are set to start at least later this year. The SAMP/T NG is an upgraded version of the baseline SAMP/T type, and is designed to offer an expanded engagement envelope, both in terms of altitude and maximum range, primarily through the inclusion of new radars. The French and Italian versions of SAMP/T NG differ in the exact radar used (the French Thales GF 300 or the Kronos Grand Mobile HP from Italy’s Leonardo). Improved Aster 30 variants are also in development. Ukraine currently has two baseline SAMP/T systems, one from France and the other from Italy.

Eurosam SAMP/T systems with ASTER missiles

In addition, the French President talked about progress in Ukraine’s planned acquisition of French-made Rafale fighters, with the goal now being to deliver the first 16 of those aircraft in the 2028-2029 timeframe. You can read more about those plans, which were first announced last year, here.

The move by French authorities to allow Ukraine to produce Aster 30s domestically is particularly significant. Russian ballistic missiles, including ground-launched types and the air-launched Kinzhal, have and continue to present a threat that is especially difficult for Ukraine to manage. Ballistic missiles hurtle back to Earth at very high speeds in the terminal phase of flight, making them very challenging to intercept compared to other kinds of missiles, in general.

In recent years, Russia has also begun using ballistic missiles with enhanced maneuvering capabilities to make them even more difficult to knock down, even by more advanced air defense systems like Patriot. French Air Force Gen. Fabien Mandon, the chief of the French defense staff, claimed last year that SAMP/T was actually proving to be more effective than Patriot against Russian ballistic threats.

“We helped Ukraine by deploying missile and drone interception systems called the SAMP/T system,” Mandon said. “The Russians adapted the flight profiles of their most advanced missiles because they realized they were being intercepted by Ukrainian defenses. Today, the Patriot system is struggling to intercept them, but the SAMP/T is intercepting them.”

That being said, Ukraine still has more Patriot systems than SAMP/Ts, but both are in extremely high demand and short supply. The same goes for interceptors.

“Our warriors performed well today in intercepting drones and cruise missiles, but unfortunately not Russian ballistic missiles. And the reason is precisely the insufficient supplies of interceptor missiles,” Ukrainian President Zelensky wrote in a Ukrainian language post on X on July 6 after an especially heavy barrage on the capital Kyiv, according to a machine translation. “It is extremely important for the world, first and foremost America and our European partners, to emerge from the NATO summit in Ankara with strong decisions to support our air defense, and thus the protection of ordinary people’s lives. As long as missiles for ‘Patriots’ remain in the warehouses of allies, it only encourages Russia to continue ‘defeating’ residential buildings. The United States and Europe have enough power to stop this terror.”

Patriot and SAMP/T may offer important capabilities against other aerial threats, including Russia’s Zircon missile. Zircon is widely described as an air-breathing hypersonic cruise missile. However, the question has been raised recently about whether it might actually be a more traditional quasi-ballistic weapon.

At the same time, demand for higher-end surface-to-missile systems and anti-ballistic missile capability, and suitable interceptors, is growing across Europe and elsewhere globally. This is underscored by the announcement today of the new Integrated Anti-Ballistic Missile Coalition. This, in turn, reflects a similar surge in the development and fielding of ballistic missiles around the world, including by smaller countries and even some non-state actors. The conflict with Iran this year, as well as fighting with Iranian-backed Houthi militants in Yemen in recent years and the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, have only further driven home the growing capabilities and proliferation of ballistic threats.

This reality applies even to the U.S. military, where the Marine Corps is now looking to acquire an organic ballistic missile defense capability to reduce reliance on the Army to provide this support. For years now, TWZ has been calling attention to how the Army’s Patriot force is heavily strained due to constant demands and is simply not adequately resourced to meet the current operational needs. That service is working to address those shortfalls, but it will take years for those efforts to come fully to fruition.

The PATRIOT Missile in Action

So, for Ukraine, having its own domestic pipeline for an interceptor like Aster 30 would offer an immensely valuable hedge against shortages and delays elsewhere. For this particular missile, demand extends beyond SAMP/T operators, which also currently include Singapore. Warships in service with the navies of France, Italy, the United Kingdom (where it is part of the Sea Viper air defense system), and several other countries are also equipped to fire these interceptors.

HMS Daring tests Sea Viper missile | Royal Navy

High demand for Patriot interceptors and full Patriot systems in Ukraine has already had negative downstream impacts on orders for other customers. Concerns have been raised about the sufficiency of U.S. military stockpiles as a result, something that has been further compounded by heavy U.S. and allied expenditures in recent fighting in the Middle East.

At the same time, there are still questions about how and when domestic production of Aster 30 or Patriot interceptors in Ukraine might begin, or when the first missiles might start being delivered. Higher-end anti-air missiles typically have production lead times measured in months, if not years. It will take some time for Ukraine just to finalize deals with the relevant defense contractors and establish a domestic production line. Where initial funding might come from is not entirely clear, either, though new financial aid from France and other countries could be a definite possibility. Ukraine might potentially be able to export some of the interceptors it produces, offering a badly needed economic boost for the country.

There is also an operational security question. Russia or other adversaries could gain valuable insights into the capabilities of SAMP/T or Patriot if they were to get their hands on full-up interceptors or even just critical subcomponents. There is already a certain danger taken in delivering more advanced missiles to a country at war. Even wreckage can be an intelligence gold mine for the enemy, depending on what is recoverable. Establishing a full domestic production line will require stockpiling of brand-new subsystems, as well as the sharing of at least some degree of intellectual property and manufacturing know-how. All of which increases the total number of potential risk vectors in a country that is, again, at war with its neighbor, which also happens to be a near-peer threat for the United States and others in the West.

Macron’s announcement about licensing Aster 30 production today does not address Ukraine’s critical immediate needs for more high-end interceptors to respond to incoming Russian ballistic missiles. At the same time, it does open up an important new path to keeping a steady supply of missiles for the Ukrainian military’s growing number of SAMP/T systems down the road. These are also capabilities Ukraine will need in the long-term, well beyond the current conflict, to help deter future aggression.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

This incredible feat of engineering took 17 years of continuous construction to finish.

Ten years ago this month, construction finished on one of the most impressive feats of engineering in the world. The Gotthard Base Tunnel – a railway tunnel below the Lepontine Alps in Switzerland – is the longest and deepest transport tunnel in the world.

It opened in June 2016 and has provided a high-speed rail link between northern and southern Europe. Specifically, the train runs between Rotterdam in the Netherlands and Genoa in Italy.

It’s called a Base Tunnel as it travels through the base of the mountain, rather than trying to snake over the ranges.

This means that the journey on this train is by and large straight and flat.

The high speed trains that travel through it can reach speeds of 250km/h, slicing the journey time significantly.

Construction of this incredible tunnel took a whopping 17 years of continuous labour, and approximately CHF 12.2 billion (£11.2billion) to build.

Engineers and construction crews excavated more than 28 million tonnes of rock using massive boring machines to dig it out, as well as precious blasting to clear the way for the tunnel.

Before its construction, trains had to carefully traverse the winding mountain routes which meant travel speed and cargo capacity was significantly hampered.

Now, trains can whip through the solid rock mountain and travel between Erstfeld in the north to Bodio in the south in just 20 minutes.

This incredible tunnel runs for 57km and at its deepest point it is thousands of feet deep.

At the deepest point, trains are travelling at 7,546 feet below the surface.

Since its construction, the train has carried thousands of people with data showing that the number of people travelling through the Gotthard by train has almost doubled in 10 years

In 2025 the average was 16,400 a day, compared with 9,000 in 2015, according to the Swiss Federal Railways.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his far-right Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich have offered the clearest signal yet that they are considering the establishment of new Jewish settlements on what remains of the Gaza Strip after almost three years of their country’s genocidal war against Palestinians in the enclave.

Last Monday, Smotrich, who made his continued participation in the ruling coalition conditional on being granted increased control over Israel’s settlement enterprise, told reporters that his ministry had prepared plans for three settlements in northern Gaza, and that all that was needed to move forward was the green light from Netanyahu.

The following day, Netanyahu came close to providing it. Speaking on Israel’s staunchly right-wing Channel 14, he refused to rule out the prospect of settlements in Gaza.

“The question is whether you prefer to do or to talk,” the prime minister replied cryptically when asked whether the establishment of settlements was a possibility. “And yes, I prefer not to address it.”

Israel’s current settlements – in the occupied West Bank and occupied East Jerusalem – are illegal under international law.

In clearing the way for any future settlements in Gaza – and for what Netanyahu euphemistically told Channel 14 viewers was the “voluntary migration” of its remaining population, a process widely characterised by international jurists as ethnic cleansing – Israel has killed more than 73,000 of its occupants.

At the same time, Israel has been accused by United Nations-backed experts of deliberately imposing a famine on survivors in Gaza and, most recently, of furthering its genocide in Gaza through the deliberate targeting of children.

The degree to which preparations are under way for the physical establishment of any settlements in Gaza – which previously had 21 illegal settlements before the Israeli government decided to dismantle them in 2005 – is difficult to ascertain. The area north of Gaza City has been largely razed by Israel, with its deliberate campaign to demolish Palestinian homes and institutions, destroying almost everything not hit with bombs from the air.

Supporters of settlements in Gaza see that now empty land as a perfect opportunity to cement a buffer between Israel and Gaza.

With elections due in Israel, it is beneficial for politicians such as Smotrich and Netanyahu to insinuate that this is now the plan.

“The Israeli public has been subjected to almost endless incitements to genocide since October 7,” said Neve Gordon, an Israeli professor at Queen Mary University of London. “People who watch legacy media in Israel have no understanding of the level of destruction in Gaza, or the kind of suffering that has gone on there.

“There are even spots, tourist spots, where some people in Israel go to watch the bombing. This is the constituency that statements like Smotrich’s are designed to appeal to. These are the people who would like to see more settlements in Gaza, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t take it seriously ” he said. “[But] this isn’t just rhetoric. There is a definite and consistent push from across much of Israel’s politics to resettle the Gaza Strip.”

A history of ethnic cleansing

A growing number of hardline religious Israelis have been seeking to resettle the Gaza Strip since the 2005 disengagement. Since then, analysts and historians have described concerted efforts by those supporting settlements to capture the institutions of Israeli public life, gaining dominant voices in the education system, the media and other areas of government.

Organisations such as the far-right settler group Nachala have openly championed the resettlement of the enclave. Months into Israel’s genocidal war, Nachala held a conference explicitly promoting Israel’s return to Gaza, entitled ”Settlement Brings Security and Victory”. It was attended by numerous government ministers, including Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir.

Despite what critics describe as his success in establishing settlements on a scale unparalleled since the 1990s, Smotrich continues to struggle in the polls. His Religious Zionist party may not secure enough votes in the next election – which must be before the end of October – to meet the minimum threshold to get into parliament. That perhaps explains why Smotrich is eager to inflate the prospects of settlements in Gaza and attract more support from the Israeli right-wing.

Political advantage

The irony is curious for observers such as Orly Noy, the editor of the Hebrew-language Local Call magazine.

Smotrich “has been the most effective member of the cabinet in promoting the interests of the settlers in the West Bank”, she said. “He has really made a revolution in that sense,” referring to the judicial, economic, and infrastructure overhauls initiated under Smotrich’s watch, that he appears to be receiving little credit for among his base.

The stakes for Netanyahu are potentially more dramatic, analysts pointed out. Currently on trial on multiple corruption charges, the PM faces a jail sentence if found guilty.

Similarly, anger over his apparent determination not to hold an independent inquiry into his own government’s failings in the October 7 attack runs high, perhaps giving him a reason to suggest that he will move forward with building settlements and expelling Palestinians from Gaza.

“Look, if you want to distinguish yourself from the rest of the field ahead of the election, your time is now,” political analyst Ori Goldberg said. “This is your moment, and, if you want to propose imposing further hardship onto Palestinians, there is absolutely no Jewish member of [parliament] – apart from the [left-wing member of parliament] Ofer Cassif – who is going to oppose you.

“People don’t care anymore,” he said of the chances of the settlement of Gaza receiving any resistance from Israelis. “There’s just nothing [on the suffering in Gaza]. People have grown indifferent. There’s just a big black hole.”

Complicity

While the Israeli government may have no domestic qualms when it comes to building settlements in Gaza, it does have to contend with the international backlash – and that may be why the project does not move beyond the planning stage.

But would Israel face any real lasting consequences from building settlements in Gaza?

In the eyes of many, the Israeli government’s freedom to act comes from the unwavering diplomatic and military support of the US, as well as the financial support of Europe which, despite its occasional criticism, remains Israel’s foremost trading partner.

“In terms of international reaction,” author and fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations, Hugh Lovatt said of the prospect of settlement in Gaza, “from 2023 onwards we’ve seen the greatest expansion of settlements since the [1990s] Oslo Accords, as well as plans to render the two-state solution obsolete”.

“And, while there’s been some criticism, there’s been very little action,” Lovatt said. “I don’t know if that would be any different were it to happen in Gaza. It’s true that Gaza has been the focus of a great deal of international – and specifically US – attention since the ceasefire that the West Bank has not.”

However, whether that attention would act as a check on Israel’s attempts to expand its settlements is unclear.

“Would Israel risk such a blatant move to block Trump’s Gaza plan? I’m not sure,” he said of the US president’s plan for Gaza, which while heavily criticised for allowing Israel to continue its presence in the Palestinian territory, makes no mention of Israeli settlements.

“And while Europe has a very poor track record so far, an expansion of Israeli settlements to Gaza could push European states to act,” he said.

The US and Israel have signed a deal allocating land for a permanent US embassy in West Jerusalem, years after a temporary one was established during Trump’s first term in office. The move is yet another blow to the hopes of a future Palestinian capital.

South Korea plans to develop a new semiconductor production base in the country’s southwestern region through 800 trillion won (US$517.9 billion) in corporate investments that will create four memory chip fabrication plants, Industry Minister Kim Jung-kwan said Monday.

Kim unveiled the investment plan to transform the Gwangju and Jeolla regions into the nation’s second major semiconductor cluster, alongside the existing hub in the Seoul metropolitan area, during a national investment briefing chaired by President Lee Jae Myung at Cheong Wa Dae.

“Relying on a single production base in the Seoul metropolitan area is no longer sufficient to meet surging semiconductor demand,” Kim said, noting that constraints on power and water resources limit further expansion under existing plans.

The semiconductor investment is part of the government’s “three mega projects” initiative, which calls for large-scale investments by chip giants Samsung Electronics Co. and SK hynix Inc., as well as other companies, in semiconductors, physical artificial intelligence (AI) and AI data centers.

Kim said the Chungcheong region will be developed into an advanced semiconductor packaging hub through 81 trillion won in investment to meet growing packaging demand as chip production expands, while the Daegu and North Gyeongsang regions will be fostered as innovation hubs for semiconductor materials, components and equipment.

He added that the government will help companies accelerate semiconductor investment by bringing forward the construction schedule for new fabrication plants by as much as 12 years, from the mid-to-late 2040s to the mid-2030s.

To support the expansion, the government vowed to streamline permits and construction procedures while investing in critical infrastructure, including electricity and industrial water supplies.

At the meeting, attended by Samsung Electronics Chairman Lee Jae-yong and SK Group Chairman Chey Tae-won, Kim outlined a government-industry plan to invest 30 trillion won over the next 15 years to support the entire semiconductor value chain, from research and development and chip design to testing and manufacturing.

The ambitious industrial blueprint is aimed at transforming the country from a global manufacturing powerhouse into a leader in the artificial intelligence era, anchoring its strategy on semiconductors, AI infrastructure and physical AI.

For the robotics sector, Kim said the government will foster an AI-powered robotics industry to strengthen South Korea’s manufacturing competitiveness in the intensifying global competition.

Kim warned that China has already begun mass-producing humanoid robots through regional manufacturing hubs, underscoring the need for South Korea to accelerate the commercialization and mass production of its own humanoid robots.

“We must accelerate the foundation for mass production,” Kim said, adding that the government plans to create early domestic demand by procuring humanoid robots for education, defense and disaster response.

The initiative aims to raise South Korea’s share of the global humanoid robot market from just 1 percent last year to 20 percent over the long term.

As the third pillar of the strategy, Minister of Science and ICT Bae Kyung-hoon outlined a plan to expand the nation’s AI data center infrastructure, emphasizing that ample data is important for South Korea to secure a leading position in the global physical AI race.

“The next three years will be the golden time to become No. 1 in the area of physical AI,” Bae said. “The government will lead the physical AI sector, by designating it as a national strategic industry.”

Under the plan, an initial investment of 550 trillion won will be spent to build 8.4 gigawatts (GW) of AI data centers by 2029. The ministry will gradually expand the infrastructure by 10 GW until 2035, Bae said.

To support the initiative, the government pledged to ensure adequate supplies of electricity and industrial water, and strengthen power infrastructure around existing semiconductor clusters.

Once the data infrastructure is in place, the science ministry plans to develop a general-purpose foundation model for physical AI in the next three years, based on a world model, or AI tools that understand the dynamics of the real world.

Copyright (c) Yonhap News Agency prohibits its content from being redistributed or reprinted without consent, and forbids the content from being learned and used by artificial intelligence systems.

Walk into the Grammy Museum in downtown L.A., and you’ll see Clive Davis’ legacy everywhere.

The museum’s intimate performance space is named for the late record executive, and his visage greets guests at the front door. (Davis was the first million-dollar donor to the nascent Recording Academy archive and exhibition space.) His sprawling roster of acts — Bruce Springsteen, Miles Davis, Whitney Houston, Alicia Keys, Earth, Wind & Fire — defined an entire art form and business model as preserved in the Grammy Museum. Davis’ pre-Grammy gala was the most coveted invitation in music every awards season.

Davis’ death at 94 is “devastating,” said Michael Sticka, chief executive and president of the Grammy Museum. “Clive was always a north star of music and talent and artistry. We’re all lucky to have his legacy to look up to.”

Davis’ death marks the end of perhaps the most important and enduring career in the record industry. Sticka spoke to The Times about Davis’ remarkable longevity, creative vision and how a career like his will likely never be possible again.

Clive was a giant of the record business. How did his career shape the modern record industry?

His career was iconic. He really had a unique ability to not just bring an artist to their fullest potential artistically, but commercially. From attending Monterey Pop and first seeing Janis Joplin to Whitney Houston and Alicia Keys, I don’t think anybody had that ear in them the way that he did.

With Clive, what you got was not just hearing commercial viability, but an understanding of what was going on in the zeitgeist. That’s what propelled his career and legacy beyond most record executives.

His name’s on the building at Grammy Museum’s theater. What did he mean to the institution — not just for fundraising but as a living connection to music history?

He didn’t just donate to the museum. He donated his time, his historical knowledge of music, his firsthand perspective. He always kept tabs on what was happening in music. I always say the Clive Davis Theater is the toughest ticket in town for its intimacy and the level of programming we do. But he did an annual program at the museum where people could come hear stories directly from him. Once he decided he was in, he was all in.

His gala was the place to be every Grammy season too.

I don’t think anybody could gather a roomful of luminaries like that from entertainment, tech and politics in the way that Clive did. We were lucky to be a part of that. Even with the stature he had, he was still a physical presence there, he was approachable. He was always looked at as this living legend, but his legacy was continuously being built.

That’s true over the arc of his career, which saw him lead Columbia, Arista, J Records and more. He had a lot of resurrections as well as successes.

He had this ability to resurrect. Look at Santana and “Supernatural,” he was a producer on that album that was inducted into the Grammy Hall of Fame just last year. So many of us would just give up, but he just had this resolve to continue, and thank God he did.

The record industry is so different now than when he began his career. Artists find audiences on social media rather than being discovered by label executives. Is a career like his — a famous executive driven by their own taste and individual savvy — even possible today?

That’s true, artists break on social media before they’re even on record executives’ radars now. I don’t know if we’ll see that kind of career arc again. Clive had a rare combination of gravitas and being recognized so publicly. The man and his legacy are not going to be replicated.

Beyond the name on the theater, how do you hope the Grammy Museum will honor him with its programming in time to come?

I don’t know yet. We weren’t really prepared for this. We’re gonna have to sit down and think how to pay tribute to such a legacy. I think that the impact the Clive Davis Theater has, bringing in 120 artists a year — I couldn’t think of a more apropos name on the door.

The U.S. men’s soccer team isn’t only trying to win games in this World Cup. It is trying to win hearts and minds as well.

“We want the game to grow,” star midfielder Christian Pulisic said. “We want to get Americans excited to watch this game, to watch our team. That’s obviously a big goal of ours. And being successful would give that the best boost.”

The Americans certainly got a great start Friday, opening the second World Cup played on U.S. soil with a dominant 4-1 win over Paraguay. It was one of the most complete performances the American men have had on the sport’s biggest stage, with Folarin Balogun scoring twice, Pulisic setting up two goals, and just one momentary lapse on defense separating goalkeeper Matt Freese from a shutout.

The U.S. passed well, defended well and, most important, was clinical and dangerous in front of the net, finishing well.

U.S. midfielder Giovanni celebrates with Antonee Robinson and Sebastian Berhalter after scoring against Paraguay.

(Robert Gauthier/Los Angeles Times)

“It was a real statement,” Balogun said. “And that’s what we wanted. I’m very delighted with the overall performance.”

The effort was warmly received by a sold-out crowd of 70,492 at SoFi Stadium, with record-setting crowds watching on TV throughout the country.

Fox Sports announced 15.99 million watched the win, making it the most-viewed U.S. World Cup match on English-language television.

And the Spanish-language broadcast drew a total audience of 8.9 million across Telemundo, Peacock and Telemundo’s streaming platforms. It was the most-watched U.S. World Cup match on Spanish-language television network platforms, harking back to the 1994 World Cup, the first played in the U.S. that also attracted record TV audiences.

At 38, captain Tim Ream is the only member of the team who was alive in 1994, but he and his younger teammates repeatedly have been reminded of the impact that tournament had on soccer in the U.S. That 1994 team won just one game, though, scored just two goals and didn’t make it past the round of 16.

This team is convinced it can do better — on and off the field.

Fans cheer after U.S. beat Paraguay to open the World Cup Friday at SoFi Stadium.

(Kelvin Kuo/Los Angeles Times)

“It’s trying to be an inspiration for the next generation and grow the game,” midfielder Tyler Adams said. “I think we have the opportunity to do that.”

Part of that is kick-starting the kind of interest in soccer that briefly swept the country during the first U.S. World Cup 32 years ago. And this team certainly energized fans Friday.

“Having this crowd around us, seeing the red, white and blue, it’s awesome,” Pulisic said. “It’s really pushing us forward. We just hope it continues like that.”

It will if Pulisic and Co. continue playing like that.

The U.S. controlled the ball for nearly an hour of the 90 minutes, completed more than twice as many passes as Paraguay and took almost twice as many shots. It was a game that was as attractive and inviting as it was one-sided, one that might turn the most skeptical viewer into a fan.

It was, midfielder Weston McKennie said, the kind of game that could push the U.S. closer to becoming a proper soccer nation.

American midfielder Weston McKennie outruns two Paraguay defenders.

(Kelvin Kuo/Los Angeles Times)

“Because it’s a World Cup and it’s in America, people came out,” McKennie said. “We’re OK with that. There’s a lot of people that maybe have never come out to support us. But hopefully today, with this performance, they can connect with us.

“You feel this electricity in the stadium and the passion. That’s one thing that’s going to change soccer here.”

Pulisic and McKennie helped put the U.S. in front to stay in the seventh minute, although the goal was credited to Paraguayan midfielder Damián Bobadilla, who got his right foot in front of a McKennie pass intended for Balogun and deflected it into the net for an own goal. Pulisic made the whole sequence happen, however, pushing the ball between a pair of defenders before poking it on to McKennie in the center of the box.

Balogun scored twice in the final 20 minutes of the first half, one-timing a perfect pass from Pulisic in from the penalty spot in the 31st minute, then running on to a perfectly weighted through ball from Malik Tillman and avoiding two defenders to line a left-footed shot into the top left corner five minutes into stoppage time.

The brace was the first of Balogun’s international career and came in his World Cup debut before a crowd of family and friends, a cheering section he saluted from behind the goal line after scoring.

“I had to sort through a lot of ticket [requests.] It’s a dream night, you know? I’ve not been able to take it all in,” said Balogun, whose brace marked the first multigoal game by an American in the World Cup since 1930.

And that wasn’t the only history the U.S. made Friday. Defender Chris Richards, whose status for the opener was in doubt after he tore two ligaments in his left ankle a month ago, completed all 83 of his passes, the most without a miss in a World Cup game since 1966.

Mauricio pulled one of those goals back for Paraguay in the 73rd minute, before Gio Reyna closed the scoring with his first World Cup goal deep in stoppage time.

Pulisic, who said he took a kick to his left calf in the first half, was replaced by Sebastian Berhalter to start the second. Pulisic showed no signs of injury while talking with reporters after the match, and coach Mauricio Pochettino is hopeful the injury will not limit Pulisic during the next match Friday against Australia.

For the U.S., the commanding win over Paraguay was just the start. The best, the players promise, is yet to come.

Fans fill SoFi Stadium during the U.S. World Cup win over Paraguay on Friday.

(Kelvin Kuo/Los Angeles Times)

“Today was a great starting point for us,” McKennie said. “But we know that’s just a start and this is something we don’t want to over-celebrate. Because we want this to be the normal for us.

“We have two more games to go in the group. Hopefully we improve.”

Added Pulisic: “There’s so much more we want to accomplish.”

And not all of that will take place on the field.

When Kings’ new head coach Peter Laviolette took a tour around the Los Angeles area, he thought he was only going to get a one-bedroom home with a view of the water. His children, though, piped in: “Make sure you get a four-bedroom,” Laviolette remembered his three children saying.

During Laviolette’s time away from the sport, the 61-year-old traveled to Scotland and watched his son play in the East Coast Hockey League. The time away has given Laviolette time to rethink his coaching, and after 30 years of coaching, including 23 as a head coach in the NHL, he’s bringing a trident approach to reshape culture and win games. Centering a hockey family is one part.

“For me, there’s three real important pieces,” Laviolette said. “First, build a family inside the locker room, inside the organization. Secondly, to really work to try and build the culture to get players and organizations to think about the choices they make and how that can affect the culture. And then the third part is the actual game on the ice, just making sure that every day from the start of training camp we work at the game.”

Los Angeles hired Laviolette to a three-year contract after he spent a year away from the sport. Laviolette’s coaching experience stretches 1,594 games, the ninth-highest career total, with six teams: the Capitals, Flyers, Islanders, Hurricanes and Predators. Most recently, he was fired by the Rangers in 2025 after two years with the team.

His postseason success might be the biggest draw for the Kings, who have seen middling success in the years since their second Stanley Cup title in 2014. Los Angeles made the playoffs each year since the 2021-22 season, but the team did not advance past the first round.

Meanwhile, Laviolette is only the fourth coach in hockey to lead three teams to the Stanley Cup Final. He last won with Carolina in 2006, but he earned two President’s Trophies in 2017-18 and 2023-24 with the Predators and the Rangers.

Kings general manager Ken Holland, left, and Peter Laviolette pose for a photo during the new coach’s introductory news conference Wednesday at the team’s training facility in El Segundo.

(Eric Thayer / Los Angeles Times)

Still, Laviolette, despite his track record of first-year turnarounds, is joining a team in flux. The Kings fired coach Jim Hiller after the Olympic break. Interim coach D.J Smith helped guide the team to an 11-6-6 finish, aided in part by a trade for Rangers winger Artemi Panarin, whom Laviolette has also coached.

“I had a really good relationship with Artemi in New York,” Laviolette said. “He’s one of the most talented players I’ve ever coached, and I’m really happy to get to work with him again. He’s an amazing talent.”

Using the winger to go on the prowl is one of the small changes Laviolette plans to bring. The Kings have historically prioritized defense in a league that has shifted to attacking. Los Angeles fell to 30th in goals per game last season (2.68), the first time the Kings averaged fewer than three goals since the 2021-22 season. The team was also 28th in power-play percentage at 17%. Laviolette acknowledged that Los Angeles needed to change, highlighting that an attack-forward mindset has been a keystone of his coaching.

“I don’t think it should be irresponsible to defense,” he said. “But through my experiences, and even just watching the playoffs right now, this is an attack-oriented game, and you have to be willing to move.”

Where does Panarin fit?

“He has the ability to be a game-breaker and a difference-maker,” Laviolette said. “He’s not just a goal scorer. He’s not just a playmaker. He’s elusive. He’s shifty.”

The goal for next season is to score 250 times, according to Kings’ vice president and general manager Ken Holland. The team scored 220 last season.

“We’ve got to get back to scoring more goals,” Holland said. “Part of that’s going to be personnel driven, part of that’s going to be probably style‑of‑play driven, mentality, and certainly the head coach has a lot to do with it.”

As Laviolette meets current staffers and decides whom to bring in, Holland is managing the phones to reach out to assistant coaches and players. Smith has definitively moved on. Phil Housley, whom Laviolette described as an “excellent coach,” could be another potential candidate. Housley worked with Laviolette as one of the Rangers’ assistant coaches between 2023 and 2025.

Still, it’s hard to say the Kings will be a Cup contender with Laviolette. His teams tend to dramatically decline two or three seasons after his hiring. He struggles to develop younger players, instead relying on veterans to carry the weight. Laviolette will have to amplify players like Quinton Byfield and Brandt Clarke, each a talented 23-year-old with high ceilings.

The Kings’ success will rest in how well Los Angeles adapts to Laviolette’s coaching trident. The veteran coach, to his credit, projected confidence.

“When you put those three things together,” he said. “You can really become an unstoppable force.”

June 5 (Asia Today) — South Korea’s presidential office said Friday there has been no major change in the plan to build nuclear-powered submarines in South Korea as Seoul and Washington resume talks on nuclear cooperation and wartime operational control.

A senior Cheong Wa Dae official told reporters that recent security talks between South Korea and the United States were “very productive and useful.”

“There has been no major change in the position that nuclear-powered submarines will be built in South Korea,” the official said.

The official said the two sides discussed uranium enrichment, spent fuel reprocessing and nuclear-powered submarines. The talks also included what the official described as an “umbrella” consultation framework.

“We have not set a target deadline, but we will move quickly and try to produce concrete results by the end of the year,” the official said.

South Korea and the United States held formal talks in Seoul this week on follow-up discussions related to Seoul’s push for nuclear-powered submarines and expanded rights for uranium enrichment and spent fuel reprocessing. The talks followed earlier bilateral agreements on nuclear cooperation and submarine development.

On enrichment and reprocessing, the senior official said Seoul and Washington need “several new frameworks of agreement.”

“We intend to make progress, including by revising what needs to be revised,” the official said.

The official said talks on enrichment and reprocessing are now moving into a full-fledged phase.

“These discussions are based on trust in South Korea’s denuclearization, so there are no additional denuclearization conditions,” the official said.

Asked about coordination between Seoul and Washington on the timing of South Korea’s recovery of wartime operational control, the official said the two allies do not have a significant difference of opinion.

“Efforts to meet the conditions have continued for more than 10 years, and several years ago there was even an assessment that the conditions had been more than 90% met,” the official said. “Because there is little difference in views on the conditions, we can coordinate and align them.”

The official said the two sides also do not differ sharply on the timing of the transfer.

“There is a gap of a little over a year, about one year-plus,” the official said. “We do not see that gap as something that cannot be adjusted.”

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260605010001877

The incredible lift ascends 153 metres (502 feet) in under a minute

Some of the world’s most jaw-dropping lifts can be found in luxury hotels, including the highest outdoor lift in Europe, nestled in Lucerne, Switzerland. The Bürgenstock Resort is home to the remarkable Hammetschwand lift, offering stunning views of Lake Lucerne.

The Hammetschwand lift was built between 1900 and 1905 by pioneering hotelier Franz Josef Bucher, at a cost of 500,000 Swiss francs (around £470,000). It remains the quickest route up to the viewpoint, climbing 153 metres (502 feet) in under a minute.

Those planning a visit should bear in mind that to reach the foot of the lift, you’ll need to walk the breathtaking Felsenweg cliff path.

It is estimated that over 40,000 people use the Hammetschwand lift annually, and around 200 to 250 riders per day.

On Tripadvisor, one visitor advised choosing “the perfect sunny day to enjoy the view.” They went on to say: “This is a fantastic view, the elevator is just too quick, but still worth a visit.”

Another said: “You do the Burgenstock track to the lift and it is already by itself stunning!!! Nobody talks about it. It’s a hidden gem in Switzerland!

“Then you arrive at that special spit where the lakes of the four cantons connect, and it’s breathtaking. A bit ahead, there’s the lift and the adventure to one of the most beautiful views ever. It’s easy, it’s accessible, it’s unbelievably beautiful. I will do it again.”

Among other remarkable examples is the Hotel Santa Caterina’s lift in Amalfi, Italy, which boasts breathtaking views. Carved into the rugged cliffside, the glass-fronted elevator takes guests down to the exclusive Beach Club and the hotel’s Italian seafood restaurant.

In Greece, the Corfu Holiday Palace features a stunning lift that transports guests down the cliffside to the beach in just moments, treating them to gorgeous views across the bay while providing far easier access to the white sands below.

The Luxor Hotel in Las Vegas, United States, is home to one of the most iconic lifts on the planet. Given the hotel’s striking pyramid shape, the lifts travel between floors at a diagonal 39-degree angle, treating guests to a spectacular outlook over the atrium as they make their way to one of the hotel’s 4,407 rooms.

ED Sheeran has been dealt another blow in his ongoing struggle to build a rehearsal space near his mega estate “Sheeranville”.

The Shape of You singer faces painfully slow construction on his new rehearsal studio due to eco-rules.

Builders having to begin construction by hand because of the prescence of endangered newts.

And they will be given special “toolbox talks” on what to do if they come across the tiny 15cm critters.

Planning bosses say the tiny 15cm critters could be disturbed by his plans to knock down a historic but dilapidated barn and turn it into a personal rehearsal space.

Council chiefs said the measures were normal for any countryside development – and not “unreasonable”.

SHE’S BACK!

Coronation Street star to make shock comeback months after leaving soap

HEALTH SCARE

Disney legend, 78, rushed to hospital after suffering stroke

Ed’s builders will have to use hand tools instead of machinery, remove all debris by hand.

The popstar’s problems with amphibians date back as far as 2018 0 when protected great crested newts were found near his Suffolk estate.

Planning permission for the project was granted, but with a string of conditions to protect the species.

Sheeran bought the £1million farm in 20245 – which included a 19th century dilapidated piggery.

The brick and wood debris will also be entirely removed by hand to stop the newts from accessing it.

The ‘Great Crested Newt Method Statement’ filed with Mid-Suffolk District Council states: “The removal of any debris e.g. rubble, wood, will be undertaken by hand as far as possible, and with care, checking beneath all removed items for newts.

“Careful use of machinery will be necessary to lift large debris and to remove the existing concrete building base, with the area beneath checked for the presence of GCN as each section is lifted.”

The method statement also gives a time limit restricting project work to March, April and May when most newts will be in ponds away from construction.

Other eco measures Ed’s having to put in place include creating a “species rich, flowering lawn” with 19 different species of flowers.

Plus he’s got to plant 12 fruit trees, two bat boxes and a triple-house sparrow tower.

A spokesperson for Mid-Suffolk District Council told The Sun: “This is certainly NOT a case of any unreasonable ‘eco-friendly measures’ being demanded by our council – simply normal requirements that would be expected of any countryside developers.”

They explained there had been no conflict between Ed Sheeran and the council at any stage and that he had not complained about the restrictions.