control

The United States government has said it aims to control Venezuelan oil sales indefinitely.

“We need to have that leverage and that control of those oil sales to drive the changes that simply must happen in Venezuela,” Energy Secretary Chris Wright said on Wednesday.

His comments come days after US forces abducted Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro on Saturday. Since then, the administration of US President Donald Trump has announced a deal under which Venezuela would turn over 30 million to 50 million barrels of sanctioned oil to the US to sell.

That comes against a backdrop of demands that Venezuelan government officials open up access to US oil companies or risk further military action.

On Friday, executives from several major oil companies, including ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips, and Chevron, are slated to meet with the president to discuss potential investments in Venezuela.

Can the US control Venezuelan oil sales indefinitely?

“The US federal government can absolutely intervene, make demands, capture what it wants, and redirect those barrels accordingly. I don’t know of anything that would meaningfully interfere with the federal government if that’s what it decided to do,” Jeff Krimmel, founder of Krimmel Strategy Group, a Houston, Texas-based energy consulting firm, told Al Jazeera.

There are, however, geopolitical hurdles. The US has less leverage than it did more than two decades ago when the US military and its allies entered Iraq, another oil-rich country. Today, other superpowers could stand in the way in ways they did not in 2003.

“When we went into Iraq, we were living in a unipolar moment as the world’s only great power. That era is over. China is now a great power, and most experts consider it a peer competitor. That means it has ways to hurt the US economy and to push back militarily, including through proxy conflicts, if it chooses to oppose such actions,” Anthony Orlando, professor of finance and law at California State Polytechnic University, Pomona, told Al Jazeera.

China is the largest purchaser of Venezuelan crude, although it only imports about 4 percent of its oil from the South American nation.

“It’s a question of whether they want to draw a line in the sand with the United States and say, ‘You can’t do this, because if we allow it, you’ll keep pushing further,’” Orlando said.

“If you’re a minor power like Venezuela, not China or Russia, you’re a country vulnerable to US intervention. That creates an incentive to align more closely with China or Russia to prevent it from happening, and that’s not a good outcome for the United States,” Orlando continued.

In the days since Maduro’s abduction, members of the Trump administration have also renewed calls to take over Greenland.

How does this compare with Iraq?

The US intervention in Venezuela has been compared to its involvement in Iraq, which began under the administration of former President George W Bush in 2003. At the time, Iraq had the second-largest oil reserves in the world, with 112 billion barrels.

However, production was limited. Prior to the invasion, Iraq produced 1.5 million barrels per day (bpd), rising to 4.5 million bpd by 2018.

While the Iraqi government retained ownership of oil, US companies were often given no-bid contracts to operate there, including ExxonMobil and BP, and the majority of sales went to Asian and European markets.

In 2021, Iraq’s then-President Barham Salih claimed that an estimated $150bn in money stolen through corrupt deals had been “smuggled out of Iraq” since the 2003 US-led invasion.

Unlike during the Bush administration and its aims for Iraq’s oil, the Trump administration has been explicit about the role of oil in its attack on Venezuela.

“The difference between Iraq and this is that [Bush] didn’t keep the oil. We’re going to keep the oil,” Trump said in a conversation with MS Now anchor Joe Scarborough.

Comparatively, in 2002, prior to the US invasion, then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld asserted that the operation to take control of post-war reconstruction had “literally nothing to do with oil”.

“When the Bush administration went into Iraq, they claimed it wasn’t about that, even though there was substantial evidence it was a factor. This time it’s more explicit, so it’s clear it will impact oil markets. [But] one lesson from the Iraq war is that it’s easier said than done,” Orlando, the professor, told Al Jazeera.

Will this benefit oil companies?

Analysts argue that investments in Venezuela might not actually benefit oil companies due to rising economic uncertainty, the need for major infrastructure improvements, and the fact that large companies like ExxonMobil and Chevron already have capital programmes planned for the remainder of the decade.

“Either [the companies] will have to take on more debt or issue more equity to raise the capital needed, or they’ll have to divert capital expenditures from other regions into Venezuela. In either scenario, I expect substantial shareholder pushback,” Krimmel, the energy consultant, said.

Increased production will also require infrastructure improvements. Venezuelan oil is dense, which makes it more difficult and expensive to extract compared to oil from Iraq or the US.

Venezuelan oil is often blended with lighter grades from the US. It is comparable in density to Canadian oil, which, despite tensions between Ottawa and Washington, comes from a US ally with more modern extraction infrastructure.

“I don’t think Canada’s going to be too happy about all this,” Orlando said.

However, Chevron, the only US company currently operating in Venezuela, is seeking authorisation from Washington to expand its licence to operate in the country after the US placed restrictions on it last year, the Reuters news agency reported on Thursday, citing unnamed sources.

The US role in energy, particularly oil and gas, has surged in recent years amid the rise of fracking technology. The US is now the largest producer of oil in the world. But recent cuts to alternative energy programmes and increasing energy demands from the artificial intelligence industry have led Republicans to double down on expanding the oil and gas sector.

“There is an oil supply surplus. Even if we were in a supply deficit right now, military action in Venezuela wouldn’t unlock incremental barrels quickly. So even if you were trying to solve a short-term supply deficit, which, to be clear, we do not have, Venezuela wouldn’t be an answer because it would take too long and be too expensive to ramp production up,” Krimmel added.

While Venezuela holds the world’s largest oil reserves, the OPEC member represents only 1 percent of global oil output.

Currently, Chevron is the only US company operating in Venezuela. ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips operated in Venezuela before Hugo Chavez nationalised the oil sector in 2007, leading to a downturn in production over years of disinvestment and poorly run facilities. In the 1990s, Venezuela produced as much as 3.5 million bpd. That has since fallen due to limited investment, with production averaging 1.1 million bpd last year.

“Venezuela’s infrastructure has deteriorated under both the Chavez and Maduro regimes. While they are extracting oil, returning to production levels from 10 or 20 years ago would require significant investment,” Orlando said.

Caracas, January 7, 2025 (venezuelanalysis.com) – The Trump administration has vowed to control Venezuelan oil sales for an “indefinite” period in the wake of the January 3 bombings and kidnapping of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.

“Instead of the oil being blockaded, we’re gonna let the oil flow to US refineries and around the world to bring better oil supplies, but have those sales done by the US,” Energy Secretary Chris Wright said in a Goldman Sachs conference on Wednesday, January 7.

According to Wright, the process would begin with crude that is currently loaded on tankers that have not left Venezuelan shores because of the US naval blockade, before selling future production “indefinitely, going forward.”

A “fact sheet” published by the Department of Energy went on to claim that proceeds from sales of Venezuelan crude “will first settle in US-controlled accounts at globally recognized banks to guarantee the legitimacy and integrity of the ultimate distribution of proceeds.”

The document stated that a “selective rollback” of US economic sanctions will allow transactions involving Venezuelan oil products in global markets. The Department of Energy likewise announced supplies of diluents and equipment to Venezuela’s oil industry, which also require the lifting of sanctions, alongside broader US investment in the oil sector and electric grid.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio affirmed in a Wednesday press conference that the US has a “three-step plan” for Venezuela in the wake of the January 3 military attack. The first step involves “stabilizing” the country to allow for the arrival of US and Western corporations, before a stage of “national reconciliation” and finally a “transition.”

In the wake of the strikes that killed over 80 people in the Caribbean nation, Trump and administration officials have repeatedly threatened the Venezuelan government into accepting its demands, especially in the oil sector.

On Wednesday, US authorities announced the seizure of two new tankers as part of efforts to strangle Venezuelan crude exports. Rubio recently referred to the US’ naval blockade as a “lever of leverage” against Caracas. US forces had previously seized two other tankers transporting Venezuelan crude.

According to ABC, Washington has demanded that Caracas’ oil production and exports be done exclusively with US partners. In 2025, over 80 percent of Venezuelan crude exports were destined for Chinese refineries. However, Politico reported that US oil conglomerates are reluctant to invest heavily in Venezuela.

Trump had emphasized in recent weeks that the US’ main interest was control over Venezuela’s oil industry and reserves. On Tuesday, he wrote on social media that Venezuelan authorities had agreed to “turn over 30-50 million barrels” of oil to the US, in reference to the crude currently blockaded, and that he would “control” the proceeds.

On Wednesday, Trump published another social media post claiming that Caracas would only be purchasing US-made products with the oil sales revenues.

US actions have drawn domestic criticism, with Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy blasting Rubio’s “insane plan.”

“They are talking about stealing the Venezuelan oil at gunpoint for an undefined time period as leverage to micromanage the country. The scope and insanity of that plan is absolutely stunning,” Murphy told press.

Venezuelan state oil company PDVSA, for its part, issued a statement on January 7 informing of talks for the “sale of large volumes of crude to the United States.” The communiqué made no reference to the terms alleged by US officials.

“PDVSA ratifies its commitment to continue building alliances that boost national development and contribute to global economic stability,” the text read.

PDVSA added that the prospective agreement would follow a “scheme” similar to the one that currently applies to Chevron. 

The US oil giant is a minority partner in four joint ventures with PDVSA. Under its present sanctions waiver, Chevron allocates crude for PDVSA to sell. However, under a previous license, Chevron would commercialize all the oil before transferring proceeds to its Venezuelan partners.

Acting President and Oil Minister Delcy Rodríguez has not commented on the US officials’ claims. In a Wednesday night televised broadcast, she said Venezuela has developed “diversified economic and geopolitical relations” all around the world.

The Venezuelan oil industry has faced multiple waves of economic sanctions dating back to the first Trump administration, including financial sanctions, an export embargo and secondary sanctions.

Caracas has made repeated calls for foreign investment, including from US companies. US refineries, particularly in the Gulf Coast, are especially geared toward Venezuela’s extra-heavy crude blends. The US was the main destination for Venezuelan oil exports prior to the 2019 embargo.
The Nicolás Maduro government additionally created favorable conditions for oil partners in a bid to ramp up oil production. The 2020 Anti-Blockade Law establishes mechanisms that supersede Venezuela’s hydrocarbon legislation, including concessions whereby private companies can lift more than half the crude produced.

The United States says it will control sales of Venezuelan oil “indefinitely” and decide how the proceeds of those sales are used, as President Donald Trump’s administration consolidates control over the South American country after abducting its president.

The US Department of Energy said on Wednesday that it had “begun marketing” Venezuelan oil on global markets and all proceeds from the sales “will first settle in US-controlled accounts at globally recognized banks”.

“These funds will be disbursed for the benefit of the American people and the Venezuelan people at the discretion of the US government,” it said.

“These oil sales begin immediately with the anticipated sale of approximately 30-50 million barrels. They will continue indefinitely.”

The announcement comes just days after the Trump administration abducted Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro on Saturday in what legal experts say was a clear violation of international law.

The US has said it plans to “run” the country and take control of its vast oil reserves, with Trump saying on social media on Tuesday that Caracas would hand between 30 and 50 million barrels of oil over to Washington.

The US actions against Venezuela come amid a months-long pressure campaign by the Trump administration against Maduro, who has been charged in New York with drug trafficking offences that he denies.

That has included a partial US naval blockade against Venezuela and the seizure of several vessels that the Trump administration says were transporting oil to and from the country in violation of US sanctions.

Earlier on Wednesday, US special forces seized two Venezuela-linked vessels – including a Russian-flagged ship in the North Atlantic – for allegedly breaching those sanctions.

The seizures came as senior US officials briefed lawmakers on Capitol Hill about the Trump administration’s plans in Venezuela.

Reporting from Washington, DC, Al Jazeera’s Alan Fisher said most Republicans have backed Trump’s actions while Democrats have raised a slew of questions.

That includes “how long this operation in Venezuela will continue, what it will cost, [whether] any American servicemen actually be deployed on the ground in Venezuela, and what is the Venezuelan reaction,” Fisher explained.

“The Trump administration [is] hoping to get everyone on side before the end of the day,” he added.

Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren wrote on social media that Wednesday’s briefing was “worse” than imagined.

“Oil company executives seem to know more about Trump’s secret plan to ‘run’ Venezuela than the American people. We need public Senate hearings NOW,” she said.

Three-phased plan

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters on Wednesday that the Trump administration is pursuing a three-phased plan that begins with the sales of Venezuelan oil.

“That money will then be handled in such a way that we will control how it’s dispersed in a way that benefits the Venezuelan people, not corruption, not the regime,” Rubio said.

The second phase would see US and other companies gain access to the Venezuelan market, and “begin to create the process of reconciliation nationally … so that opposition forces can be amnestied and released from prisons or brought back to the country”.

“And then the third phase, of course, would be one of transition,” Rubio added.

Gregory Brew, a senior analyst on Iran and energy at Eurasia Group, said the US announcement about controlling Venezuelan oil sales hints at “a return to the concessionary system” in place before the 1970s.

Brew explained in a social media post that, under that system, “producer states own the oil but it is Western firms that manage production and marketing, ultimately retain the bulk of the profits”.

A group of United Nations experts also warned that recent statements from Trump and other administration officials about plans to “run” Venezuela and exploit its oil reserves would violate international law.

Specifically, the experts said the US position contravenes “the right of peoples to self-determination and their associated sovereignty over natural resources, cornerstones of international human rights law”.

“Venezuela’s vast natural resources, including the largest proven oil reserves in the world, must not be cynically exploited through thinly veiled pretexts to legitimise military aggression, foreign occupation, or regime-change strategies,” they said.

Political situation unstable

Renata Segura, the Latin America and Caribbean programme director at the International Crisis Group, noted Venezuelan authorities have not commented on the US saying it plans to control sales of the country’s oil.

“And so we have to assume that either [the Venezuelan authorities] have accepted these terms, or that they’re just going to be forced to accept them,” Segura told Al Jazeera.

Venezuelan Vice President Delcy Rodriguez was sworn in as president earlier this week following Maduro’s abduction, stressing on Tuesday that “there is no foreign agent governing Venezuela” despite US claims to “run” the country.

Segura explained, “There’s a lot of debate within the [Venezuelan] regime itself about how to move forward” amid the US pronouncements, stressing the political situation remains far from stable.

“It’s very important what the army might do,” she said.

“The military forces in Venezuela control enormous amounts of power – both economic but also on the streets – and there might be a moment in which they think they’re not going to be on board with this particular arrangement that the United States is presenting.”

WASHINGTON — President Trump’s administration on Wednesday sought to assert its control over Venezuelan oil, seizing a pair of sanctioned tankers transporting petroleum and announcing plans to relax some sanctions so the U.S. can oversee the sale of Venezuela’s petroleum worldwide.

Trump’s administration intends to control the distribution of Venezuela’s oil products globally following its ouster of President Nicolás Maduro in a surprise nighttime raid. Besides the United States enforcing an existing oil embargo, the Energy Department says the “only oil transported in and out of Venezuela” will be through approved channels consistent with U.S. law and national security interests.

That level of control over the world’s largest proven reserves of crude oil could give the Trump administration a broader hold on oil supplies globally in ways that could enable it to influence prices. Both moves reflect the Republican administration’s determination to make good on its effort to control the next steps in Venezuela through its vast oil resources after Trump has pledged the U.S. will “run” the country.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio suggested that the oil taken from the sanctioned vessels seized in the North Atlantic and the Caribbean Sea would be sold as part of the deal announced by Trump on Tuesday under which Venezuela would provide up to 50 million barrels of oil to the U.S.

“One of those ships that was seized that had oil in the Caribbean, you know what the interim authorities are asking for in Venezuela?” Rubio told reporters after briefing lawmakers Wednesday about the Maduro operation. “They want that oil that was seized to be part of this deal. They understand that the only way they can move oil and generate revenue and not have economic collapse is if they cooperate and work with the United States.”

Seizing 2 more vessels

U.S. European Command said on social media that the merchant vessel Bella 1 was seized in the North Atlantic for “violations of U.S. sanctions.” The U.S. had been pursuing the tanker since last month after it tried to evade a blockade on sanctioned oil vessels around Venezuela.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem revealed U.S. forces also took control of the M Sophia in the Caribbean Sea. Noem said on social media that both ships were “either last docked in Venezuela or en route to it.”

The two ships join at least two others that were taken by U.S. forces last month — the Skipper and the Centuries.

The Bella 1 had been cruising across the Atlantic nearing the Caribbean on Dec. 15 when it abruptly turned and headed north, toward Europe. The change in direction came days after the first U.S. tanker seizure of a ship on Dec. 10 after it had left Venezuela carrying oil.

When the U.S. Coast Guard tried to board the Bella 1, it fled. U.S. European Command said a Coast Guard vessel had tracked the ship “pursuant to a warrant issued by a U.S. federal court.”

As the U.S. pursued it, the Bella 1 was renamed Marinera and flagged to Russia, shipping databases show. A U.S. official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive military operations, said the ship’s crew had painted a Russian flag on the side of the hull.

The Russian Foreign Ministry said it had information about Russian nationals among the Marinera’s crew and, in a statement carried by Russia’s state news agencies Tass and RIA Novosti, demanded that “the American side ensure humane and dignified treatment of them, strictly respect their rights and interests, and not hinder their speedy return to their homeland.”

Separately, a senior Russian lawmaker, Andrei Klishas, decried the U.S. action as “blatant piracy.”

The Justice Department is investigating crew members of the Bella 1 vessel for failing to obey Coast Guard orders and “criminal charges will be pursued against all culpable actors,” Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi said.

“The Department of Justice is monitoring several other vessels for similar enforcement action — anyone on any vessel who fails to obey instructions of the Coast Guard or other federal officials will be investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law,” Bondi said on X.

The ship had been sanctioned by the U.S. in 2024 on allegations of smuggling cargo for a company linked to Lebanese militant group Hezbollah, which is backed by Iran.

Easing sanctions so U.S. can sell oil

The Trump administration, meanwhile, is “selectively” removing sanctions to enable the shipping and sale of Venezuelan oil to markets worldwide, according to an outline of the policies published Wednesday by the Energy Department.

The sales are slated to begin immediately with 30 million to 50 million barrels of oil. The U.S. government said the sales “will continue indefinitely,” with the proceeds settling in U.S.-controlled accounts at “globally recognized banks.” The money would be disbursed to the U.S. and Venezuelan populations at the “discretion” of Trump’s government.

Venezuelan state-owned oil company PDVSA said it is in negotiations with the U.S. government for the sale of crude oil.

“This process is developed under schemes similar to those in force with international companies, such as Chevron, and is based on a strictly commercial transaction, with criteria of legality, transparency and benefit for both parties,” the company said in the statement.

The U.S. plans to authorize the importation of oil field equipment, parts and services to increase Venezuela’s oil production, which has been roughly 1 million barrels a day.

The Trump administration has indicated it also will invest in Venezuela’s electricity grid to increase production and the quality of life for people in Venezuela, whose economy has been unraveling amid changes to foreign aid and cuts to state subsidies, making necessities, including food, unaffordable to millions.

Ships said to be part of a shadow fleet

Noem said both seized ships were part of a shadow fleet of rusting oil tankers that smuggle oil for countries facing sanctions, such as Venezuela, Russia and Iran.

After the seizure of the now-named Marinera, which open-source maritime tracking sites showed was between Scotland and Iceland earlier Wednesday, the U.K. defense ministry said Britain’s military provided support, including surveillance aircraft.

“This ship, with a nefarious history, is part of a Russian-Iranian axis of sanctions evasion which is fueling terrorism, conflict, and misery from the Middle East to Ukraine,” U.K. Defense Secretary John Healey said.

The capture of the M Sophia, on the U.S. sanctions list for moving illicit cargos of oil from Russia, in the Caribbean was much less prolonged.

The ship had been “running dark,” not having transmitted location data since July. Tankers involved in smuggling often turn off their transponders or broadcast inaccurate data to hide their locations.

Samir Madani, co-founder of TankerTrackers.com, said his organization used satellite imagery and surface-level photos to document that at least 16 tankers had left the Venezuelan coast since Saturday, after the U.S. captured Maduro.

The M Sophia was among them, Madani said, citing a recent photo showing it in the waters near Jose Terminal, Venezuela’s main oil export hub.

Windward, a maritime intelligence firm that tracks such vessels, said in a briefing to reporters the M Sophia loaded at the terminal on Dec. 26 and was carrying about 1.8 million barrels of crude oil — a cargo that would be worth about $108 million at current price of about $60 a barrel.

The press office for Venezuela’s government did not immediately respond to an Associated Press request for comment on the seizures.

Toropin, Boak, Lawless and Biesecker write for the Associated Press. Lawless reported from London.

Jan. 4 (UPI) — Saudi-backed government forces have reclaimed oil-rich territory from United Arab Emirates-supported, armed separatists in Yemen.

The Southern Transitional Council, which seeks to create a new state called South Arabia, seized the provinces of Hadramout and al-Mahra in Southern Yemen last month.

But Yemeni information minister Moammar al-Eryani, who represents the Presidential Leadership Council, told The New York Times by phone Sunday that government forces have since re-taken Hadramout, “assumed positions” in al-Mahra and are optimistic about securing the de facto capital of Aden soon.

Al-Eryani also urged the separatists in the region to surrender as “the state reasserts authority.”

Al Jazeera said the Yemeni government has invited the STC to a conference in Saudi Arabia and that STC representatives see this as a “genuine opportunity for serious dialogue.”

The tension between Saudi Arabia and the UAE is taking place more than a decade after the two powerful countries joined forces to stop the Iran-backed Houthi movement in Yemen.

Over the years, however, Saudi Arabia and the UAE have supported different factions and agendas within Yemen.

The UAE is helping the separatists’ crusade for independence, while Saudi Arabia wants its neighbor Yemen to be unified and stable.

Dec. 31 (Asia Today) — South Korea’s Marine Corps will regain operational control of its 1st and 2nd divisions from the Army for the first time in 50 years under a Defense Ministry plan that would expand Marine Corps command authority and move toward what officials called a quasi-fourth-service structure.

Defense Minister Ahn Kyu-baek announced the reorganization plan Wednesday at a news conference at the Ministry of National Defense in Seoul. The plan keeps the Marine Corps under the Navy while strengthening the authority of the Marine Corps commandant to a level comparable to the Army, Navy and Air Force chiefs of staff, the ministry said.

Ahn said the overhaul is intended to “institutionally guarantee the independence and professionalism of the Marine Corps,” adding that the ministry will gradually return operational control of the 1st and 2nd Marine divisions to the service.

Under the plan, the 1st Marine Division will be removed from the Army’s 2nd Operations Command, with peacetime and wartime operational control returning to the Marine Corps by the end of 2026. The 2nd Marine Division would regain peacetime operational control by 2028, while wartime operational control would remain with the Capital Defense Command.

Ahn said the wartime control issue for the 2nd Marine Division will be reviewed over the medium to long term as the military evaluates restructuring and changes in capability, manpower and unit organization.

The ministry also said it is reviewing steps to expand promotion opportunities for Marine Corps officers to general-level posts. Rather than elevating the commandant position to full general, the ministry is considering allowing Marine officers to move into positions such as deputy commander of the ROK-U.S. Combined Forces Command or vice chief of the Joint Chiefs of Staff after completing a term as commandant.

The plan also includes establishing a separate Marine Corps Operations Command, a structure the service has not previously had. The ministry said it is considering upgrading the Northwest Islands Defense Command into a Marine Corps Operations Command aligned with the return of divisional operational control.

A three-star general is a leading candidate rank for the operations commander role, which would give the Marine Corps two three-star posts: the commandant and the operations commander. The commandant would handle administrative and logistics duties, while the operations commander would oversee operations and intelligence, the ministry said.

Ahn said Marine Corps personnel account for 5.7% of the total military but that the service has relatively few general officers. He said the ministry will seek to secure the Marine Corps share by adjusting general officer positions in units directly under the ministry rather than increasing the overall military quota.

The Defense Ministry said it will also accelerate capability upgrades for the Marine Corps, noting budgets have been allocated for 10 areas including firepower, protection and detection radar. It said it will expand placement of Marine personnel in higher-level units such as the Joint Chiefs of Staff and rename the Marine headquarters building to strengthen its symbolic significance.

Ahn said the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps will operate as a joint force to build what he called a trusted advanced military.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

A historic theater in the Russian-occupied Ukrainian city of Mariupol has opened its doors more than three years after it was pummeled in a Russian airstrike that killed hundreds of civilians sheltering inside.

Moscow-installed authorities marked the rebuilding of the Donetsk Academic Regional Drama Theater with a gala concert on the building’s new main stage Sunday night. Images shared by Russian state media outlets showed the building’s marbled pillars and staircases, and dancers wearing traditional Russian headdresses known as kokoshniks performing.

The original theater was destroyed when it was targeted by a Russian airstrike on March 16, 2022, as Moscow’s forces besieged the city in the weeks after their invasion.

An Associated Press investigation later found evidence that the attack killed about 600 people inside and outside the building — almost double an early estimate from the government.

At the time of the strike, hundreds of civilians had sought refuge in the building after weeks of relentless shelling. The word “children” had been written with paint on the street outside the building, large enough to be seen by both pilots and satellites.

Moscow said that Ukrainian forces demolished the theater, a claim that the AP’s investigation refuted.

Russian forces took control of Mariupol’s city center shortly after the strike. The ruins were bulldozed and any remains were taken to the ever-growing mass graves in and around Mariupol.

Mariupol’s Ukrainian city council, which left the city when it was occupied for Ukrainian-controlled territory, called the rebuilding and the opening of the theater “singing and dancing on bones.”

“The ‘restoration’ of the theater is a cynical attempt to conceal the traces of a war crime and part of an aggressive policy of Russification of the city. The repertoire consists largely of works by Russian writers and playwrights,” the council said in a statement on Telegram.

Guests of honor at Sunday’s opening included Denis Pushilin, the Russian-installed head of the partially occupied Donetsk region, and St. Petersburg Gov. Alexander Beglov. Workers from St. Petersburg, which was twinned with Mariupol after Russia took full control of the city in May 2022, aided in the building’s reconstruction.

The Donetsk region, where Mariupol is located, has remained a key battleground throughout the war. Russia illegally annexed it in 2022, though Moscow still doesn’t control all of it. The region’s fate is one of the major sticking points in negotiations to end the war.

The Lakers underwent some soul-searching at practice Saturday, with coach JJ Redick starting the conversation before allowing players to speak freely about the team’s issues.

It was an attempt by Redick and the team to prevent things from spiraling out of control after three consecutive losses.

When the Lakers faced the Sacramento Kings on Sunday night at Crypto.com Arena, Redick wanted to see players executing on defense and playing harder.

The Lakers did exactly that, with Luka Doncic and LeBron James leading the way to a 125-101 win.

For the Lakers, it was more than Doncic finishing with 34 points, seven assists and five rebounds. It was Doncic playing defense, illustrated best when he blocked a shot by DeMar DeRozan. It was Doncic hustling, such as when he dove to the floor for a loose ball.

It was more than James scoring 24 points and handing out five assists. It was James throwing down a reverse dunk and offering words of wisdom to teammates.

And it also was reserve Nick Smith Jr. finding a role in the rotation and producing, one of the six Lakers scoring in double figures. Smith had 21 points on eight-for-14 shooting, making five of 10 threes.

Rui Hachimura had 12 points, Deandre Ayton had 11 points and 11 rebounds, and Jake LaRavia had 11 points.

The Lakers (20-10) took control from the start of the third quarter, going on a 13-2 run to give them a 26-point lead that reached as high as 30 in the fourth quarter.

Granted, the Kings (8-24) have the second-worst record in the West and were missing injured stars Zach LaVine, Domantas Sabonis and Keegan Bradley, three of their top four scorers.

But the Lakers lost three straight games because of poor defense and an overall effort that Redick described as “terrible.”

And with Austin Reaves out for at least a month because of a calf strain, getting the chance to talk through their issues might end up changing the team’s fortunes.

“They’re trying, and you know, I told the guys, this is normal,” Redick said. “There’s very few teams that don’t hit troughs throughout the season. It’s not all peaks. … It’s just a natural cycle that every team goes through.

“So we need to identify the problems and then come up with the solutions. So that’s just the process that we’re in the middle of right now.”

Netflix and Paramount are locked in an epic tug-of-war for HBO and Warner Bros. — the historic film factory behind Batman, Harry Potter, Scooby-Doo, “Casablanca” and “The Matrix.”

Warner Bros. Discovery awarded the prize to Netflix, prompting Paramount to mount a hostile takeover bid valued at $108 billion for all of the Warner assets, which also include CNN, TBS, HGTV and TLC. The Larry Ellison-backed media company, run by his son David Ellison, has asked Warner shareholders to sell their shares to Paramount.

Warner Bros.’ sale has become the industry’s game of thrones.

The streaming king, Netflix, hopes to buy a chunk of the company — HBO, HBO Max, Warner Bros. film and TV studios and the 110-acre lot in Burbank — through its $82.7-billion deal. Not included are Warner’s basic cable channels, which are set to be spun off into a separate, publicly-traded company called Discovery Global.

Both deals would fundamentally reorder Hollywood and raise antitrust concerns. Netflix would boast more than 400 million subscribers worldwide, furthering its market dominance. And Paramount’s takeover would combine two major film studios and two leading news organizations, CNN and CBS News, under Ellison family control.

Here’s a look at how we got here:

Dec. 23 (UPI) — The federal government is suing Washington, D.C., to ease its gun-ownership laws, which are the strictest in the nation.

The U.S. Department of Justice filed the suit Monday in federal court seeking to declare the laws unconstitutional and prevent the District from enforcing them. The laws ban most semiautomatic rifles and other firearms from being registered with the police department. This makes any possession of those guns illegal. AK-47s and AR-15s are among those that are illegal. Those owning those guns can face misdemeanor charges and fines.

The action “underscores our ironclad commitment to protecting the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans,” Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a statement. “Washington, D.C.’s ban on some of America’s most popular firearms is an unconstitutional infringement on the Second Amendment — living in our nation’s capital should not preclude law-abiding citizens from exercising their fundamental constitutional right to keep and bear arms.”

The suit cites District of Columbia v. Heller, which was decided by the Supreme Court in 2008. Before Heller, the District made it illegal to carry unregistered firearms but it also banned the registration of handguns. The Heller decision said that people can have guns in their homes for self-defense.

After Heller, the District updated its gun laws and included a registry and training requirements. But it still makes assault rifles impossible to register.

The suit filed by the Justice Department argues the merit of the law.

“D.C.’s current semi-automatic firearms prohibition that bans many commonly used pistols, rifles or shotguns is based on little more than cosmetics, appearance, or the ability to attach accessories, and fails to take into account whether the prohibited weapon is ‘in common use today’ or that law-abiding citizens may use these weapons for lawful purposes protected by the Second Amendment. Therefore, the District’s restrictions lack legal basis,” the filing said.

D.C. Mayor Muriel E. Bowser, a Democrat, said in a statement Monday, reported by the Washington Post, that the District would “vigorously defend our right to make decisions that keep our city safe.”

“Gun violence destroys families, upends communities, and threatens our collective sense of safety. MPD has saved lives by taking illegal guns off our streets — efforts that have been praised by our federal partners,” Bowser said. “It is irresponsible to take any steps that would lead to more, and deadlier, guns in our communities, especially semi-automatic rifles like AR-15s.”

Lawyers from Everytown Law, a gun safety organization, said the city’s gun bans are legal.

“The legal consensus is clear: assault weapon bans are constitutional. Since the Supreme Court’s rulings in Bruen and Rahimi, federal courts have repeatedly affirmed that these laws are consistent with the Second Amendment,” Bill Taylor, deputy director of Second Amendment litigation at Everytown Law, said in a statement. “Assault weapons are designed for mass devastation, and we look forward to supporting D.C. as it defends this critical common-sense safety measure.”

District of Columbia U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro told prosecutors in August not to enforce felony charges for the city’s ban on openly carrying rifles and shotguns in public or the city’s ban on magazines that hold more than 10 bullets.